Notices
Results 1 to 25 of 25
Like Tree6Likes
  • 1 Post By Lynx_Fox
  • 1 Post By icewendigo
  • 2 Post By Bad Robot
  • 1 Post By TheUnknowable
  • 1 Post By babe

Thread: Social Security..Do We Really Pay Less in than We Receive?

  1. #1 Social Security..Do We Really Pay Less in than We Receive? 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Posts
    344
    I have to admit, my belief was that one pays into the program a certain amount and only gets out what they paid. If this isn't the case, then perhaps S.S. is unsustainable in the long run. I know a lot of elderly people have been taking the program for granted and it has become an essential part of their supplemental income. What can we do (assuming it is true)? Seems like we are in quite the quagmire.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    kinda depends on how long you live after retirement
    my uncles mike and nick died within a year after retireing
    a man down the road from me is 93

    I suspect that there ain't no one answer


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    282
    There isn't any relationship whatsoever between what you pay in and what you get out. I have been paying into social security all my life, and I find the notion ludicrous that I will ever get anything but a small fraction of what I paid in back. The people who get more out than they pay in are those who have never contributed much in the first place.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,324
    It's been a great way to get less successful socio-economic groups to pay to more successful groups (translate poor blacks to pay wealthy white women), for more than half a century because of the difference in average lifespans.

    --
    Think the whole system needs a revamp and designed more like an elderly income insurance program leverage private industry than its present form.
    shlunka likes this.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    Like any pyramid scheme, the people at the top of the pyramid make out, while those at the bottom are left holding the bag.
    Social security disability is a good opportunity for slackers to milk the system with the help of a bunch of shyster lawyers. Look at all the ads placed by the shysters. I know a guy that's on disability, and he's no more disabled than you or I.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,324
    I don't think fraud is a big problem. I've read a lot of hype about the fraud and Disability Insurance (DI), but most aren't too objective. For example many articles discuss nearly 6 million being added since 2009, and infer that's because of fraud (usually blamed on Obama..haa), but neglect to mention that simple demographics would added at least 5 million to those role anyhow as baby boomers age and become disabled (about a 3rd do so before retirement age). Demographics, more than anything else, is forcing most of the bulge that make the entire program untenable in the long run unless we sustain a pretty good rate of economic growth while keeping inflation down.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Posts
    344
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    It's been a great way to get less successful socio-economic groups to pay to more successful groups (translate poor blacks to pay wealthy white women), for more than half a century because of the difference in average lifespans.

    --
    Think the whole system needs a revamp and designed more like an elderly income insurance program leverage private industry than its present form.
    I agree to an extent but I dislike the idea of privatization of S.S. It will then likely just turn into a for profit endeavor at the expense of citizens.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,151
    Yes its worth looking into, and privatizing is worse.
    Last edited by icewendigo; July 2nd, 2013 at 09:31 PM.
    mikepotter84 likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Senior
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    309
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    It's been a great way to get less successful socio-economic groups to pay to more successful groups (translate poor blacks to pay wealthy white women), for more than half a century because of the difference in average lifespans.
    That doesn't make any sense. Poor people pay less in (it's a percent of income), and get less from it. You essentially handpicked the groups with the highest and lowest average lifespans and infer that it was racist because of that. Would you rather MAKE it racist by using race as a factor to determine payments?

    Privitization wouldn't make it worse, it would make it better. People net FAR more effective interest in an IRA, Roth, 401K, or wisely investing it that they do in SS on average. The only people it wouldn't help as much are the people who don't use retirement plans, or who don't save any money.
    Why not make it optional, so that you can choose wheather or not to pay into it?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Posts
    344
    Privitization wouldn't make it worse, it would make it better.
    Likely not for the same reason it doesn't work for health insurance. Poor people will be denied coverage and profit will be the number one priority, not quality of services.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Senior
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    309
    It DOES work for health insurance. Costs are kept low, and more and more people are covered in time, as the companies learn that there is profit to be made. The problem comes when laws restrict compatition (no policies across state lines, mandated areas of coverage, etc), and let some people get a competative product that is paid for by money taken from others, enforced by the police (AKA, taxes.)
    Free market doesn't work when you restrict it, because the freedom is what makes it work. People switch when they think a different product or service will be better for them, and competition drives down price and increases quality.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Posts
    344
    It DOES work for health insurance.
    It really, really doesn't. Do you know how many Americans either can't afford insurance or are unable to obtain it do to pre-existing conditions? A "free market", laissez-faire system is propaganda that corporations use so that they can avoid government regulation.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Senior
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    309
    Do you know how much the so-called "affordable care act" has RAISED health care costs, so that even fewer people can afford it, and the care is far worse?
    Pre-existing conditions don't prevent medical savings accounts, or keep you from getting necessary care. If you go to the emergency room with any symptoms, they HAVE TO, by law see you and let you pay it back later. There are also free clinics, and prescription plans you can join. All the lack of insurance does is save you money when you need it by making you pay for it when you don't.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Posts
    344
    It hasn't raised costs. Yes, anyone can receive care but most can't afford the bills.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,324
    Quote Originally Posted by TheUnknowable View Post
    That doesn't make any sense. Poor people pay less in (it's a percent of income), and get less from it. You essentially handpicked the groups with the highest and lowest average lifespans and infer that it was racist because of that. Would you rather MAKE it racist by using race as a factor to determine payments?
    Of course it makes sense. All contributions are pooled, yet an average wealthy white women gets a social security check for 15 years more than a poor black man--those who live the longest gets the most return. The age criteria combined with the life expectancy differences automatically make it most harmful to the very group that it's supposed to help while benefiting the group that likely never needed the extra income. It would be hard to design a more regressive system.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,151
    Next time I visit elderly women in wheelchairs that barely get more than cat food Ill tell them straight up

    "Hey, you're living the high life, the very basics of human dignity is the opulence you do not deserve, 80 years of contribution to society doesnt count because you didnt make profits from it and we're in a Plutocracy, so roll your wheel chair with IV bag on to the WalMart to work, no more slackers because Joe the plumber wants to be a millionaire business man, half-a-can of cat food and no hot water for you, its more important to give millions to bankers for a 7th house and Caribbean resort reunions or trillions to the Mass Murder Department(Defense) so they can loose it or thousands for a Start Trek Parody (IRS) than to allow you to live in the 21st century with any single benefit of 4 centuries of technological progress and innovation, its medieval time for you old woman, you live too long, go work in a mine it'll shorten up that inconvenient lifespan!"
    Last edited by icewendigo; July 3rd, 2013 at 09:53 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Senior
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    309
    Quote Originally Posted by mikepotter84 View Post
    It hasn't raised costs. Yes, anyone can receive care but most can't afford the bills.
    Look up "obamacare increase premiums" in google and try again. Just because you don't want to believe it doesn't mean it isn't true.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Posts
    344
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Senior
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    309
    If you can dismiss any evidence I post from actual reputable sources and call it "propaganda", why should I except what you post, especially when it is from an obviously biased source? Did you even read any of the articles, or did you just assume that they were propaganda because they didn't agree with you?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Posts
    344
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Posts
    344
    "Income: One of the top factors determining how much you'll pay next year is your income. That's because subsidies are available to those with incomes of up to 400% of the poverty line -- roughly $45,000 for an individual or $92,000 for a family of four. Some 57% of enrollees will receive subsidies, and those subsidies will cover nearly two-thirds of the premium, on average, according to the Congressional Budget Office's estimates."

    http://money.cnn.com/2013/05/14/news/economy/obamacare-premiums/index.html


    S
    o yes, premiums will rise in some instances but they will be paid for by subsidies.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    AI's Have More Fun Bad Robot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Washington state
    Posts
    6,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Like any pyramid scheme, the people at the top of the pyramid make out, while those at the bottom are left holding the bag.
    Social security disability is a good opportunity for slackers to milk the system with the help of a bunch of shyster lawyers. Look at all the ads placed by the shysters. I know a guy that's on disability, and he's no more disabled than you or I.
    Who made it like a pyramid scheme? Gee the government couldn't have had anything to do with that, right? Originally they were supposed to invest the money to make interest on it, but instead they treated it like general fund revenues. So now the current payees are having trouble keeping up, when we should have been ahead of the game.

    Although some people live longer than the money they paid in, a lot of people never live to collect the money they paid in. Seems there should be some balance there?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Forum Senior
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    309
    Bad Robot likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    AI's Have More Fun Bad Robot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Washington state
    Posts
    6,114
    Quote Originally Posted by TheUnknowable View Post
    That was well done. Thanks for posting it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and in Bayside, Ca. since 1981, Humboldt since 1977
    Posts
    12,515
    Initially Social Security was NEVER meant to be a retirement plan. People have made it that.
    Neverfly likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: September 28th, 2010, 05:57 AM
  2. EMP and Solar Flare Protection to receive funding?
    By macb6497 in forum Electrical and Electronics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: August 1st, 2010, 11:59 AM
  3. Blood diseases only women can receive
    By Mjölner in forum Biology
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: July 3rd, 2009, 12:53 AM
  4. How much did they pay for this?
    By Bunbury in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: April 23rd, 2008, 10:10 AM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •