I said that was all I would say about that, but I guess I lied. As a man in my forties I had said that I would write off past SS payments if only the Guv mint would only stop collecting on it. Now that I'm retired, that offer is no longer on the table...I want my money back.zephyp wrote:Good stuff Rick and I agree these entitlement programs must stop. Social security is not a good place to start though IMO. Too many people have paid way to much into it. Need to find a way to phase it out. I for one have paid big bucks into SS and I would like to see my money back - at least part of it.
The problem with that is all the years of interest that are no longer available to invest those funds...Tempus Fugit.zephyp wrote:I say refund everyone the money they put in and cancel it. Period. I'd go for that - IF - they cancel welfare in total first.
I thought about that too, but where do you draw the line. Getting your principal back is better than nothing. Social security funds are supposedly held in treasury notes so the actual interest accrued by the government would be very little. You could argue that you could have personally done better.WRW wrote:The problem with that is all the years of interest that are no longer available to invest those funds...Tempus Fugit.zephyp wrote:I say refund everyone the money they put in and cancel it. Period. I'd go for that - IF - they cancel welfare in total first.
The dirty little "secret" is that the money is already gone. If they stopped collecting SS tomorrow, there would be no money to pay those currently receiving benefits.allingeneral wrote:I would be willing to let it go at this point. I don't want any of it back. Use what I've put into the system to help pay out over the next 20 years until SS is phased out. Stop collecting from my paychecks and leave me alone about it.
It's a failed program that needs to be halted. As Jay said - let me opt out and invest my own money and plan for my own future. I want the government out of it.
Thats the rumor George. Unlike Rick, and I do laud his attitude, I'd like my contributions back please. And dont take no more. I pay the max every year and celebrate every time I hit the FICA limit...it makes for a nicer Christmas.gfost1 wrote:The dirty little "secret" is that the money is already gone. If they stopped collecting SS tomorrow, there would be no money to pay those currently receiving benefits.allingeneral wrote:I would be willing to let it go at this point. I don't want any of it back. Use what I've put into the system to help pay out over the next 20 years until SS is phased out. Stop collecting from my paychecks and leave me alone about it.
It's a failed program that needs to be halted. As Jay said - let me opt out and invest my own money and plan for my own future. I want the government out of it.
Regards,
George
I'm with you. If they said - and backed it up with legislation - that the system was dead and we aint taking no more then I could live with that. Fat chance and when monkeys fly from the seat of my drawers I'll believe maybe they will do something like that.allingeneral wrote:oh, don't get me wrong - I'd love to have it back... But if it means fixing the problem, and making it so I don't have to pay in any longer, then I don't want it.
(they have something in the bill called death panels, that should reduce the payouts some)allingeneral wrote:The problem is that it requires some long-winded discussion such as this to get some people to think about these issues. Part of "Spending ourselves into oblivion" is Social Security, Welfare, etc - and Obama just wants to add another entitlement to the mix - Health Care - instead of trying to bring spending down, he's trying to add to it. It makes me sick!
What we need to do is figure out a way to lower Social Security disbursements or increase the qualifying age to 70.
( this was tried but the supremes decided it was unconstitutional to force anyone to work for benifits because of the work offered)allingeneral wrote: We also need to forget this whole healthcare (Obamacare) scam. We also need to get rid of some of the other entitlement programs out there and force people to work for a living instead of living off the government.
If I had said this I would be expecting a PM.....allingeneral wrote: If you don't want to work for a living, then there had better be a damned good reason for it before you get ANY assistance. If you're able-bodied, then get out there and do what you can to move yourself, your life, and the life of your family in a positive direction. Stop being lazy and living off the government just because it's convenient. How many babies do you have? TWELVE?!?! Maybe you should have thought about things a little better before you got yourself into that position (so to speak!)
(welcome to my world rick, I've been saving you a seat.)allingeneral wrote: And on another note regarding our representatives in the House and Senate... Get your heads out of your asses and start working for the people! Stop pandering to big business and crazy lunatic nutjobs who have millions or billions of dollars. Do your job - represent the people who elected you. It's really that simple. Just Grow a Pair and get it done!
see above .allingeneral wrote:Well, I have contributed a pretty good amount to Social Security over the 20 years or so that I've been working. I agree with you that a "Phase out" approach would be best. Perhaps lowering the disbursements - even though it will be painful for many to do that... It's a tough one to deal with, for sure, but something must be done.
Something interesting that I have learned (I don't remember if it was in this program or somewhere else)... When FDR created Social Security under "The New Deal", the life expectancy of men was 59 and women was 62. So, with those expectancy numbers, the average person would never have received SS benefits prior to their death.( That was the beauty of the new deal)
Now that people are living into their 80's routinely (life expectancy in 2006 was 75.1 for men and 80.2 for women), this has created a huge gap in the amount paid in versus the amount that's distributed.
If Congress were to increase the Social Security qualification age to 70 years or maybe even 75 - that would help a lot.(except , like today, older folks would be continuing to work past retirement age and taking jobs that young , first time employees would take, thus creating a new under reported unemployed class of americans, those with NO job experience at all.)
Perhaps grandfather those who are at least age 63 as of the day the law is passed, since those people may already be counting on their impending Social Security allotments that will be available when they reach 65. Anyone between the ages of 55 and 63 will receive smaller payments from age 65 to 75, then full benefits when they reach the age of 75. Anyone under the age of 55 will just have to understand that they can't count on Social Security at age 65 and plan accordingly.
How's that for a quick plan?
The SS opt out plan...I like that. Do you think they will buy losing all that revenue though for their little pet projects...allingeneral wrote:I think I'm going to try to come up with some good talking points on this and suggest it to my representative... The Social Security "Opt-out" Plan.
Keep everything that I've already paid into SS. I don't want any benefits - ever. I want to stop contributing. I want to opt out.
Talking points, anyone?
Well, isn;t that part of the problem? Stealing from SS to pay for BS...zephyp wrote:The SS opt out plan...I like that. Do you think they will buy losing all that revenue though for their little pet projects...allingeneral wrote:I think I'm going to try to come up with some good talking points on this and suggest it to my representative... The Social Security "Opt-out" Plan.
Keep everything that I've already paid into SS. I don't want any benefits - ever. I want to stop contributing. I want to opt out.
Talking points, anyone?
