patrick.net

I used to dismiss it as strictly a ponzi scheme from which I would never benefit.

Now I realize that the social security 'problem" that is pending isn't from a deliberate ponzi type scandal, but a demographic consequense of the baby boom aging. The "imminent exhaustion of SS trust fund" could be avoided DESPITE the baby boom hump if current contributions were increased. Every year this is delayed, the greater the contribution needed to make it work. Same with the "medicare crisis;" I heard one analyst saying increasing medicare contributions by 0.5% a year or 2 ago would keep the fund liquid indefinitely beyond the baby boom hump.

Get back to work and fund the rest of my life.
jojo says

anyone?

The majority gets to vote on extending it forever.
jojo says

Serious question, How is this different than Madoff?

We'll be dead in 10 years or so. Do you think we give a fuck?
'Till then it' Disneyland...All Expenses Paid!!
jojo says

SoftShell says

The majority gets to vote on extending it forever.

Perfect. Then we should just let Madoff out of jail? Right?

10 years is all the boomers need to make hay..
jojo says

SoftShell says

The majority gets to vote on extending it forever.

Additionally, it can't get extended 'forever'. As you know the pyramid would have to grow so large that it eventually reaches the limits of the population (no new people to add). It then must collapse.

jojo says

anyone?

You have to take it in context of the wider ponzi schemes around it: population growth and economic growth.

As a share of GDP, ss is projected to be almost flat.

It's sustainable until population stagnates and/or economic growth stops.

Then we're screwed.

Try some math. For $260,000.00 of "contributions" invested at a modest 5.6 percent over a 30 year career, a nominal survivor to the actuarial midpoint who starts to collect at age 64 and dies at 78 can receive 32000 of taxable income a year.

That's $448,000.00 in benefits from $260,000.00 in contributions based on nominal accrual rates and compound interest, a differential of $188,000.00 over the contribution, all completely legit.

Compare that to the usual Social Security pension of 10 to 20K per year. Even accounting for some tax advantage, it is clear that there is no Ponzi.

Call it what it is, politicians doing what politicians do best, they stole the Social Security fund instead of acting as trustees and stewards, and left a pile of dusty IOUs for the future generations to choke down.

The average SS recipient won't even get what they put into it if they had saved and invested the money themselves in very conservative investment vehicles, and the higher income SS contributors will be practicing social welfare already because the lower contributors will be getting much more proportionately then the higher earners compared to what they put into it.

If you are going to cherry pick, why not cite all the people who died without collecting any benefit from SS at all?

One in seven males die before reaching nominal SS age, and many don't collect very long before they die.

jojo says

@everyone

That's quite a return Idea May Fuller got. Where did that come from?

A democratic desire to take care of our elderly instead of letting them starve when they can no longer work. The problem comes when there is no means testing applied to this societal charity. If the wealthy can sign up for welfare (SS), it makes a mockery of the taxes workers pay. Calling it an investment instead of a tax was the problem to begin with.

I've got a way to pay for SS. How about we levy taxes on imported goods? Since damn near everything is imported, that should be quite a chunk of change! A 20% hike on your Chinese toaster isn't going to break you, but it will encourage capitalists to bring back toaster manufacturing to the states.

Ceffer says

If you are going to cherry pick, why not cite all the people who died without collecting any benefit from SS at all?

One in seven males die before reaching nominal SS age, and many don't collect very long before they die.

It's rough being a guy.

Kid you probably never lived in a society where seniors are out on the street. Social Security does make us stronger as a nation, and better as a nation. Leave Social Security alone.

Without it, we might as well be another barbaric third world country that doesn't give a shit about it's own citizens. If it's underfunded, increase taxes, solution is simple.

jojo says

That makes sense but rather than govt keeping it for us why not get our own individual account with an independent 3rd party. This eliminates the temptation to pillage the funds to buy votes. It also assures the money is actually paid.

Independent third party does not "assure" anything. And they are sure as hell are not going to be accountable. If you think government lacks accountability, just imagine it being a 100 times worse... that's private sector accountability. I know, I'm in private sector.

Something's wrong when I agree with Ft. Wayne. Or, could it be, that people hate big government until they don't hate it? The monster isn't really a monster at all?

jojo says

Serious question, How is this different than Madoff?

Madoff didn't provide utility, misrepresented his company and ability, and eventually could not payout what was promised.

The only thing stopping us from meeting our obligations is will. Budgets reflect priorities, so I don't see why any budget couldn't pump cash into SSI to cover over a rought patch of "too many seniors". Or, raise the payroll taxes.

The GOP and Wall Street have been filling the airwaves for decades with the myth that we "must cut benefits" to keep it solvent. Pure piffle.

There are myriad ways to keep the program solvent (and the idea that a Government program has huge surpluses is super impressive in the first place!). The idea was/is to diminish the esteem for the program in the young public's eyes, so that the younger generation would begin to make alternative plans, throw up their hands and say, "it's not going to be there for me anyway". The GOP could thereby use that as justification for private accounts and dismantle the mechanism through which it works---redistribution.

If SS were to collapse what will the Baby Boom Rep/Con/Teas have to say about losing their Socialized entitlement?

Automan Empire says

Now I realize that the social security 'problem" that is pending isn't from a deliberate ponzi type scandal, but a demographic consequense of the baby boom aging. The "imminent exhaustion of SS trust fund" could be avoided DESPITE the baby boom hump if current contributions were increased. Every year this is delayed, the greater the contribution needed to make it work. Same with the "medicare crisis;" I heard one analyst saying increasing medicare contributions by 0.5% a year or 2 ago would keep the fund liquid indefinitely beyond the baby boom hump.

Or one can raise the age at which benefits are received, to keep up with age inflation.

HEY YOU says

If SS were to collapse what will the Baby Boom Rep/Con/Teas have to say about losing their Socialized entitlement?

I'm really not expecting to get it, or to get it, but the purchasing power of those $$ to be about 1/4 of what they are today.

jojo says

you probably never lived in a society where seniors are out on the street

Why should I care if people too stupid to save for their retirement live in poverty? It's their own damm fault. Maybe some of us are tired of being everyone else's rich uncle via the tax system.

FortWayne says

we might as well be another barbaric third world country

Aren't we already on our way there already?

jojo says

@fortwayne

Im not sure I agree with you on this. I have a retirement account and I can get the balance anytime I want. That's my money with my name on the account. I can even take the money out if I want to pay the fees. Try doing that with Soc Sec.

Government system is a generalized system that works for everyone. An average person isn't going to save for retirement, this is forced saving instead.

And I do get statements from Social Security administration, statements were never a deal breaker.

jojo says

Ok it soinds like you are correct about medicare and medicaid (I will have to look at the details). However, lifetime payouts from medicare fare exceeds what people pay into the scheme.

That's a function of inflation and anti-competitive, pro-corporatist laws, not the nature of Medicare. You can't blame Medicare for corrupt politicians and central bankers who created this inflation and lack of less expensive choices.

jojo says

@futuresmc

Well, if that's the case then medicare should be able to negotiate with suppliers.

I totally agree. I would even go farther as it should be able to set standards of care and then offer patients the option of a free vacation to a place like India in order to get surgeries and other expensive treatments for half the price. Yes, you might have to sweeten the deal with some pocket money to spend on souvenirs or a spa-like hotel near the hospital for recovery, but when you have a procedure like hip or knee replacement that costs thousands less per patient overseas and you have many people who need such a procedure, you still save money by enticing them to use the cheaper alternative. And when you consider that Baby Boomers love to travel and explore anyway, you have a built in market pipeline to savings as they age.

Let them eat cat food.

monkframe says

Let them eat cat food.

Or Soylent Green.

Any thing alive on this planet is a "taker." Silly term.

jojo says

@crazy

Let's assume its in line with existing insurance premiums. Would you agree that medicare should be an option for people to purchase?

Especially if its better than Obamacare as you stated.

The USG would be the largest buying group in the USA. It seems odd to forbid the USG the freedom to do something that private groups do all the time.

the boomers will be the last generation to receive social security checks in their present form.

once they pass through, all will complain what an atrocity that was and the system will be changed for the future generations to make it more fair.

that will be the biggest joke of all.