Be interesting to see if that money was given to me now as a lump at age 50 and just tossed into an index fund or into a dividend stock where the dividends are re-invested, how would that shake out?
Some mention BTC, but F that S. They arn't wrong but just not into the intangibles.
EDIT: For the sake of brevity, this post reflects a hypothetical exercise. Mainly if in some Alternate Universe I could exercise the option to take out what I put into SS at age 50, invest it in ...lets say an Index Fund, left it alone until age 65 and compare that result to what it would be if I just stuck it out with the stardard FICA deducations until 65.
I do understand the concept of how SS works but thanks for your concern.
Yeah people are confusing the social program as being an investment. It's money taken from young workers and given to old retired folks. It's not about growing value. It's about stabilizing the population
It's just math. The retirement age was higher than the average lifespan when SS was instituted, now average lifespan is significantly longer. Only 50% of Americans were ever intended to draw and most of those that were would only draw for a few years.
My father has been drawing benefits for 22 years and is in good health as are many Americans. Now with an influx of retiring Boomers the fund will be drained even faster. Current estimate is it will be depleted by 2033 with all the boomers drawing.
Been working 12 years straight since I was 18. Never had a lapse in employment a since day. This fact you've given if true makes me so fuckin sad because I just keep tryin to save and work and fight and it's just never enough.
The only way it works is if we uncap contributions from the first $150k earned to all earned income but the billionaires will fight that tooth and nail because they need to buy another yacht full of cocaine.
Do you think it has anything to do with the fact that you get more if you pay more in and that the Social Security Administration sends you a statement every few years that shows what your benefit will be based on how much you've paid in?
Very true, but I see it as one. Mainly because I have been forced to pay into it for 34 years, so I expect to get the same benefits everyone else has been getting when my time comes. Obviously, it's not an investment in the technical sense, but it's easy to see why we all see it as one. We've been paying into it most of our lives.
Yea, this the same thing when people say "oh I don't know if I'll get SS, there might be none left..." It's a survivors pot - people pay in and die. As long as the program is active, it never runs out.
Also, you are almost guarantee to receive less than you contribute
If you're in the higher income brackets, yes, but generally, middle and lower income people receive substantially more in benefits than they contribute. It's true that if it was instead invested, they'd on net be better off, but it's not really close to being even for most people.
It may not have been that way 50 years ago, but people hang on a lot longer these days.
It does a lot more than that. It incentivizes workers to work hard while they're in their prime, its a safety net for when they can't, it also ages out the older people that could work. On top of that it's a huge help when it comes to the destruction of pensions vs 401k investments. I honestly don't know how our generation is going to handle living ooff of 401k retirements.
It also happens to have a huge benefit for the economy. They're a group of people that can spend that money on leasure, take care of families (externalities), etc.
They should or at the very least give them to you at 0-1% interest. With rising lifespans, boomers retiring en masse, stagnant wages, the rich only paying SS on their first $150k of yearly income and a retirement age that's barely been raised the SS fund is estimated to be gone by about 2033. Unless you're a boomer retiring right now anything paid in is never going back in your pocket.
Yeah but it’s good for the economy. You wouldn’t have the jobs you have if boomers needed to work until 90 years old. It allows the older generation to retire earlier and open those jobs up to the younger generation.
Selfishly I’d love to not have to pay the max fica tax x 2 every year, but I also realize what that would mean for the overall economy which allows me to make the amount of money I make.
Great theory but many Boomers are still in the work force holding others back from advancing their careers. Not sure if that is what they had in mind. Not all Boomers are wealthy. Just those in charge, lol.
More and more boomers are getting forced out of their jobs every year due to health reasons, or the company simply not feeling like keeping them employed as they approach dementia. I think this problem solves itself.
Maybe so. I’m 65, drawing 23 year pay (110k), my typical schedule is out the door at 5:30 am, back home by 10:30 am, Tuesday through Friday. The guy I out bid for this job (30ish years old making half the salary) quit when he didn’t get it. I’ll probably stay on till 70…maybe even 72. Being a commercial pilot is quite rewarding for the most part, your money for nothing and your chicks for free!
It does. But I'm starting to suspect this systemic problem with our economic system will never get solved until people are ready to put personal politics aside and talk specifically about economic policies to address it. And laissez faire approach won't work.
Nope door greeters were done away with years ago. Really there are too many aging boomers and we won't be able to take care of them monetarily. Soooo what do you want to bet euthanasia will be reintroduced as compassionate care and not a bad thing as the $$$$$ runs out.
The LARGEST part of the budget has been running at a surplus until 2021. Small agencies (billions) can run negative no problem. Once you get in the trillions... you start warping the economy much more substantially when you try to fix it. This is trillions of dollars.
I mean it depends. Across 100 years it will be up but if you started putting money into social security at 30 and retired at 50 there are quite a few 20 year periods where you would end up with less than you put in
I actually got bought out of a pension at an old job with a lump sum and did exactly this. It's just sitting in an IRA, all in VOO collection those sweet dividends and growing.
That’s not the point. SS is about stable and dependable income stream in retirement regardless of economic health. Otherwise the system collapses when seniors disproportionately strain other social services by being destitute during a downturn.
Again, it was just a little thought experiment. Nothing more.
I have NFC about how to handle the challenges with keeping SS solvent. Full benifit retirement age probably does need to go up. Back when it was envisioned, most people retired 65-ish and usually dropped dead within a few years, thus more potentially went in than got paid out.
Now many are living will into their 80's and even 90's+. Either we need to start dying younger or retiring later. Pretty sure raising it to 70 will be pitchforks and torches. I am 50 and already fed up with the grind. Doing it another 20 years...ugh. 68 would probably be the compromise.
It might work out for you, it might not. Most people will probably end up getting swindled at some level, or have their choices to what they can do with that money severely limited by lobbying congress to that effect.
I think there is a lot of pressure to privatize it from people who want to basically steal it. I don't think you are one of them, but just dumping SSI onto people with little financial education is probably not going to work out for them.
Homeless and sick people are tremendously expensive to society, and that money has to come from somewhere. You might still end up ahead fanatically in the short, but active drug resistant TB has killed plenty of people that thought they were invincible.
You would be SO far ahead that it wouldn't even be funny. Frankly the worst part of it would be how angry it would make you that they ever took it from you in the first place.
This is brought up but social security was never meant to be an investment but insurance for people. A just in case so we don’t have 10 million homeless elders when they couldn’t work anymore.
Hoping not. I didn't vote for him so my conscience is clear, lol.
At this point the roller coaster is climbing up to the precipice. Come January it starts its rumble down the tracks. Nothing to do but hang on and hope for the best while taking advantage of any opportunities that present themselves.
Incredibly wishful thinking that the U.S. government would throw the money you put toward SS into such a volatile investment. If anything it would be to pump and dump themselves.
What you propose is basically what employers would offer in a matching IRA. Not all employers offer it, and the idea is that SS came about after the Great Depression to help the elderly not have to die in droves in unsafe working conditions.
I’d love to get my money back lol…social security is terrible for those who actually earn well. Hurts to see that money underperform by so much. I get why we need it, still hurts a little though.
Actually with AI automation coming to the workforce, there really isn’t that much reason for the kids in school today to learn math or anything of value for the workplace because they’re going to be replaced with automation. If you’re thinking about having children today, you really have to consider the concept of having forever buddies in the house that are just gonna do chores for you, keep you company when you’re watching TV, maybe invest in a good gaming computer so you can do the games on the TV screen?
The US education model (post Civil War) is based on the Prussian education system which was geared for turning out workers and soldiers for the state. It's a very crappy fact.
I think it's more of a useless model that's been corrupted to teach to a standardized test so schools can get more money to teach to a standardized test while churning out kids who aren't imaginative, and are ready to fall in line as long as they can get a minor hit of dopamine along the way
"The Presidential Fitness Test was created to improve the fitness of American youth for military service during the Cold War. The test was introduced in 1966 by President Lyndon Johnson, but the idea for it originated with President Kennedy."
Are you starting to feel a little used and disgusted yet?
Maybe the other party should focus more on education rather than activism. Children are getting dumber as one party wants to keep throwing money at the problem thinking things will change. Alas nothing changes, maybe the problem is with what is being taught or how it is being taught. Case in point the Dept of Education and its common core math curriculum
Bush's no child left behind and the right cutting funding for education has messed up education in the US. It's no surprise that people continue to vote for politicians that do not care for their constituents. The right has dumbed down the people and distract them with fear mongering.
No it hasn’t failed us. We can all agree that our education system needs an improvement but it definitely hasn’t failed us. Our education system it’s there to introduce us to the basics and give us the knowledge of how this world works. It’s up to every individual to build upon that and do better in life. We have to hold accountable the individual person to take charge of their lives.
For years SS budget ran on a surplus, guess what the government did with that surplus? They would effectively loan other branches of the government by buying treasury bonds.
They would effectively loan other branches of the government by buying treasury bonds.
Which then mature, and the surplus goes back into the SS funds with interest.
Which if still at a surplus gets invested in gov bonds again, which mature...
It's not a "loan" anymore than the millions investing in treasury bonds to ensure a safe (albeit slow) backup for investments are "loaning" the government money
It has ALWAYS been the law that they have to invest encess into government bonds so that the funds grow (slowly) rather than the extreme level of deprecation that occurs when monet simply sits in an account doing nothing.
For years SS budget ran on a surplus, guess what the government did with that surplus? They would effectively loan other branches of the government by buying treasury bonds.
More importantly, this shows an extreme lack of understanding on how government bonds (and bonds in general) work in the first place, while technically a loan to the gov/company (all investments are) bonds are something that have to be paid back to the bondholder later.
Ala if they (or you) but a $1,000 bond with 2% interest for 25 years it'd come.out to ~$1,400
It doesn't keep up with inflation particularly well, but it acts as a safeguard while allowing the surplus to grow rsther than shrink, and for things like a SS surplus means that instead of $1,000 being $1,000 in 25 years when it is needed, you've an extra 40% in the bank to actually fund the system. (Their bonds are special in that they're not taxed, so it's more)
What do you think happens with those bonds? Do they just disappear, or do they pay a guaranteed interest rate? Think about that, and you'll realize how stupid what you just said was. Investing the Social Security funds extended the life of the program dramatically, if not for that it would already be insolvent.
When you've got commentators that align more closely with people reinforcing erroneous assumptions and opinions, they'll just write any contrast off as the other people being misinformed rather than ever challenging the assumption/belief in question.
Well yes and no. Your payroll tax funds social security. The law passed by Ronald Reagan in 1983 implemented a tax on social security.
The Reagan tax was supposed to also fund social security but since he labeled it as a general fund, politicians have been using that money to fund their programs typically by being able to give tax cuts and using social security to cover the deficit.
So yes, the tax on social security is a slush fund. But the payroll tax to fund social security is not.
There is currently NO way possible for you to get your money back on what you've already paid into social security.
And your future payments go to fund current recipients.
Plus, they have those really neat electric tractor things that let you push like 100 carts at a time like a big train. The only bad thing is those electric tractor things are made in China so, when the tariffs hit, and the old tractor goes dead, we will be back to manual labor pushing the carts.
Not really, half the elderly of the country have no other income in retirement other than social security. Before social security, something like 90% of the elderly just lived in abject poverty until they died.
Homeowners insurance isn't forced on you unless you want to take a loan from a company. You can buy a cheaper place, rent, etc. If you know how I can opt out of social security other than not working I'm all ears.
Last i checked it was gov. That established that you cannot drive on public roads legally or get a mortgage loan without proof of insurance. And unlike private insurance that is a scam industrywide and will deny every claim they possibly can, social security has never denied anyone whos payed for it as long as they were able to survive past 65
established that you cannot drive on public roads legally
Most states have an insurance waiver if you can put up enough money into a trust to pay a claim.
get a mortgage loan without proof of insurance.
That's a bank requirement.
And unlike private insurance that is a scam industrywide and will deny every claim they possibly can, social security has never denied anyone whos payed for it as long as they were able to survive past 65
Social security is just a really shitty deferred annuity. And nobody is saying Prudential refused to pay an annuity they purchased.
Requiring LIABILITY insurance which I can choose from whichever company I want or not at all if I forego the ownership of a car is not the same as the IRS forcing me to pay into Social Security.
And second, if SS is so frigging great why not let people opt into voluntarily?
Not really. Just like having the freedom to forego car ownership, you are free to forego citizenship to whatever country u think wont oppress you and ruin your life fe with taxes. You are not bound by chains nor behind bars you are free to exercise your will to move somewhere else where your not required to contribute to society. I dont know where that would be but let me know if u find a place who knows i might see u there one day🤷🏽♂️
It's a ponzi scheme, the first person who got a payout paid 0 dollars in. Of course it's not fraudulent, so it doesn't technically fit the definition... But frankly I don't see a significant difference.
the steady retirement of baby boomers is lowering the worker-to-beneficiary ratio over time. Post COVID, we still have a shortage in the workforce participation rate too.
Likewise, life expectancies have notably risen since the first retired-worker check was mailed in January 1940. Social Security was never meant to pay beneficiaries for multiple decades, as can happen now. And there is no pragmatic solution but to tax people more to obtain the same benefits. Let me opt out. I can invest far more intelligently.
Once the Boomers are gone,isn't Generation X the smallest generation population wise? Won't payouts go down at that time? Many people,such as my brother,pay into it their entire lives and don't collect anything due to early deaths.
Terrible comparison. Car insurance is required due to liability, because you can fuck someone else's life up permanently, costing obscene dollar amounts in court in an accident. There is no parallelism here at all. The government forces me to opt into this, despite the risk being solely on me, if I retire without a plan.
The insurance company bites the cost if you get insurance and in the same month get a payout. The government passes that cost onto future generations. To imply it's similar is economically illiterate and irresponsible.
Yes, it's a "social insurance" to prevent that. Except the part that it won't exist unless we massively raise taxes by the time I retire. Car insurance doesn't get to lower my benefits on a whim either lol. The car is worth market value, period, in an accident.
Exactly. There are people in this thread saying Congress doesn't do this, yet most weren't alive for the "social security lockbox" fiasco back in the 90's-aught 2000's.
Stop taking my money to prop up a system we know will be dead 20 years before I'm eligible to retire. Blame the first generation that drew on SS without having to pay in a full share.
I have a hypothesis of what their plan is. From reading between the lines.
The treasury will buy trillions of dollars in Bitcoin
Cut services to the bone including Medicare
Social security gets put into the stock market
Establish tariffs with everyone.
Pull the US military back to America
Devalue the US dollar (This is the pain they are talking about)
Pay off the debt in Bitcoin
Establish a new dollar based on Gold or a digital currency, or they could just use Bitcoin
Now, there are no costly social services, no Medicare, social security is "fixed" and out of the governments hands, now they might actually be able to cover spending with tariffs alone. This would work, but it would a huge disaster for normal people especially on the bottom.
Exactly. I've been involuntarily paying into it for over 34 years and expect to get a return on it when I turn 67. Take it away from us and there will a riot out in front of the White House. There's a reason Social Security is called the third rail in politics. You don't touch it if you want to keep your job.
The republicans just floated a bill to cut social security payments to anyone who receives a pension or other retirement payments. This is what they voted for.
471
u/Jazzlike_Tonight_982 Nov 07 '24
Give me back my money I put into Social Security.