This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Is Social Security going bankrupt?

#1wolf_blitzer85Posted 4/27/2013 8:54:42 AM
http://www.timesnews.net/article.php?id=9026044
When you look at the actual numbers and to the math, it's the govt. that is pretending it's going bankrupt. To raise the retirement age and cut benefits.

What a damn cash cow that is to the government. They get part of your money every week without you being able to say "NO".

And this is why dishonest actuaries have nice things.
---
Redcount doesn't even lift and he thinks he's all badass. -- Cynyn
#2letsduthisnow02Posted 4/27/2013 9:23:45 AM
wolf_blitzer85 posted...
http://www.timesnews.net/article.php?id=9026044
When you look at the actual numbers and to the math, it's the govt. that is pretending it's going bankrupt. To raise the retirement age and cut benefits.

What a damn cash cow that is to the government. They get part of your money every week without you being able to say "NO".

And this is why dishonest actuaries have nice things.


Actually they get every penny of surplus by law.

And by law they are required to pay it back with interest.

Been this way since the 30s.
---
My life remains in a standstill until I get Trails in the Sky: The Second Chapter
#3mystic belmontPosted 4/27/2013 9:53:39 AM
If you raise the maximum amount one can earn before they do not have to contribute, than it will be solvent.
---
"Freedom was meaningless without ownership and control over one's own body" -Henry McNeal Turner
[Evil Republican]
#4wolf_blitzer85(Topic Creator)Posted 4/27/2013 10:42:47 AM
mystic belmont posted...
If you raise the maximum amount one can earn before they do not have to contribute, than it will be solvent.

i'm pretty sure you meant to say if they raise the maximum amount one can earn so everyone has to contribute, then it will be solvent.

because the rich like finding loopholes
because tax attorneys
because Wall Street
because...we don't love America we love money.
---
Redcount doesn't even lift and he thinks he's all badass. -- Cynyn
#5willythemailboyPosted 4/27/2013 11:02:02 AM
wolf_blitzer85 posted...
mystic belmont posted...
If you raise the maximum amount one can earn before they do not have to contribute, than it will be solvent.

i'm pretty sure you meant to say if they raise the maximum amount one can earn so everyone has to contribute, then it will be solvent.

because the rich like finding loopholes
because tax attorneys
because Wall Street
because...we don't love America we love money.


No, he didn't. Currently you only pay social security on the first $113,700 each year. Anything above that is untaxed.

Also, your plan wouldn't solve anything. Under that cap, people paying more into the system means they get paid that much more after they retire. It's designed that way; a person paying taxes on $50k a year gets much less per month after they retire than a person who paid $100k a year over the same working lifetime.

The only ways to increase the solvency of Social Security are to decrease how much it pays out (by reducing payments or delaying eligibility), increasing the tax rate supporting it, or making more income taxable under the system. Or any combination of those.

Of course, raising the taxable income cap would only help solve the problem if we increased the cap while holding the payout cap at the same level it is now.
---
He who laughs last, thinks fastest.
#6wolf_blitzer85(Topic Creator)Posted 4/27/2013 11:17:06 AM(edited)
willythemailboy posted...
wolf_blitzer85 posted...
mystic belmont posted...
If you raise the maximum amount one can earn before they do not have to contribute, than it will be solvent.

i'm pretty sure you meant to say if they raise the maximum amount one can earn so everyone has to contribute, then it will be solvent.

because the rich like finding loopholes
because tax attorneys
because Wall Street
because...we don't love America we love money.


No, he didn't. Currently you only pay social security on the first $113,700 each year. Anything above that is untaxed.

Also, your plan wouldn't solve anything. Under that cap, people paying more into the system means they get paid that much more after they retire. It's designed that way; a person paying taxes on $50k a year gets much less per month after they retire than a person who paid $100k a year over the same working lifetime.

The only ways to increase the solvency of Social Security are to decrease how much it pays out (by reducing payments or delaying eligibility), increasing the tax rate supporting it, or making more income taxable under the system. Or any combination of those.

Of course, raising the taxable income cap would only help solve the problem if we increased the cap while holding the payout cap at the same level it is now.

NOPE!
we could force rich people who earn above the cap to pay into it.
but 99% of them would probably never need it in the future.
I'm guessing that atleast 2 million Americans make over $113,700 each year.

so some quick math:
1. $250,000 income x 6.2% = $15,500
2. 2,000,000 Americans x $12,500/yr= $31,000,000,000 ($31 Billion raised, each year)


NOTES:
http://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/taxRates.html
1. (average of those 2 million people) x 6.2% of that income a year (SS contribution, not adding in the employer contribution part of 6.2%)
2. 2 million people x figure above = closes the yearly SS gap until about the year 2080 i think

And this is why wolf blitzer is a part time actuary, and has nice things. And I do my own taxes b****es.
---
Redcount doesn't even lift and he thinks he's all badass. -- Cynyn
#7letsduthisnow02Posted 4/27/2013 11:25:05 AM(edited)
You are likely to take More out of social security the less you make. As an estimate:

Someone who makes 15000 per year would receive 10000 per year.

50k for 20k benefits

100k for 30k benefits.

Removing the cap would greatly increase solvency.

http://www.justfacts.com/socialsecurity.asp

Edit: wolf beat me to it.
---
My life remains in a standstill until I get Trails in the Sky: The Second Chapter
#8wolf_blitzer85(Topic Creator)Posted 4/27/2013 11:42:55 AM
letsduthisnow02 posted...
You are likely to take More out of social security the less you make. As an estimate:

Someone who makes 15000 per year would receive 10000 per year.

50k for 20k benefits

100k for 30k benefits.

Removing the cap would greatly increase solvency.

http://www.justfacts.com/socialsecurity.asp

but...but...

YOU'RE TAXING US TOO MUCH! -- say the rich

I think it's time to fire up the old Moterhead song boys. What do you say?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWpXdQJ-8bg
EAT THE RICH, baby. that's what wolf says.
---
Redcount doesn't even lift and he thinks he's all badass. -- Cynyn
#9KnavePosted 4/27/2013 11:54:54 AM
What if you just let me keep my 15%~ and I let you keep yours. That way we can do with our money what we wish.

What a radical concept.
#10wolf_blitzer85(Topic Creator)Posted 4/27/2013 12:25:23 PM
NOPE.
I imagine the U.S. would look like China or India in a generation.
---
Redcount doesn't even lift and he thinks he's all badass. -- Cynyn