The American Spectator

Becky| 4.21.10 @ 11:41AM

And for those of us with vested railroad retirement benefits, there is also no such thing as a guarantee.

I think Washington tried to put it into Social Security under Reagan, and wouldn't be surprised to see that and the Postal retirement rolled into SS before it finally dies

mike| 4.21.10 @ 12:43PM

Social Security has been robbed by poltications for years! If they paid back the IUO's there would be no problem. The healthcare welfare program just passed takes 53 B from SS and 538 B from medicare. The Social Securty trust fund is funded by the tax payer and the benifits promised by the government are not unfunded like welfare!

Curly Smith| 4.21.10 @ 1:15PM

Yes, politicians have stolen from the Social Security Trust Fund ever since LBJ moved FICA taxes to the General Fund to hide the real cost of the Vietnam War.

But, they can't repay it... there isn't enough money. Until recently SS did take in more that it paid out but it was accumulating unfunded future liabilities that can't possibly be repaid. You mention the $100 billion in Medicare and Social Security cuts that ObamaCare includes but that's round-off error compared to the $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities. So, sadly, the promised benefits are indeed unfunded.

Lastly, the Social Security trust fund is currently funded by workers, not by tax payers. The system was awash in cash when there were 5 workers to 1 retiree but it will either suffer a painful death when the Baby Boomers retire or it will require massive FICA and income tax increases to fund those unfunded liabilities.

The current Federal Budget is around $4 trillion while the liabilities exceed $100 trillion. How would you propose closing the gap? Perhaps you wouldn't mind doubling the overall tax rates but I rather suspect that the 'utes will say "you should have saved for your retirement, take a pain pill".

Real American| 4.21.10 @ 1:42PM

A Ponzi scheme going belly up? Never!

WM| 4.21.10 @ 2:15PM

People need to start accepting the idea that Social Security cannot survive and must be abolished. Basic integrity means you shouldn't have supported it in the first place. I understand there are some impoverished older people that paid in all their lives, but that can be dealt with in a reform plan. People knew what was happening all these years to the money that was going in; they just thought that the scheme would keep going long enough that they could get their freebies when they retired. Well, now they have to pay the price for their tacit complicity, and there is no political way around it, because the money just isn't there. Integrity, people! Start doing the right thing now.

Julie Anne Burton| 4.26.10 @ 6:29PM

WM, it's not as if any of us were given the option of *not* supporting it! Regardless of how I feel about the Social Security System, the federal government is still going to take approximately 23% of my pay (I'm self-employed as a freelance writer, so I pay both ends). After that chunk is gone, I have to pay state and federal income tax, and then I have to give my agent 15% of the gross as well. I'm doing what I can, but there's not a lot left over for retirement savings.

disinterested spectator| 4.21.10 @ 3:38PM

Politicians also have a rational attitude toward Social Security: It absolutely will happen! Beneficiaries will continue to receive their checks one way or another. It may mean tax increases, more borrowing, or cuts in other areas of the budget. If necesary, the government will print the money, while the COLA offsets the inflation that ensues. It may mean the end of Western civilisation, but Social Security will endure.

Julie Anne Burton| 4.21.10 @ 5:30PM

My husband and I have always assumed that we'd never get our social security benefits -- we're 50. Problem is, our income is around 50k. (I'm disabled, and while I work as a writer, when the economy tanked, so did most of my gigs. We rely on his income.) We contribute to a pension plan and a deferred compensation plan, to the tune of about $500 a month. We recently met with a financial planner (kindly provided by his employer) who told us that if we wanted to maintain our current standard of living, we'd need to save an additional $700 a month. In the past year and a half, to save his job, his pay was cut 37%. We only clear about 2k a month, so saving an additional $700 is pure fantasy. Our current standard of living? We live in a 60 year old house that desperately needs work/updating. Both our cars are over 20 years old. With the exception of 3 pieces, all our furniture is beaten-up hand-me-downs from our family. We do have moderately new computers -- about 3 years old, but they're used primarily for work. Despite our having very good insurance, we pay out about $400 a month in health care costs. We haven't taken any sort of vacation (as in travel somewhere) in about ten years. My husband anticipates that he'll have to follow in his father's footsteps -- my father-in-law is 78 years old and still works a 40 hr week, though as a security guard rather than a television engineer. His wife, 75, works 30 hours a week.

We're not alone in our situation. Virtually everyone in my husband's office is in similar straits,and they have children to support as well, where we do not. What's going to happen is that this generation will simply not be able to afford to retire. I find this to be a very sad thing. While I'll probably die before I'm 70, I hate to think of my husband's life consisting of working from when he was 12 years old until his death.

If we'd had the money taken from our checks by social security,we'd have invested it and have been much better off overall, despite the market bumps.

dofus kamas| 4.28.10 @ 2:59AM

whether Dofus kamas you know it dofus kamas or not

Aubry Pope| 2.16.11 @ 6:23PM

Fifty five years ago, the Washington Post had a big three inch headline that said, "Social Securit Awash in Money." In Washingtron, no less. And Congress was in session. It didn't take them long to fix that problem!
At the time the SS was instituted, the retirement asge was 65 but the average age of Americans was 57. It waas a sure fire Ponzi scheme. People just didn't live long enough to get SS. People live to 74 or more now and if the same formula were used, the retirement age should be 81. Of course, we won't be able to do that but a more realistic retirement age could be chosen.