General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIn 1975, my boss said, "Social Security won't be worth a damn when we retire."
She is six years older than me.
Now, 47 years later, Im getting Social Security, and I guess she is too because I havent read her obituary.
This horse shit about Social Security is going to end has been going on a long, long time.
It wont end unless this country lets the Reptilicans end it.
Sibelius Fan
(24,396 posts)raccoon
(31,111 posts)blueinredohio
(6,797 posts)Make the rich pay their fair share. You know every one of those old bastards are getting social security and using the hell out of Medicare.
markodochartaigh
(1,138 posts)In 1984 at the first hospital in which I worked after I got my nursing license, we had an elderly patient who had soaked her feet in Clorox. She had diabetes so she was hospitalized on Medicare for a few weeks. When she was ready to go home her family decided to redecorate her house, so the doctor kept her in the hospital an additional couple of weeks while the painting was done and the antiques arrived from New York. I'm sure that rich people know of many such instances and assume that the same abuse of the system happens with poor people. After the first hospital I worked in a public hospital for three decades. The poor absolutely do not have even the slightest chance of abusing the system to anything near that extent.
MaryMagdaline
(6,855 posts)Response to Sibelius Fan (Reply #1)
Baked Potato This message was self-deleted by its author.
ProfessorGAC
(65,044 posts)I hit the cap all of the last 25 years of my career. At least.
I would not only have not complained if there was no cap, I likely would never have noticed.
Unless one makes 7 figures and pays roughly 5% of the $870k differential, the difference isn't likely to be meaningful.
And, it would have, as you said, a massive positive impact on solvency.
IMO, there should be a floor rather than a cap. You don't start to pay until your annual income reaches a minimum amount - after that you pay on every dime you earn.
fescuerescue
(4,448 posts)The poor carry the heaviest load of funding SS precisely because it starts dollar $1. Literally everone pays it.
Adding the 1% to the top wouldn't be enough to offset the reduction from the 99%
Rocknation
(44,576 posts)rocktivity
Emile
(22,765 posts)MaryMagdaline
(6,855 posts)Kudos to Ralph Nadar for spelling out to me, in particular, what a scam this is. No financial plan is funded decades in advance like US Social Security. Its a wonderfully run program.
doc03
(35,338 posts)retired 12 years ago and SS still comes every month.
not fooled
(5,801 posts)they've spent decades spewing propaganda to get the marks to go along with the privatization con.
And, shame on the corporate media for not adequately informing Americans that the GQPee has been trying to destroy SS ever since its inception. And that SS needs some adjustments--as it has throughout its history--not obliteration and privatization.
Wounded Bear
(58,656 posts)Now I live on it.
All it needs is a couple of tweaks on the cap and maybe some other little things, and it will be fine.
Maru Kitteh
(28,340 posts)Bullocks.
That means they would have to take earned benefits away from white men who depend on them so no - it ain't a happenin".
Response to raccoon (Original post)
Baked Potato This message was self-deleted by its author.
BOSSHOG
(37,055 posts)If its good for Americans and originated by liberals it is bad. And they lie constantly and loudly as Joseph Goebbels instructed them to do. They also carry out Goebbels orders to blame your enemy for what you do, like misusing the department of Justice. Republicans have slowly evolved but they are now, without a doubt, full fledged freedom hating Nazis.
Walleye
(31,024 posts)I have been hearing that all my life. We are the richest country in the world. Social Security isnt gonna go broke because Americans arent gonna go broke. And the United States makes good on its financial obligations. Always has. I worked a long time. I had a pretty high paying job when I lived in Manhattan and left it to do something I wanted to do more, but as much as I cursed that job I now get a decent Social Security check
roamer65
(36,745 posts)AZLD4Candidate
(5,691 posts)ALL income, including royalties, STCG, LTCG, SLTCG, residuals, etc.
If you make money, it's into FICA.
CousinIT
(9,245 posts)--my DUMB sister. WHO VOTES REPUBLICAN - AND lives on guess what? SOCIAL SECURITY.
If enough idiots vote Republican THEY WILL get rid of it and it won't MATTER what people want, think or do. They'll get told to go pound sand.
not fooled
(5,801 posts)via privatization, i.e. "Medicare" "Advantage" and now DCEs. Stealth schemes courtesy of the GQPee (and they haven't been stopped even under Biden )
former9thward
(32,009 posts)Medicare Advantage plans have many benefits that traditional Medicare does not have. That is why Democrats don't want to get rid of them. If you want traditional Medicare, fine, that is your business. But no one is going to take them from the people that want them.
BlueIdaho
(13,582 posts)Thank god thats not the only option. If you dont like it, make another choice.
not fooled
(5,801 posts)but rather private insurance--heavily subsidized by the government, with all of the pitfalls that come along with private health insurance. The goodies are there to lure people in. As private insurance, there's a lot more gatekeeping and requirement to get authorization for treatment. I'm sure they work great for a while, but once the policyholder starts needing a lot of expensive care, not so wonderful.
An internet search for "medicare advantage scam" will show many, many studies and investigative reports documenting ripoffs by the insurance company, problems obtaining authorization for treatment, etc. that aren't there for real Medicare.
My biggest problem is not that some may choose to get private insurance, but rather that the whole intent of the scheme is to drain funds from traditional Medicare--which is much more efficient and lacks a profit motive--in order to eventually destroy traditional Medicare and turn the entire system into mandatory for-profit private insurance. Then just watch the rationing that takes place.
Just one of the many, many sources of information about "Medicare" "Advantage":
Why Congress would consider giving these corporate health insurers more business is hard to understand if our representatives are putting the interests of their constituents and the national treasury first. Yes, some Medicare Advantage plans are helping people who cannot afford supplemental coverage in traditional Medicare. But, the answer should be to strengthen and improve traditional Medicare, which is far more cost effective and allows people unfettered access to the care they want and need, not to hand more business to corporate health insurers who by at least one recent account are responsible for not meeting their members care needs, leading them to die.
Medicare Advantage plans have a huge bag of tricks to seduce more people to enroll with them in 2021. But, even the Trump administrations Department of Justice recognizes that at least some of these health insurers are engaging in massive fraud. HealthCare Dive reports a recent DOJ suit against Cigna alleging $1.4 billion in overcharges. There was a suit against Anthem in March and Sutter Health settled a similar fraud suit for $30 million.
Some might think that these insurers only commit fraud against the government. Keep in mind that these insurers also can profit handsomely by delaying and denying care and creating other administrative and financial barriers to keep people from receiving needed services that Medicare covers. Whether the Medicare Advantage plan you are enrolled in or might be considering switching to does or does not do so is a gamble you should not take lightly.
[link:https://justcareusa.org/medicare-advantage-gold-mine-puts-traditional-medicare-at-grave-risk/?link_id=3&can_id=9d16b609e43ac33f41fd14cad455b49b&source=email-beware-of-new-trump-card&email_referrer=email_953651&email_subject=wheres-your-body-fat|]
Here's more, from that bastion of liberal hatred for Medicare Advantage, Forbes:
Medicare Advantage plans, usually bundled with prescription drug coverage, typically require you to use health care providers in their network. The policies limit your annual out-of-pocket costs for covered services.
"People need to go beyond the commercials" to understand the fine print of Medicare Advantage plans, Omdahl said. "There are indeed zero-premium Advantage plans and many of the plans do not have any [annual out-of-pocket] deductibles. But the zero co-pay is misleading. Zero co-pay is for your primary doctor; depending on where you live, co-pays may apply in other situations."
In addition, noted Omdahl, "start digging into the evidence of coverage and you will see that Medicare Advantage is pay-as-you go: fifty dollars to see a specialist, four hundred dollars a day for five or six days of hospitalization. So you are writing checks, and that's what people don't realize. They think 'zero premium' means it's free, which it's not."
Savage said that due to the Medicare program's rules, Medicare Advantage enrollees could wind up paying out of pocket as much as $7,500 a year; more than $11,000 a year if you use out-of-network health care providers.
"These plans work best if you don't get sick," she said. "Once you need to see a lot of specialists, then you start paying."
Omdahl said that before signing up for a Medicare Advantage plan, understand that anytime you want care other than an emergency, the plan has to approve it.
[link:https://www.forbes.com/sites/nextavenue/2021/11/12/the-truth-about-those-medicare-advantage-tv-commercials/?sh=14d99e2c1e99|
Cosmocat
(14,564 posts)Either.
They would burn the entire country down tomorrow if they could.
CousinIT
(9,245 posts)They'll destroy everything. That is their stated intent (Bannon, Trump). And Republicans did not create Social Security. Democrats did. Republicans called it "socialism" and have been trying to destroy it ever since like Pelosi said.
Puppyjive
(502 posts)A lot of the anti social security people are not entitled to social security because they never paid into the system. It also means they probably have never paid taxes. They are scared about the IRS getting more employees and going after them for tax dodging. Should have been done a long time ago.
former9thward
(32,009 posts)Can you name someone who has never paid taxes or SS and is worried about the IRS?
Puppyjive
(502 posts)I know how the system works. Trust me.
former9thward
(32,009 posts)Puppyjive
(502 posts)Let's just put it this way. Social Security is like car insurance. You get out of it what you put into it. If you don't pay your car insurance, you don't get to collect.
grantcart
(53,061 posts)Than the minimum 10 years and never qualified for benefits
Undocumented workers use a "borrowed" SS number to work but don't get credit for the contribution.
Two of my son in laws were illegal (now legal) so I know the names of 2.
former9thward
(32,009 posts)they knew of people who 1) never paid taxes, and 2) did not pay SS withholding and 3) feared new IRS agents. Are your son-in-laws in that category?
DENVERPOPS
(8,820 posts)There is no separate account that I know of, maybe I am wrong.
As I understand it, it has always been completely funded from "current withholding" on workers wages coming in. But now that the Baby Boomers have big numbers of people, and the younger workers are no longer in the majority, they have somewhat limited the amount people who retire receive.
If it had been held separately and invested in conservative things, retiree's checks would be two or three times what they are now receiving. But the Federal politicians didn't hold it separately, they threw it in to the general fund and spent it. That helped keep the wealthy's taxes less to operate the country.
Now, that money is needed, and the wealthy want to pretend that the money that came in, they just want people to think it just disappeared somewhere, poooof. And they have dismissed another huge debt that they created and now is coming due.
The other thing is: that the wealthy don't really pay much into it, or medicare either as I understand it, because both are based on "earned income", and investment income and profits aren't and never have been included in "earned income"........??????
I am old, and I may be mistaken, is my understanding correct?????????
I had to laugh at the cost of living inflation factor that supposedly were going to make this years SSI checks more to help with the inflation. I got my first new amount check at the first of the year, and LOL, it was a chunk less than last years, because the government merely increased the deduction for medicare that they take out of it.............
I remember when Reagan forecast that we weren't putting enough into Social Security for it to survive. But it seemed they just dumped it into the general tax revenue!!!!!! So he doubled the employer/employee share from 7.5% to 15%. The next year, there was 7.5% more flowing into the general tax revenue and he declared we were taxing more than we needed, so he dramatically cut the amounts of taxes that the rich and corporations paid........LOL LOL LOL And that was just one of many shell games they executed....
grantcart
(53,061 posts)It is a completely separate account from the general fund
It is held separately and invested conservatively, primarily by loans primarily loans to US government
Last year it generated 1.4% interest.
Like all government retirement accounts all across the world our SD is 'transgenerational' in nature meaning that some of each generations contributions goes to help the previous generation.
It is an entirely manageable system as long as the average age of existing workers remains below 38. Japan has risen to an unsustainable 49% it is particularly bad for Japan because average longevity is longer.
The US moved from 39.3 in 2000 to 42 in 2020. The primary reason is a drop in reproductive rate in the white population where the average age in teased from 39. 6 to 42.7
Two important studies were issued a couple of years ago sounding the alarm and indicating we needed to start increasing immigration to avoid problems in the future.
Illegal immigration is particularly helpful in a particularly sister way because when they use borrowed SS numbers the contributions are taken from them but they accrue no benefit, saving money paying their retirement.
Oh and the week that America's best economists were sounding the alarm about bringing in more immigrants, was the same week Trump initiated ripping children from their parents along the border
yaesu
(8,020 posts)Those who had low paying jobs or didn't pay into it long enough get the bare minimum which barely pays for food let alone rent, insurance, ect... There needs to be a minimum basic income fixed into SS, something that a person can actually exist on.
OneCrazyDiamond
(2,032 posts)No way she could make it on that by herself. She has her kids to save her though.
liberal N proud
(60,334 posts)Septua
(2,256 posts)And there's a bunch of 'em that want to. It infuriates me when the $200K a year pious Republicans bitch about SS, Medicare or Medicaid suggesting it needs changing or privatizing. They don't need it...if they did end it, I'd have to move to the underside of a bridge somewhere.
NoMoreRepugs
(9,427 posts)donated to campaign coffers dont u think?
Wall Street is salivating to get their fingers into that pie.
LogicFirst
(571 posts)Social Security would not exist. Im collecting it anyway!
Joinfortmill
(14,425 posts)DFW
(54,387 posts)Last edited Tue Aug 16, 2022, 12:34 AM - Edit history (1)
I wasn't going to bother (I HATE HATE HATE paperwork), but during the week I was with my brother in Virginia, he insisted I apply, and he knows his way around this stuff. So, together, we plowed through it. I THINK it went through, but I'll believe it when a payout comes, and not before. I know nothing beyond that. Do I owe taxes on it, how much if I do, and to whom? IRS? Surely. Germany? Maybe not, but they'll try to get it regardless. I'll leave that to the accountants. "That's not my department, says Wernher von Braun." If there's anything left over after taxes, I'm sure there are a few more local offices of Planned Parenthood that could always use a few more bucks. The way things are going these days, if I have $19.95 left over free and clear, I'll be amazed.
**edit--I looked at the SS website and found that 85% of my payout is taxable in the USA. The cap of someone's earnings that can be subjected to the Social Security tax in 2022 is $147,000 at a rate of 6.2% This is indeed ridiculous. No wonder the payout is subjected to tax. That means the max someone has to pay out is $9114, even if they earn a salary of five times the cap.
Sibelius Fan
(24,396 posts)because they will never collect what they paid into the system. This ignores the fact that many poor and middle-class people pay into the system their entire lives and die before they reach the age where they can start drawing SS benefits. That money is not refunded to their heirs. It remains in the fund to be used to support others.
DFW
(54,387 posts)But living in Germany, I never really had someone to discuss it with, either. I mean, I can understand there being a cap somewhere. I guess someone making $1 million a year would probably say paying $62,500 is plenty, but if the payout for a 70 year old is $5000 per month in 15 years, that IS $60,000 a year. Inflation will wipe some of the fun out, but if it remains at current levels (averaged over the past 5 years), not a huge amount. I have no idea what the rules are for foreign spouses if I should get run over by a truck tomorrow. Does my wife get anything? Nothing? Her German version of Social Security pays her a net of just under $1300 a month, which she cannot live on unless she sells the house and the cars, and moves in with our daughter down in Frankfurt (she makes gazillions and would welcome a supplemental baby-sitter).
Whatever. I'll get what I get, and if it's above zero, it will go right back out again as contributions to causes I believe in, with maybe a meal or two in some German or Belgian train station, freezing my ass off waiting for some delayed train that is 90 minutes late or canceled outright.
Emile
(22,765 posts)about you investing your Social Security money without government interference. I don't know how many times I heard Social Security would be bankrupt before we would be able to retire. My dad who grew up in the depression told me don't ever let them take Social Security away.
UCmeNdc
(9,600 posts)Last edited Tue Aug 16, 2022, 06:45 AM - Edit history (1)
Get rid of the caps and quit raiding the SS funds for other government funding and SS will have a budget surplus.
Johnny2X2X
(19,066 posts)One problem is people fail to think about retirement enough. Social Security is absolutely an important part of my revenue stream in retirement. Without it, it would get fairly ugly. The days of pensions are gone, and I think people are going to be in for a rude awakening with their 401Ks not being enough. And a huge problem with 401Ks is people are forced to borrow out of them when life comes at you.
Everyone has to have a plan, too many people don't end up with anything late in their careers. My plan doesn't work without Social Security supplementing my investment income. I understand the need to strengthen social security because it's right in front of me whenever I review my plan. Like a lot of people, I plan to retire with a paid for home, no debt, and a 401K that is enough to get by on, but that social security is important to maintain a standard of living that we are used to in retirement.
bikebloke
(5,260 posts)However, it was approved and comes in regularly. My pension was another thing. The company wouldn't reply to queries. So I assumed my pension was stolen. In the Social Security application, they ask if you have a pension. I said no. Then they sent me a letter saying the company is on record for having my pension. I was to show them their letter. That kicked the greedy bastards into gear. And now i'm receiving my pension also.
Baggies
(503 posts)Its certainly not enough to sustain someone on its own.
Gotta remember when it was established the age of receiving SS was set at 65 when most men (who made up the vast majority of workers in the 30s) only lived to age 66-67. That meant you collected 40 years and only paid out for very few. Now people live into there 80s.