FOLKS WERE TALKING ABOUT THIS IN 2000, WHAT EVER HAPPENED?
Posted on 08/14/2015 5:06:42 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Social Security turns 80 on Friday, and the massive retirement and disability program is showing its age.
Social Security's disability fund is projected to run dry next year. The retirement fund has enough money to pay full benefits until 2035. But once the fund is depleted, the shortfalls are projected to be enormous.
The stakes are huge: Nearly 60 million retirees, disabled workers, spouses and children get monthly Social Security payments, and that number is projected to grow to 90 million over the next two decades.
And the timing is bad: Social Security faces these problems as fewer employers are offering traditional pensions, forcing older workers to think hard about how they will afford retirement.
[SNIP]
WHAT HAPPENS IN 2016?
The trust fund that supports Social Security's disability program is projected to run dry in late 2016 — right in the middle of the presidential election. If Congress allows that to happen, it will trigger an automatic 19 percent cut in benefits to the 11 million people who receive Social Security disability.
Lawmakers could redirect tax revenue from Social Security's much bigger retirement program, as they have done in the past.
If the tax revenue were redirected, the retirement fund would lose one year of solvency, so both the retirement program and the disability program would have enough money to pay full benefits until 2034. At that point, Social Security would collect enough in taxes to pay 79 percent of benefits.
Republicans are balking at the fix. They see the funding crisis as an opportunity to improve a disability program that they believe is plagued by waste and abuse.
"Social Security retirement funds have been raided far too many times for far too many years," said Rep. Tom Reed, R-N.Y.
(Excerpt) Read more at finance.yahoo.com ...
Privatize.
BTW, THE SOCIAL SECURITY ISSUE WAS ONLY ADDRESSED ONCE IN THE DEBATE — BY CHRIS CHRISTIE.
His proposal, anyone getting $250,000 and up in retirement income gets NOTHING from SS.
BTW, THE SOCIAL SECURITY ISSUE WAS ONLY ADDRESSED ONCE IN THE DEBATE — BY CHRIS CHRISTIE.
His proposal, anyone getting $250,000 and up in retirement income gets NOTHING from SS.
Definition of “overahul” to politicians = increase taxes or pillage and plunder.
Social security is in trouble because politicians have pilfered the contents to the tune of $13.4T. Make them pay it back!
Never ONE mention of the fact that clintoon, with the willing assistance of Republican fools in Congress, RAPED the disability fund in the 1990’s, in order to “end” welfare.
Take the disability definitions back to what they were in 1990, and see how the situation dramatically improves. Of course that would kick millions of deadbeats that simply don't want to work, off of Social Security and back to welfare where they were to begin with.
The main benefit of this would be that blind, stupid, and gullible American public would finally realize that it is welfare that is killing the country!
More lies. SS has been running on IOUs for some time.
Saying anyone getting $250k and up get no SS, means nothing. It doesn’t fix the problem. That group is probably less than 2 percent. Meanwhile the found continues to run dry.
That scenario happening in the middle of an election campaign is tailor made for the Fake Indian to ride in on her white horse and propose “saving Social Security” by raising taxes on the EEEEEEVIL Rich and Wall Street. Sure to generate nothing less than 72% public approval in polls.
The GOP as usual will be left there stammering.
“”Social Security retirement funds have been raided far too many times for far too many years,” said Rep. Tom Reed, R-N.Y.”
Beginning with LBJ who decided to combine the SS fund with other Federal Govt Budget.
The solution is simple to Libs and the govt-expanding RINOS. There are trillions in retirement accounts just waiting for exploitation by our govt.
They will take 401k and IRA money out from those who placed it there and issue IOUs. Their reasoning will be, since taxes were never paid on the money, it is not truly theirs.
Reason I am withdrawing my 401k out.
Yes, Fauxhontas is my prediction of the dim nominee.
She' going to be tough to beat with her proposed giveaways and beating up the rich.
Waaaay more dynamic than Hillary.
No. Social Security is in trouble because, from day one, it was a pay as you go, intergenerational transfer payment program. It was NEVER fully financed. The "trust fund" was NEVER more than an accounting fiction. There were NEVER real assets.
The operating balance has at times been large and was much increased by the Reagan reforms in the '80's. But this was merely a matter of accumulating a greater cushion. It never approached full funding, nor was it designed to. Labeling this a "trust fund" has always been an exercise in deliberate disinformation.
The goal for reformers should be full funding on the basis of personally owned retirement accounts, with real investments, real earnings, and full inheritability. This would bring all working Americans into the investor class and, over time, would revolutionize the distribution of wealth in the United States. The fact that the left almost universally opposes this idea is perhaps the clearest proof extant that the left cares nothing about the welfare of the people for whom it claims to work, and that it's real goal is dependency and political control.
Exactly, a "real" savings vehicle.
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.