I'm not planning on relying on it, but it would be nice to get some of those dollars back in the future.

It seems like most people think that this system is slowly swirling the drain. Is this true?

I'm 37. I wonder if I'll get anything when the time comes.

Pichael Thompson said:

---

It's the largest Ponzi scheme of all time


Saying its on borrowed time is polite

---

FACTS

I don't think it ever gets killed. It will be scaled back. Retirement age will be raised for sure and they will probably implement means testing. Probably more.

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

America is beyond bankrupt. Who will be left holding the bag?

---

nobody on the left. they are into stealing, not paying.

It has to change because it is unsustainable as it is. It needs to be eliminated, but I doubt any politician has the cajones to make what changes need to be made for it to be sustainable, much less get rid of it. It will be one of the things that bankrupts us.

Another way to extend would be remove the spousal 50% benefit rule. I was a high earner for quite a while and my wife never worked after our 1st was born. She is entitled to (gets a check for) 50% of my amount rather than the less than 10% of my amount she would qualify for based only on her work record. That 50% rule even applies if you have been divorced but were married at one time for over 10 years.

Many of you are aware the full age has already been extended slightly. At some point you have to think they will need to do it again. You can still start at 62 buy my full benefit age was 67 yrs and 10 months and not 65 like many people older than me. I've got several neighbors that spent their career at A&M and will get $5000 a month if they wait until they are 70 to start collecting.

Mine and my retirement accounts on top is large enough I pay taxes on almost all mine and my spouses. There are some politicos that would like to make all soc security non taxable. That would seem to be moving in the wrong direction to stabilize it longer term given where the US stands today with debt. A lot of people talk aobut means testing and reducing your soc security payment if your retirement income (non soc security) is high.

I could also see them raising the level where a person quits paying social security tax. I think its currently about $176000 a year now and once you hit that you don't have to pay anymore soc security tax the rest of the year into the system. Upping that limit would seem to extend the soc security concept.

The math to think about it isn't that hard once you know all the screwy rules.

After putting $24.75 in and receiving $22,888.92 out, Ida Mae Fuller says, "Ponzi up my friends!"
Ida May Fuller - Wikipedia

Phatbob said:

---

It has to change because it is unsustainable as it is. It needs to be eliminated, but I doubt any politician has the cajones to make what changes need to be made for it to be sustainable, much less get rid of it. It will be one of the things that bankrupts us.

---

It won't go away because no one in this country saves their own money. The average retirement nest egg in this country is anywhere from $40-80k depending on the source.

Almost the entire country does not have money to live on once they stop working.

Miss a payroll tax deadline and see what happens. These criminals need the money coming in today to fund the obligations today. If anyone did this scheme, they'd be in prison for life…see Maddoff.

YouBet said:

---

Phatbob said:

---

It has to change because it is unsustainable as it is. It needs to be eliminated, but I doubt any politician has the cajones to make what changes need to be made for it to be sustainable, much less get rid of it. It will be one of the things that bankrupts us.

---

It won't go away because no one in this country saves their own money. The average retirement nest egg in this country is anywhere from $40-80k depending on the source.

Almost the entire country does not have money to live on once they stop working.

---

Another reason it needs to go away. The public has been told Social Security is their retirement safety net and thus they don't need to do it themselves. That is the ugly truth the left could never admit... the government program meant to solve a problem cements it where it was and slowly makes it worse over the following years through mismanagement, incompetence, and the elimination of personal responsibility. I guarantee without SS people would have more savings to retire on than they would get from SS.

PA24 said:

---

All this gloom and doom needs to stop of how SS breaking the country..

---

Not a big fan of math?

PA24 said:

---

Republicans are not going to mess with SS, no one is that stupid.

---

Exactly why there is doom and gloom. That is where the math leads. Just because you'll get yours before it happens doesn't make it untrue. It just makes you selfish for fighting the necessary fixes.

SS is the definition of borrowed time...

Pizza said:

---

SS is the definition of borrowed time...

---

Young people have been selling this lie for 65 years.

aggie93 said:

---

Depends on what you mean. Total collapse? Unlikely. The most likely solutions are raising the retirement age or allowing means testing or reduced benefits and increased taxes. In truth SS isn't as bad as Medicare though both are in terrible shape.

As a Gen Xer though I expect they will pull the rug the year before I finally get benefits.

---

Thanks, Boomers.

PA24 said:

---

Phatbob said:

---

PA24 said:

---

Republicans are not going to mess with SS, no one is that stupid.

---

Exactly why there is doom and gloom. That is where the math leads. Just because you'll get yours before it happens doesn't make it untrue. It just makes you selfish for fighting the necessary fixes.

---

Blab, Blab, Blab

Nothing but noise and fearmongering...been hearing it for decades and someday you will hear it ....

---

Right... exactly how do you think we worked ourselves into a $1.5 Trillion yearly deficit and $36 Trillion in debt. Since you are well educated in math, how sustainable is that?

LETTUCE PRAY said:

---

I'm not planning on relying on it, but it would be nice to get some of those dollars back in the future.

It seems like most people think that this system is slowly swirling the drain. Is this true?

I'm 37. I wonder if I'll get anything when the time comes.

---

I don't know, but for my children I plan on leaving enough inheritance to at least cover them in case Social Security folds up. RMDs(required minimum distributions) may muck up the works if the government starts screwing around with this program.

Anyone 50 or under counting on SS as part of their retirement is foolish. It may be there is some form or fashion, even if delayed or reduced, but you would be wise to view it as gravy you didn't expect and plan accordingly.

PA24 said:

---

Republicans are not going to mess with SS, no one is that stupid.

---

It's because people don't realize it's a redistribution scheme. Hell some people on here refused to believe it. Maybe if people only got what they paid in not a penny more then we could save it. We know that won't happen because of the moochers

Quote:

---

1. There's nothing wrong with Social Security that can't be solved by raising the retirement age to 90.

2. Social Security is unsustainable because it is not meeting the first order condition of a Ponzi scheme, namely expanding the pool of suckers.

- Professor Walter E. Williams (1936 - 2020)

---

Poor people and retirees need it.