How to Fix Social Security

[SmootSmack]

According to US Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, the US Social Security trust fund will be used up by 2041 (thank you modern medicine!), though many think it may be sooner than that. This means that for many of us there will be no money available when we retire. Ultimately this leaves us with three choices

1. Raise Social Security Taxes
-Currently employees pay 6.2% tax, this is matched by another 6.2% from employers


2. Cut Benefits

3. Privatize Social Security
-The idea here isn't necessarily to privatize the entire account, just a portion of it (primarily in mutual funds). So, for example, you might pay a 3.2% tax and the other 3% would go into a private account

So what's your solution?

[70Chip]

I voted other. Social Security is a pyramid sceme and those are against the law. The program should be phased out over time in a way that minimizes the detrimental impact on the the most vulnerable, because it's going to go bankrupt anyway. This is what SHOULD happen.

What WILL happen is they will end up raising the payroll tax. Sympathetic media will then congratulate these "couragous" politicians who have "saved" social security and the vast majority of people will never realize their getting stuck with the bill.

This is interesting reading:

Social Security Trust Fund - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[ArtMonkDrillz]

Soylent Green

[70Chip]

Originally Posted by ArtMonkDrillz

Soylent Green

Assisted-suicide advocate Kevorkian to run for U.S. Congress

[FRPLG]

I voted other because as 70 said it is a pyramid scheme. I think it ought to be revitalized to only allow citizens to withdraw what was put in with the appropriate interest applied. Once you are out then you are out. Then we need to figure out ways to make lif cheaper for older citizens. But the current model for social security will never work no matter how we tweak the taxes or benefits. It needs to be remodeled as a savings plan and not a pyramid scheme to ever really work.

[dmek25]

i say leave it alone. the money that is earmarked for social security benefits is used for strictly that. the main issue, in my opinion, is that every time the gov't gets into a bind for one of their programs, they dip into the S.S. fund

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by dmek25

i say leave it alone. the money that is earmarked for social security benefits is used for strictly that. the main issue, in my opinion, is that every time the gov't gets into a bind for one of their programs, they dip into the S.S. fund

That is definitely a big issue but long term that doesn't matter because the system is simply economically unsustainable since it is really nothing more than a fancy pyramid scheme.

[KLHJ2]

I say privatize it so that the majority of your money goes into something that can build compound intrest, for one.

Secondly, if the govt decides to dip into it, there is a smaller portion that they would be able to touch.

Overall it is a win, win, win.

Economy, beneficiary, govt.

[BrudLee]

I just got a letter from Social Security today that said if I earn no more money for the rest of my life, I will be entitled to $560/month when I retire. If I continue to earn money until I'm 62 at this rate, I'll earn $680/month.

What? I'm 37. Twenty-five more years of rock-breaking is supposed to get me an extra $120? Screw you.

If the Federal Government offered people my age and younger the opportunity to opt out of the Social Security plan for 10% of what we've put into it, there would be a stampede of people begging for checks. Since that isn't going to happen, there needs to be means-testing for benefits. Not entirely fair, but it's like Social Security is a lottery, and it only pays out when you lose.

[onlydarksets]

Originally Posted by ArtMonkDrillz

Soylent Green

But, Soylent Green is people!

[onlydarksets]

You can't cut benefits across the board, because the people who need it need the whole thing. I'd also like to see an opt-out option. Maybe if you opt to privatize half, you only get 25% of the SS benefit. Dunno, it's an antiquated system built for a different generation.

[skinsguy]

The best solution is to just prepare for retirement without even thinking about social security. I personally would like to take that percentage of my check and put it into something that will definitely be there for me when I'm 65.

[Schneed10]

Privatizing is the most efficient use of our money, by far. Any other solution makes no sense from an economic standpoint.

[saden1]

Pull out of Iraq, decrease the defence budget to a quarter of what it is, start negotiating for drugs, repeal the Bush tax cut and strengthen the "death tax."

[GTripp0012]

I support a general phasing out of Social Security over time, and eventually a total elimination of it.

I realize that means that I will be paying a social security tax for the first few years I work, and I will never see any of that money again. I'm fine with that. I kinda view taxes as throwing money into the fire anyway, even though it's obviously necessary to support a vast majority of public help systems. That doesn't mean I expect my tax dollars to all be spent wisely...in fact a good portion of tax dollars are relatively pissed away.

I think the closer someone is to retirement (right now), the more it becomes necessary to have social security for them, since they dont have nearly as much time to develop an alternate retirement plan as I do.

I'm 20, and I can totally save enough for retirement where I don't have to depend on a dime from social security. I have no problem if they take a chunk of my starting salary and put it in the SS fund of some 50 year old guy who is totally dependent on his social security check.

But ten years from now, I would hope that people are planning to retire without social security as a crutch. If I'm not going to benefit from social security, I would expect not to be paying a social security tax when I'm 40.