Social Security trust fund to run dry in 2033

[eliza61]

Really get tired hearing this same old story - I don't believe it at all.

I think it's good to keep it in the news mainly because the system needs fixing and I do really believe that many of our social issues are so huge because we totally ignore them.

Now, I'm willing to bet a very substantial paycheck that ss is not going any where also. Not because I'm some financial wizard, god knows I am not but mainly because we truly have no choice.
Seniors are not about to let it go and with tough economic times, many many people are not saving for retirement so as terrible as it sounds, many will be living off of ss.

 

[manning]

Fooled about what?

This problem has existed for the last 20 years at least, who was fooled?

Everyone in this country has huge entitlement issues so nothing gets done.

Seniors are a huge group and getting bigger and they are not about to let anyone in congress mess with their ss.
No one wants more taxes.
As much as we like to pretend, poor folks are not going away and in some fashion will cost society.

Rich blame the folks on welfare.
Poor folks blame the 1%
Unemployed blame illegal immigrants
Poor workers blame the big corporation.

I saw a speech from Jimmy Carter about the broken ss system.

No one is fooled, no one also wants "their life" to be negatively impacted.

Well, let's see. They say SSN is for SSN. Yet they silently borrow from the fund. Gonna be interesting when it runs out of money. How much do you think SSN is going to collect on those IOU's? How much blood do you get out of a turnip? Going to have to raise a tax somewhere. Will it be income tax or SSN tax. What's the old saying? A tax is a tax, is a tax no matter what you call it.

They say the fuel tax is for highways. I haven't seen any cars/trucks on bike trails lately. Matter of fact not at all.

No cars on commuter trains either. Here we pay taxes for those trains (part of the sales tax funds it) plus fares to ride them. At least the tax is levied in the RTA region only.

And in Illinois we wonder if all those toll road fees are used for toll road operatations. We just don't know.

 

[eliza61]

Well, let's see. They say SSN is for SSN. Yet they silently borrow from the fund. Gonna be interesting when it runs out of money. How much do you think SSN is going to collect on those IOU's? How much blood do you get out of a turnip? Going to have to raise a tax somewhere. Will it be income tax or SSN tax. What's the old saying? A tax is a tax, is a tax no matter what you call it.

They say the fuel tax is for highways. I haven't seen any cars/trucks on bike trails lately. Matter of fact not at all.

No cars on commuter trains either. Here we pay taxes for those trains (part of the sales tax funds it) plus fares to ride them. At least the tax is levied in the RTA region only.

And in Illinois we wonder if all those toll road fees are used for toll road operatations. We just don't know.

I apologize Manning, I'm still not getting your point? Ok, in Illinois you don't know what the taxes are being used for? Have we every had transparency in any government? Local, state or federal?

Here in Philly we have two major bridges, Walt Whitman and Ben franklin. Both bridges are undergoing major renovations, both have a sign that says
"your tax dollars at work". Now are they actually using tax dollars? Are they robbing peter to pay paul. Don't know?

I apologize, I'm just not getting your point? Would social security be better funded if we knew where or who was raiding the piggy bank? Maybe, maybe not.

Now Pennsylvania's governor usually post the state budget every year after he signs it. but the problem with state budgets like many peoples budgets is that halfway through the year they are kuput. Philadelphia school superintendant is always screaming that the school system is broke because PA promised one thing and delivered far less?

Not sure what you are saying we were "fooled" on.
I think most people today would say they know full well social security is running on empty.

LOL, now I don't know how "silent" the borrowing is, heck you can read about it in wikepedia. evidently Congress has the full legal right to monkey around with the "Trust" fund.

I did find one interesting article from moneywatch.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/does-congress-raid-social-security/


HUGE DISCLAIMER I'm not the most knowledgeable person when it comes to the SS budget. my knowledge is limited to these are primarily questions I'm asking. no

 

[chicagodisneyfan]

The issue is everyone is living longer.

When SS started, the average man lived to be 60 and a woman 64 ( numbers from CDC) - yet the retirement age was 65!

If the same program was instituted today - the retirement age would be something like 80.

Personally, I think SS should kick in at 72.

 

[manning]

I apologize Manning, I'm still not getting your point? Ok, in Illinois you don't know what the taxes are being used for? Have we every had transparency in any government? Local, state or federal?

Here in Philly we have two major bridges, Walt Whitman and Ben franklin. Both bridges are undergoing major renovations, both have a sign that says
"your tax dollars at work". Now are they actually using tax dollars? Are they robbing peter to pay paul. Don't know?

I apologize, I'm just not getting your point? Would social security be better funded if we knew where or who was raiding the piggy bank? Maybe, maybe not.

Now Pennsylvania's governor usually post the state budget every year after he signs it. but the problem with state budgets like many peoples budgets is that halfway through the year they are kuput. Philadelphia school superintendant is always screaming that the school system is broke because PA promised one thing and delivered far less?

Not sure what you are saying we were "fooled" on.
I think most people today would say they know full well social security is running on empty.

LOL, now I don't know how "silent" the borrowing is, heck you can read about it in wikepedia. evidently Congress has the full legal right to monkey around with the "Trust" fund.

I did find one interesting article from moneywatch.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/does-congress-raid-social-security/


HUGE DISCLAIMER I'm not the most knowledgeable person when it comes to the SS budget. my knowledge is limited to these are primarily questions I'm asking. no

The point is when you pass a tax and say what it is to used for then use it for that.

I.E. the highway trust fund was passed to use the money for highway use.

Cavuto had a federal congressman or senator on (don't remember his name) who was advocating an increase in the gas tax.

Cavuto said to him he would be in favor of an increase if a detailed accounting on how the tax is now used and would he be willing to provide that accounting.

That guy dodged that question like crazy. You would think he was playing a game of dodge ball. To me that indicated the money was being diverted to other things/projects.

Pass a tax for "X" use and use it for "X". don't divert some of it to "Y" !

 

[Planogirl]

The issue is everyone is living longer.

When SS started, the average man lived to be 60 and a woman 64 ( numbers from CDC) - yet the retirement age was 65!

If the same program was instituted today - the retirement age would be something like 80.

Personally, I think SS should kick in at 72.

Don't some companies have mandatory retirement at certain ages? They'd have to play along.

Plus it would be hard for some 70 year olds to continue to do certain types of work. That could cause problems.

 

[rigs32]

An easy fix would be to raise the cap on payments. Currently only the first $117k of income is taxed for SS.

 

[eliza61]

The point is when you pass a tax and say what it is to used for then use it for that. I.E. the highway trust fund was passed to use the money for highway use. Cavuto had a federal congressman or senator on (don't remember his name) who was advocating an increase in the gas tax. Cavuto said to him he would be in favor of an increase if a detailed accounting on how the tax is now used and would he be willing to provide that accounting. That guy dodged that question like crazy. You would think he was playing a game of dodge ball. To me that indicated the money was being diverted to other things/projects. Pass a tax for "X" use and use it for "X". don't divert some of it to "Y" !

Lol, good luck with that. Sorry dude, politicians and robber barons have had their hands in the till since the dawn of time. Not saying it's right but pretty much since day 1 we've been robbing peter to pay Paul. Heck, we went begging to France after the war of independence back in 1776. Lol not much has changed. In NJ folks were mad at the teachers union because they took the gov to court to force him to make pension payments. Everyone was screaming at the teachers saying they needed to "give back". Well the teacher pension funds were fully funded to the tune is 115% until the previous governors started "borrowing" the money to plug holes in the budget. So basically their money was stolen and when they had the "nerve" to demand the money back, people had the gall to say stop whining.

You take my money without my permission, then squander it, yeah I'm going to whine really loud.

But I totally agree with you, the funny accounting needs to stop

 

[seashoreCM]

Every time they "fixed" Social Security in years past, the result was a surplus just waiting to be borrowed for general fund usage.

The correct way to fix Social Security is to not keep running a surplus to be used for other things.

If we leave Social Security alone, that is, do nothing, then there will be no visible or tangible changes until (what was that number the OP stated) 2033? Then everybody's Social Security checks would take a sudden 25% cut.

We could smooth things out a little by reducing benefits gradually a few years before 2033 and the benefits would then continue to reduce gradually for a few years after 2033 and then level off at the 25% cut from what was promised.

That would be the best way to handle the situation.

I say that any means testing should be limited to taxable income. Retirees should not be forced to sell off prized possessions at small cents on the dollar in order to qualify for Social Security. Retirees should not be forced to put their homes on distress sale for some vulture real estate investor to snap up. And retirees who have little income left over after heavy expenses for health care or who live in high tax states should be able to collect a goodly Social Security benefit for usual living expenses.

Getting out of our fiscal mess requires producing more. Increasing the gross national product. This includes the unionized teachers (educate more children more thoroughly using the same budget). This includes the unionized government workers (plow more streets, re-register more cars, try more law cases using the same budgets.) Also supervise more employees and churn out more paperwork using the same budget whereby some of the administrators of today would be returned to rank and file positions. Build another Toy Story Mania ride above or alongside the first.

Inflation is defined as too much money chasing too few goods and services. By producing more we don't have as few goods and services and therefore we have less inflation.

 

[disneychrista]

the fund that pays disability benefits .

Social Security DISABILITY is what is paid if you are unable to work due to a permanent disability. It is NOT the retirement portion of the SS.

 

[Kingdome8]

Im39. I expect when I retire I will get 75% of what I'm projected to get.

If social security ever stopped, and it won't, the USA would be like the wild wild west again. Imagine what people will do for medicine and food. Scary

Problem is social security pays way to many bs claims. People just don't wanna work.

 

[manning]

Im39. I expect when I retire I will get 75% of what I'm projected to get.

If social security ever stopped, and it won't, the USA would be like the wild wild west again. Imagine what people will do for medicine and food. Scary

Problem is social security pays way to many bs claims. People just don't wanna work.

More like they work at not trying to work

 

[eliza61]

Im39. I expect when I retire I will get 75% of what I'm projected to get.

If social security ever stopped, and it won't, the USA would be like the wild wild west again. Imagine what people will do for medicine and food. Scary

Problem is social security pays way to many bs claims. People just don't wanna work.

Wait, I'm confused again. How do you collect SS if you've never worked. I thought the payments were based on your salary? If you've never gotten a salary how would you get ss.

That was one of the things I thought about when I was trying to decide if I was going to be a SAHM or return to work.

 

[Dakota731]

Most of the money paid out to those on social security come from payroll taxes. Those will continue to be collected and paid to out to recipients of social security. You are making it sound like the entire program will end in 2033, which it will not.

No, it will just run out of money when payments out are much larger than payments coming in from payroll taxes (I forgot that is how our federal government does its budget.)

Problem is social security pays way to many bs claims. People just don't wanna work.

That's right! According to the Washington Times a review of cases from 1980 through 1983 found 40 percent of those receiving disability benefits were not disabled, suggesting a tremendous level of bad payments

Social Security is made up of two trust funds. The main one is the Old Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund, with the Disability Insurance Trust Fund accounting for a smaller but growing part of the agency’s work and a growing segment of fraud paying out billions of dollars to people who have never paid into the system.

The disability fund is slated to go bankrupt in two years. Under existing law, benefits will have to be cut.

 

[KarenC]

The issue is everyone is living longer.

When SS started, the average man lived to be 60 and a woman 64 ( numbers from CDC) - yet the retirement age was 65!

If the same program was instituted today - the retirement age would be something like 80.

Personally, I think SS should kick in at 72.

When Social Security started the life expectancy of someone who was 65 was just a few years shorter than life expectance for today's 65 year old. Many, many more people died young and that's what caused life expectancy to be so much lower than it is today. This increase in life expectancy is actually healthy for the social security system because it means more workers to fund the system.

 

[manning]

When Social Security started the life expectancy of someone who was 65 was just a few years shorter than life expectance for today's 65 year old. Many, many more people died young and that's what caused life expectancy to be so much lower than it is today. This increase in life expectancy is actually healthy for the social security system because it means more workers to fund the system.

You math is a little off. When SS started the ratio was something like 12 to 1 now it's 2 payers in for 1 recipient and that may be down to 1 to 1.

Also when it started age 65 was picked because actuary tables showed many recipients died around that age. It wasn't meant to be long term. Then medical science upset the apple cart, it prolonged life.

 

[pryncess527]

Just saw this on my news feed and it made me think of this post

http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2014...ign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=20140714

Millennials are the most populous generation in America.

From a demographic perspective, this is very good news for the nation. It means the U.S. has a wave of people just entering the workforce, whose tax dollars (hopefully) will support the retirement of the baby boomers.

 

[eliza61]

No, it will just run out of money when payments out are much larger than payments coming in from payroll taxes (I forgot that is how our federal government does its budget.)

That's right! According to the Washington Times a review of cases from 1980 through 1983 found 40 percent of those receiving disability benefits were not disabled, suggesting a tremendous level of bad payments

Social Security is made up of two trust funds. The main one is the Old Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund, with the Disability Insurance Trust Fund accounting for a smaller but growing part of the agency’s work and a growing segment of fraud paying out billions of dollars to people who have never paid into the system.

The disability fund is slated to go bankrupt in two years. Under existing law, benefits will have to be cut.

LOL, not laughing at you Dakota, I'm assuming from your tag you're pretty new here but....
since I've been on this site, the budget board has been predicting the demise of social security.

I did a quick search and as far back as 2005, some one has been predicting our doom.

http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=1723823&highlight=social+security

I'll wait it out.

 

[aprilgail2]

Which is exactly what the program was intended, actually it was supposed to be a safety net for the poor. It was never designed for people to retire on.

It was just meant to supplement money you should have saved for your retirement, not to fund your whole retirement!
Where I work we don't pay into social security nor do we collect it. We pay a higher percentage into a private fund but collect much more than social security would pay. A lot of political people also use our fund rather than social security. I think in my whole life I have paid less than 100.00 into social security for some random on the books jobs when I was a kid.

 

[Dakota731]

Which is exactly what the program was intended, actually it was supposed to be a safety net for the poor.

If that's the case, then social security taxes shouldn't be taken out of EVERYONE'S paycheck. That's just socialism, taking from everyone to pay for a few. Especially when someone is trying to do the right thing and spend frugally and save for their own retirement. It's hard to fund OUR retirement plus several other families' as well.

LOL, not laughing at you Dakota, I'm assuming from your tag you're pretty new here but....
since I've been on this site, the budget board has been predicting the demise of social security.

It just seems like simple math to me that if you spend more than you take in, it will have to fail. Especially now that more and more of the funds go to disability payments and fraud (many to those who have never paid into the system).