Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Half of millennials don't think they'll get Social Security
MSNBC ^ | Allison Linn

Posted on 10/25/2011 7:01:45 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican

Grandma and Grandpa may be getting a Social Security raise, but half of their grandkids are pretty sure they won’t see any Social Security at all.

That’s according to a new poll from the Strategic Research Institute at St. Norbert College in De Pere, Wis. It’s working with several other organizations on the iOMe Challenge, which seeks to help young people think about their financial future.

Apparently, they don’t think there’s much future there at all, at least when it comes to Social Security.

The online survey, which included a nationally representative sample of 642 18- to 29-year-olds, found only 5 percent expect that the Social Security benefits they stand to receive at age 67 to be about the same as the ones retirees are receiving today.

In addition to the 50 percent who don’t think it will exist at all, another 28 percent thought it would exist but the benefits would be much smaller. Eighteen percent weren’t sure what would happen.

Social Security is at risk of running short of funds unless some changes are made, because the general population is both aging and living longer. Proposals include raising the Social Security tax cap, increasing the age at which you start collecting Social Security and reducing benefits.

David Wegge, executive director of the Strategic Research Institute, noted that no matter what happens with Social Security, millennials will likely have to rely more on their own savings than previous generations. That’s because pensions also are becoming much less common.

“There’s much more responsibility that’s being placed on an individual’s shoulder,” Wegge said.

(Excerpt) Read more at lifeinc.today.msnbc.msn.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 10/25/2011 7:01:47 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

And the other half are to stupid to realize it.

I am 38.. My odds are about 50/50.. if that.

My 4 year olds odds? 1 in a million. But he WILL be paying for someone else on it.


2 posted on 10/25/2011 7:04:07 PM PDT by cableguymn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

And the other half are economically illiterate idiots...


3 posted on 10/25/2011 7:06:07 PM PDT by piytar (The Obama Depression. Say it early, say it often. Why? Because it's TRUE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

60% of them voted for Obama


4 posted on 10/25/2011 7:08:30 PM PDT by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: piytar

“And the other half are economically illiterate idiots...”

That half probably thought Social Security was the new song from Lady Gaga.


5 posted on 10/25/2011 7:11:56 PM PDT by max americana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican
I am a millennial I a fervently disagree.

I KNOW I, nor my wife, nor my 4(soon to be 5) kids, will be getting social security.

Hell, I doubt the United States will still exist as a United Country when I am that old, assuming something isn't down about our present situation.

6 posted on 10/25/2011 7:14:02 PM PDT by KC_Lion (I will NEVER vote for Romney! The GOP will go the way of the Whigs if they nominate him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican
Hold on to your hats kiddies. It's going to be a bumpy ride.

Given that the U.S. government, full of power-hungry Leftists and fascists and all manner of dirty slimeballs, anything promised or set up is subject to change at any time as prior generations just weren't honorable enough to adhere to freedom-granting founding principles.

7 posted on 10/25/2011 7:21:58 PM PDT by Crucial
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

Well, if these grandkids want a future they best be thinking of not voting for obuma. A whole bunch of you grandkids voted for that Marxist slug. So you best be rethinking what you did.


8 posted on 10/25/2011 7:23:04 PM PDT by sergeantdave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican
Why has no one asked ozero about his plan for social security?

Stimulus this and stimulus that, but what about social security?

9 posted on 10/25/2011 7:39:05 PM PDT by knarf (I say things that are true ... I have no proof ... but they're true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

‘no matter what happens with Social Security, millennials will likely have to rely more on their own savings than previous generations.’

Fine, start now.

Can I get my money back while you’re at it?

And another thing, while they’re getting off my lawn tell the Millennials we’re tired of they’re non stop whining.


10 posted on 10/25/2011 7:55:19 PM PDT by dk88 (Occupy=Liberalism: No solutions, no responsibility and demanding free stuff from someone else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dk88

Sorry, ‘their’


11 posted on 10/25/2011 7:56:34 PM PDT by dk88 (Occupy=Liberalism: No solutions, no responsibility and demanding free stuff from someone else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

They may get the present amount of social security in dollars, but fast food places will be enticing people to breakfast with chicken biscuits that only cost $99.99.

There are a lot of ways for oppressive governments to confiscate wealth.


12 posted on 10/25/2011 8:05:39 PM PDT by Psalm 144 (Voodoo Republicans: Don't read their lips - watch their hands.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

More than half the younger boomers don’t think we will get SS either.

So, what else is new?

When are Americans going to wake up and quit believing those lying politicians?


13 posted on 10/25/2011 8:08:59 PM PDT by TruthConquers (Delendae sunt publicae scholae)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cableguymn
And the other half are to stupid to realize it.

I am 38.. My odds are about 50/50.. if that.

My 4 year olds odds? 1 in a million. But he WILL be paying for someone else on it.


Right there with you. I'm about the same age, my daughter's 7, and it makes me madder than a wet hen when I think about how much debt she's already saddled with, just to pay for the irresponsibility of those who set up the Social Security Ponzi Scheme.

The last generation that can rely on getting social security are the baby-boomers - Obama's generation in case anyone was wondering - and because SS is a ponzi scheme - the later generation pays for the benefits promised to the earlier generation(s) - that'll be the last Great Ripoff from the Worst Generation; stealing every last penny they can from future generations as they careen toward their well-deserved graves.
14 posted on 10/25/2011 8:11:47 PM PDT by Oceander (If Romney is the GOP nominee, then Obama wins in 2012, either directly or by proxy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: knarf
Why has no one asked ozero about his plan for social security?

Because asking Obama a tough question is racist.

Don’t forget as far as the Democraps are concerned there is nothing wrong with social security. There is lots of money in the Trust Fund. As soon as the Stimulus kicks in and we have full employment SS will be rolling in money.

Don’t worry your little head about it and reelect Obama and all will be well. /S

15 posted on 10/25/2011 8:14:12 PM PDT by Pontiac (The welfare state must fail because it is contrary to human nature and diminishes the human spirit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: cableguymn
And the other half are to stupid to realize it. Pretty much my first thought as well when I read the headline.
16 posted on 10/25/2011 8:19:18 PM PDT by zeugma (Those of us who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Oceander
I am 38.. My odds are about 50/50.. if that.

I think you’re a dreamer.

I am 50 and I am sure my odds are way less than 50/50.

I also think that my odds of getting a pension from the electric utility I work for are less than 50/50 because Obama and the Demoncrats are working hard to bankrupt the company.

And the Demoncrats also are working on a plan to steal our 401K funds to shore up SS, so as far as I can see there is little chance for anyone under the age of 55 of ever retiring if Obama is reelected. I maybe too optimistic about 55.

17 posted on 10/25/2011 8:29:11 PM PDT by Pontiac (The welfare state must fail because it is contrary to human nature and diminishes the human spirit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

Oh, they might get it in Zimbabwean devalued currency.


18 posted on 10/25/2011 8:33:17 PM PDT by 3Fingas (Sons and Daughters of Freedom, Committee of Correspondence)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oceander
as they careen toward their well-deserved graves.

Just wondering are your parents and grandparents included among these villains?

19 posted on 10/25/2011 8:38:46 PM PDT by ontap
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican
That's why I doubled my life insurance policies, and made my kids and grandkids beneficiaries of about half. They can invest it and survive better in old age, or spend it and regret it, but at least I am helping them as much as I can.
20 posted on 10/25/2011 8:40:38 PM PDT by greeneyes (Moderation in defense of your country is NO virtue. Let Freedom Ring.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

My wife and I both turned 66 this year and we are getting full S/S checks, plus we still work!! So it is like extra money!! But we both paid into S/S for 45 years so we earned it. So we use the money to go to the Indian casino. Don’t flame me! I am a long time Freeper. Just living life large.


21 posted on 10/25/2011 8:43:52 PM PDT by ExtremeUnction
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

My wife and I both turned 66 this year and we are getting full S/S checks, plus we still work!! So it is like extra money!! But we both paid into S/S for 45 years so we earned it. So we use the money to go to the Indian casino. Don’t flame me! I am a long time Freeper. Just living life large.


22 posted on 10/25/2011 8:44:10 PM PDT by ExtremeUnction
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ExtremeUnction

Doubledipping & doubleposting?


23 posted on 10/25/2011 8:45:50 PM PDT by Revolting cat! (Let us prey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

Since there is general consensus that SS cannot pay the benefits it has promised to future retirees, it is time to stop extracting FICA taxes from workers.

If we eliminate the worker-side of the FICA, but expand the employer-side to include all employee compensation — meaning not just wages up to $106K/yr, but all wages, all non-cash benefits like health and life insurance, company vehicle allowances, stock options, etc. — and up the rate to 10%, the revenue collected from the employer would collect $850B/yr. That, combined with the $2.5T owed by the general fund to the SS Trust fund, would be enough revenue to pay current benefits to existing retirees until they die. It would be enough to pay future retirees the HHS poverty level of $11k/yr or the amount they’ve earned up to the date they stopped contributing directly, whichever is higher. So nobody has to worry about grandma eating cat food, but a better-than-poverty-level retirement will require people save some of that 7.65% they are no longer paying to FICA and invest for themselves.

I would also require 20 years employment in the US to receive the full default poverty-level benefit, subtracting 5% of benefit for each year they are short of 20 years — that would stop retirement age immigrants and “refugees” from collecting from a system they never contributed to. Collecting retirement earlier than 65 will also reduce your benefit by 5% per year — retire at 60 if you want, but received just 75% of the age 65 amount.

To discourage outsourcing labor, I’d also apply this 10% tax to expenditures to foreign entities including imports, essentially applying our payroll tax to the outsourced labor embedded in those imports. This would garner another ~$200B and allow complete elimination of the Corporate profits tax and all the lobbying and corruption it promotes as well as the overhead to businesses to comply with the corporate tax code. Those profits will still be taxed, but at the individual level as dividend or capital gain income.


24 posted on 10/25/2011 8:46:17 PM PDT by Kellis91789 (There's a reason the mascot of the Democratic Party is a jackass.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ExtremeUnction
Right on brother my wife and I are also retired after 45 years I'm not making any apology's.
25 posted on 10/25/2011 8:59:17 PM PDT by ontap
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

Half of them will be right and the other half guilty of very wishful thinking.


26 posted on 10/25/2011 8:59:45 PM PDT by Sequoyah101 (Half the people are below average.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Revolting cat!

Sorry and sorry. Much of what I post is satire. We don’t spend our S/S checks at casinos. But, like 99% of Boomers approaching retirement, we have no choice but to take the S/S money. It was part of our retirement plan. The other part is funded by our 401k. We know it sucks. But it’s what we’re stuck with.


27 posted on 10/25/2011 9:03:43 PM PDT by ExtremeUnction
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Revolting cat!

Sorry and sorry. Much of what I post is satire. We don’t spend our S/S checks at casinos. But, like 99% of Boomers approaching retirement, we have no choice but to take the S/S money. It was part of our retirement plan. The other part is funded by our 401k. We know it sucks. But it’s what we’re stuck with.


28 posted on 10/25/2011 9:03:43 PM PDT by ExtremeUnction
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Kellis91789

Now that is an excellent post. You should run for office.
Too bad none of the major candidates have your full grasp of the situation.


29 posted on 10/25/2011 9:11:40 PM PDT by 3Fingas (Sons and Daughters of Freedom, Committee of Correspondence)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: All

Know What Your Gov't Is Up To
By Keeping The News Going
On The WWW #1 Conservative Site
Free Republic!!

Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!


30 posted on 10/25/2011 9:14:24 PM PDT by musicman (Until I see the REAL Long Form Vault BC, he's just "PRES__ENT" Obama = Without "ID")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

Millenials? Heck, I'm 50 and I seriously doubt that I'll ever see a penny of the FICA I've paid into since I was 14 years old!

Mark

31 posted on 10/25/2011 9:25:42 PM PDT by MarkL (Do I really look like a guy with a plan?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kellis91789
If we eliminate the worker-side of the FICA, but expand the employer-side to include all employee compensation — meaning not just wages up to $106K/yr, but all wages, all non-cash benefits like health and life insurance, company vehicle allowances, stock options, etc. — and up the rate to 10%, the revenue collected from the employer would collect $850B/yr.

Hey, no big deal, right? I mean, I'm sure the employers are just rolling in cash, so there would be no problem in increasing the cost of employing people. We hear the leftists screaming about how the employers are just sitting on all this cash, refusing to hire people. I wonder how many people would lose their jobs due to a plan like this? You propose boosting the employers' share of FICA and Medicare from roughly 7.5% to 10%, and increasing the tax over all the employees' compensation! Plain and simple, you need to look at the total cost of an employee to the employer, NOT just their salary. This includes ALL the taxes... Not just FICA, but unemployment insurance, workmans comp insurance, etc... The government has a problem understanding that employers do NOT provide jobs... Employers hire people and compensate them based on the value they can bring to the company through the goods and services they produce.

Mark

32 posted on 10/25/2011 9:42:30 PM PDT by MarkL (Do I really look like a guy with a plan?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: 3Fingas
Now that is an excellent post.

I wonder how many small business owners would just say "screw it," close up shop, and let their 5 or 10 employees go...

That plan would severely impact any labor cost intensive company... Many companies are already running on razor thin profit margins. Eliminating the corporate tax probably won't cover the cost increases to the employers.

Mark

33 posted on 10/25/2011 9:50:00 PM PDT by MarkL (Do I really look like a guy with a plan?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: MarkL

Well, that’s a good point.

I personally would like to see the abolishment of all income taxes, payroll taxes, etc. I would like to see a national sales tax combined with tariffs on imported goods and that’s it.

We need to transition to personal individual retirement/medical accounts and get government out of that business. How we get to that point and honor our commitments to people that have worked and paid into the existing system? I don’t know, but we need to work towards that goal.


34 posted on 10/25/2011 10:11:24 PM PDT by 3Fingas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: MarkL

Nonsense. We all know the business just passes along its costs to the consumer, provided they can still compete when charging higher prices. Applying a factor of 1.10 to a salary vs 1.0765 will be more than compensated for by the savings on profit taxes. Roughly the same total tax will be paid by employers as currently, but the emphasis is placed on profits and getting the most productivity out of employees, rather than subsidizing unprofitable employers and unproductive workers. Their competitiveness will be improved by applying the payroll tax to embedded labor in imports.

“I wonder how many people would lose their jobs due to a plan like this?” Answer: None. There will be huge job growth as employers no longer have to worry about their taxes. Everything is known upfront. Any employee will cost 1.10x their compensation package. Period. No tax planning, no depreciation schedules, no 67,000 pages of tax code to try to game, just how best to make a profit. Business would flock to the USA as the most business-tax friendly country.

As far as applying the tax to all payroll costs instead of just wages goes, this means eliminating the myth that low-wage employees are under-compensated employees. It is dishonest to say an employee makes $20K when they also get $15K in employer-provided yet untaxed benefits. That employee costs the employer $35K in compensation and they should be paying payroll taxes on the full amount. Otherwise, the government is favoring the business that provides non-cash benefits over the employer who pays the employee the full $35K without benefits and let’s the employee choose what benefits to buy for himself. The government should not be favoring policies that take choices away from the employee.


35 posted on 10/25/2011 11:27:49 PM PDT by Kellis91789 (There's a reason the mascot of the Democratic Party is a jackass.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: MarkL; 3Fingas

“I wonder how many small business owners would just say “screw it,” close up shop, and let their 5 or 10 employees go...”

I would say “None”. A successful small corporation typically has at least a 10% profit margin. Eliminating the 35% Corporate profits tax means 3.5% of their revenues stays in their pocket. Even if all of the COGS was labor (no other expenses), their total tax would be going DOWN.

Currently: 7.65%*83.6 + 35%*10 = 9.9% of revenue going to taxes
My Plan: 10%*83.6 + 0%*16.4 = 8.36% of revenue going to taxes

If the small business is not a Corporation, then they are paying both sides of the current payroll tax or 15.3%. So their payroll tax drops from 15.3% down to 10%.

An employer loses under my plan if they have been gaming the current system by pretending employee costs are separate from benefits costs, so they can underpay the payroll tax. This is the equivalent of bartenders and other workers who make 75% of their income on tips and under report their income to cheat on their payroll and income taxes. It is part of what needs to be cleaned up in our tax system, not some “goody” that should be preserved.


36 posted on 10/26/2011 12:01:51 AM PDT by Kellis91789 (There's a reason the mascot of the Democratic Party is a jackass.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: 3Fingas

“We need to transition to personal individual retirement/medical accounts and get government out of that business.”

Well ... SS was passed as part of the societal contract with workers whose age and/or health didn’t allow them to continue working. That is why it is funded by a tax on “work” and not “income”. The Depression demonstrated how their own planning for retirement had been deficient. Elderly were literally starving, and that showed a lack of societal respect for the elderly who had been productive members of society. People had proven themselves incompetent to plan for retirement, so government force was “needed”. SS was a poor solution for a lot of reasons. It doesn’t even accomplish its supposed goal of preventing the elderly from starving, since many SS recipients get far less than poverty-level benefits.

Even if we had “private accounts” as GW proposed, the government would still be using force against individuals to make them save part of their incomes. The advantages in that plan were better investment returns, and inheritance of the account when you died, but his plan still amounted to government force applied to individuals, and government still managed the whole thing.

My plan ends government force against individuals and guarantees a poverty-level retirement income. People are free to save as much or as little as they want beyond that, while being assured society won’t let them starve when they are too old to correct their mistakes. I think it’s a workable compromise.


37 posted on 10/26/2011 12:35:36 AM PDT by Kellis91789 (There's a reason the mascot of the Democratic Party is a jackass.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: ontap

To the degree that they’re receiving benefits they don’t need, yes, and I’ve already had several arguments on that point with them. Go eff yourself.


38 posted on 10/26/2011 4:20:41 AM PDT by Oceander (If Romney is the GOP nominee, then Obama wins in 2012, either directly or by proxy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Pontiac

To be fair, I was giving the benefit of the doubt. I honestly don’t think that I’ll get anything from social security other than a bill for the bennies prior generations got. Retirement isn’t in the plans; dying with my boots on - sitting at my desk at work - is.


39 posted on 10/26/2011 4:22:55 AM PDT by Oceander (If Romney is the GOP nominee, then Obama wins in 2012, either directly or by proxy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Oceander

I hope they told you what a worthless whiney litle piece of crap you are.....Eff your self moron!!


40 posted on 10/26/2011 9:57:27 AM PDT by ontap
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson