Social Security is a rip off

DamnYankee

Loyal to the end
Have you ever calculated how much you would have in retirement funds if you had invested all of your social security taxes, incrementally as you have paid them, in a safe investment portfolio, such as municipal bonds (5-6%, almost no risk), or corporate real estate (7%, slight risk). After 45 years of working most people would be millionaires. And if they die the day after they retire, their spouses or children get to fight over the money.

The only difference between you, with your mortgage, college bills, and retirement worries, vs. the old money people living in mansions, is that their grandparents had enough money in the bank to set them up in a comfortable lifestyle. These people perpetuate their wealth by adding to the principle to keep up with inflation and living off the interest. The current social security system virtually assures that this will never happen to the middle and lower classes. Since we are forced to pay so much taxes, we can't afford to retire!

Say at age 20 you make $20,000/yr ($1667/mo) and pay 6.2% of your income into a fund matched by your employer, and continue this practice until you retire at age 65. After 45 years in a slight risk investment (and with a 45 year term it is almost inconceivable that a "slight risk" investment would have any risk), earning 7%, you would have $783,802 dollars in the bank. (Let's forget inflation here because we will assume that your raises would at least keep up with inflation.) By continuing your 7% investment, never touching the principle, you would be able to draw $4572 in interest per month upon retirement. That's 2.74 times your pre-retirement income. A low risk, 5% investment would earn you almost twice your pre-retirement income.

And the numbers simply multiply with income. Under this scenario, a retired couple would have over $1.5 million in the bank and earn over $100,000 per year in interest.

Compare that with the paltry amount given back by the government in social security. But here is the real rub: after you die, all your principle can be given to your children and grandchildren, basically setting them with "old money". Comparatively, your social security “investment” evaporates, and some people die unable to pay for a decent funeral.

The Republican plan is to transition from the system that we have now to full privatization over several decades, to allow support of the retired and retiring who have been duped all these years. You and I won’t see full privatization, but maybe our grandchildren will.

This is the truth that Democrats don't want you to know. By throwing crumbs, rich liberals like Kennedy and Edwards will continue to be supported by poor people. After all, a retired couple living on 100 large doesn’t really care about the cost of prescription drugs, universal health care, or the current question of social security. They are unlikely to vote for a Democrat.

Do the math. Be smart about your life decisions. See more at http://calculator.socialsecurity.org/.
 
Keep payin in kiddo I will be drawing before long :D

Hmm 8 years and no plan from the Republicans and they controlled both houses and the white house for most of those years.
 
Bush was the first politician to attempt reform. It used to be called the "third rail". Maybe in 20 or 30 years we can get it fixed.
 
Keep payin in kiddo I will be drawing before long :D

Hmm 8 years and no plan from the Republicans and they controlled both houses and the white house for most of those years.

There was a plan if you follwed politics after the 2004 election. It obviously did not get passed.
 
His attempt was all just lip service like the rest of him.
Was an SS reform bill submitted ?

Again, its been the first time anyone has seriously talked about it. Perhaps if we were a dictatorship like some far-left liberals claim we are then some reforms would have been enacted. But as I recall the Democrats have always been the one dragging their feet on this, fighting privatization tooth and nail.
 
Last edited:
Or, the stock market could take a dive, and you could lose everything. Or you could live until your 120, and your saving account would dry up. I'll bet you wish you had that guaranteed pension for life no matter what then - oh, but it's welfare!
 
Again, its been the first time anyone has seriously talked about it. Perhaps if we were a dictatorship like some far-left liberals claim we are then some reforms would have been enacted. But as I recall the Democrats have always been the one dragging their feet on this, fighting privatization tooth and nail.

Based on evidence, privitization has fallen far short of it's promises.
 
Or, the stock market could take a dive, and you could lose everything. Or you could live until your 120, and your saving account would dry up. I'll bet you wish you had that guaranteed pension for life no matter what then - oh, but it's welfare!
Apparently you didn't read the article.

1. The interest rate chosen for the calculation is Bond-fund low, so the stock market can do what ever it wants.

2. The post retirement income is based on living on the interest only. The principle is never touched, so you can never outlive your income.
 
Based on evidence, privitization has fallen far short of it's promises.
Tell that to the millions of smart Americans, who invested savings over decades, and are now retired living well off the interest of their investments. Social security payments might make up 10 to 15% of their incomes. Compare these individuals to the ones who never saved and rely on social security for their sole source of income.
 
Apparently you didn't read the article.

1. The interest rate chosen for the calculation is Bond-fund low, so the stock market can do what ever it wants.

2. The post retirement income is based on living on the interest only. The principle is never touched, so you can never outlive your income.

the problem with that is unexpected medical payments and prescription drugs. A lot of seniors and pre-seniors end up dipping into the nest egg for medical bills. Those prices have certainly out paced inflation and continue to do so.
 
In terms of an annuity, I'll agree, SS kind of sucks.
Kind of? It was designed to never pay you back, while you could not pass on what you 'saved' to your family. People live longer, the money is spent in the general fund, and less people, per capita, are working now compared to retirees than it was designed for.

If you are supposed to trust the government to save your money (you know those people with 'oversight' over banks) maybe we should expect them not to spend the savings accounts on pimple cream research funds.
 
the problem with that is unexpected medical payments and prescription drugs. A lot of seniors and pre-seniors end up dipping into the nest egg for medical bills. Those prices have certainly out paced inflation and continue to do so.
Yes they have but those are separate issues. If your income is 5 times greater than on SS alone you are more able to handle all types of unexpected situations.
 
Yes they have but those are separate issues. If your income is 5 times greater than on SS alone you are more able to handle all types of unexpected situations.

They are definitely not separate issues. Seniors are relying more and more on SS and medicare to fund retirement medical payments because of their skyrocketing prices. I'd say medical prices is probably the biggest force driving the current populist movement today.
 
Yes they have but those are separate issues. If your income is 5 times greater than on SS alone you are more able to handle all types of unexpected situations.

addititionally when you're uninsured or even unable to become insured because of a pre-existing condition and your medical bills are in the tens of thousands you essentially need to be rich in order to live. Secondly, where are you getting 5X from?
 
Apparently you didn't read the article.

1. The interest rate chosen for the calculation is Bond-fund low, so the stock market can do what ever it wants.

2. The post retirement income is based on living on the interest only. The principle is never touched, so you can never outlive your income.

dream on.
 
They are definitely not separate issues. Seniors are relying more and more on SS and medicare to fund retirement medical payments because of their skyrocketing prices. I'd say medical prices is probably the biggest force driving the current populist movement today.

addititionally when you're uninsured or even unable to become insured because of a pre-existing condition and your medical bills are in the tens of thousands you essentially need to be rich in order to live. Secondly, where are you getting 5X from?


Medical prices are so high because doctors and pharmacueticals have gotten sued so often that they have to raise their prices, perform unnessasary testing, or have simply gone out of business. Tort reform is required to fix that, and the Democrats have dragged their feet on that as well, as they are beholden to the trail lawyers, John Edwards being the most blatent example. Regardless: separate issue.

Medical insurance is over- regulated and is screwed up by most of the same issues.

The 5x estimate is based on a typical SS income compared to the interest income calculated in the OP.
 
Social Security isn't an investment program. It's a retirement insurance program. You're comparing apples and aardvarks.
 
Back
Top