Social Security is a rip off

uscitizen said:
yeah I have paid car insurance for 30 years with no accident, I want my premiums back !
Click to expand...
You've compared apples to oranges. You received the benefit of insurance even if you didn't use it.

I just don't want to pay any more premiums. Y'all can keep the ones that I already paid. I want what would be my future premiums to go into private investments.
 
Okay lets analyize this comment..........

Southern Man said:
I have proven that the SS program is a rip off no matter what you choose to call it. Where has all that money gone? What happened to freedom of choice? American workers do not have the abilty to opt out.
Click to expand...



Suppose a law is enacted allowing citizens to opt out of SS...All their money then goes into a stock market fund for retirement purposes/speculation ...we then have another stock market crash like the big one in 29'...how do you then retire and survive?...This is exactly why the SS retirement fund was initiated in the first place...a catch all for for those who fall between the proverbial cracks...if not for SS most if not all would now be receiving welfare in one form or another...just a fact Jack! So the small amount of money deducted as a insurance premium for SS benefits are not all that bad!;)
 
Southern Man said:
You've compared apples to oranges. You received the benefit of insurance even if you didn't use it.

I just don't want to pay any more premiums. Y'all can keep the ones that I already paid. I want what would be my future premiums to go into private investments.
Click to expand...

But then I would not get my benefits I have paid in for 30 years...
We just need to double the population ! that is the answer ;)
 
TexasMeg said:
As a teacher in Texas this is what i deal with:

"What about my own Social Security benefit? I have heard that there is also a restriction on how
much Social Security a TRS member may receive.
Yes, there is a restriction and it is important to understand both this limitation and the GPO before making a
retirement decision. The restriction on the Social Security benefit of a TRS member (or most people receiving a
retirement benefit from a state or federal plan) is called the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP).
For individuals to receive a retirement benefit from Social Security they must have worked in positions covered
by Social Security (paying FICA taxes on wages) for a minimum of 10 years or 40 quarters. For members of
TRS to qualify for a retirement benefit from Social Security they too must have worked the required minimum
of years or quarters required by Social Security (paying FICA taxes on wages). The amount of benefit
calculated by Social Security is based on yearly income, age, and other factors. . However, after their benefit is calculated by Social Security, it will be reduced by application of the WEP. The reduction is based on the
number of years during which the TRS member paid into Social Security and the number of years the member
earned at or above the “substantial earnings” level set by Social Security."

I'd love to know what happens to the money i paid in from age 16-22. And collecting spousal SS??? Forget it...doesnt happen for texas teachers. Apparently we're overpaid or something ;)

http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cach...+and+social+security&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=us
Click to expand...



If you are on a retirement plan from the state/county/city(Taxpayers paying your salary and retirement)...which I assume you are referring to... you will receive a decent retirement check...if you have the required quarters in as defined under law, you will also receive a SS check...you have stated you have not put in the required quarters...so no benefit check is due...you can work a second job(private sector) or work after retirement to obtain the required quarters...that is up to you!;)
 
Battleborne said:
If you are on a retirement plan from the state/county/city(Taxpayers paying your salary and retirement)...which I assume you are referring to... you will receive a decent retirement check...if you have the required quarters in as defined under law, you will also receive a SS check...you have stated you have not put in the required quarters...so no benefit check is due...you can work a second job(private sector) or work after retirement to obtain the required quarters...that is up to you!;)
Click to expand...

yes i understand this much...and no i havent put in the required quarters...not likely to put 10 years in on top of being a teacher. however there were 5 years i DID contribute. And what is the rationale behind teachers here not being eligible to collect spouses' social security when said spouse DID complete the required quarters?
 
Southern Man said:
I have proven that the SS program is a rip off no matter what you choose to call it. Where has all that money gone? What happened to freedom of choice? American workers do not have the abilty to opt out.
Click to expand...


You have proven that you don't understand the purpose of social security.
 
TexasMeg said:
yes i understand this much...and no i havent put in the required quarters...not likely to put 10 years in on top of being a teacher. however there were 5 years i DID contribute. And what is the rationale behind teachers here not being eligible to collect spouses' social security when said spouse DID complete the required quarters?
Click to expand...


It is law...just like the 'double dipping' law the federal government has...a commissioned officer(field grade) who retires from the military gets less benefits then a non commissioned officer or grunt if they go to work for the civilian government...this is because all are government employees and all are receiving benefits and salary from the taxpayer base...so you being a state/county/city government employee you also fall into the 'double dipping law' geez louise let's not be greedy here...you are getting your fair share!;)
 
Battleborne said:
It is law...just like the 'double dipping' law the federal government has...a commissioned officer(field grade) who retires from the military gets less benefits then a non commissioned officer or grunt if they go to work for the civilian government...this is because all are government employees and all are receiving benefits and salary from the taxpayer base...so you being a state/county/city government employee you also fall into the 'double dipping law' geez louise let's not be greedy here...you are getting your fair share!;)
Click to expand...

lol fair share. yup thats what all teachers say.
 
Battleborne said:
Suppose a law is enacted allowing citizens to opt out of SS...All their money then goes into a stock market fund for retirement purposes/speculation ...we then have another stock market crash like the big one in 29'...how do you then retire and survive?...This is exactly why the SS retirement fund was initiated in the first place...a catch all for for those who fall between the proverbial cracks...if not for SS most if not all would now be receiving welfare in one form or another...just a fact Jack! So the small amount of money deducted as a insurance premium for SS benefits are not all that bad!;)
Click to expand...

I've proven that even with near zero risk municipal bonds paying a paultry 5% the amount that you pay in SS would result in a post retirement income twice what it was when you were working. When was the last time a municipality in the US went bankrupt and did not pay back its bonds? What are the chances of a diversified portfoli of muni bonds with a significant percentage going bankrupt? Probably less than the chance of the Federal government going bankrupt, wouldn't you say? After all many municipalities have existing within current US borders far longer that the US itself.

In reality many would, and should invest in higher risk stocks, especailly when they are young. Over a 45 year time period the DOW has increased well beyond 5%, even when that period includes the 1929 stock market crash. 8-10% is what most people should expect, which means that they are likey to retire early.

Your portfoli should be divested in order to balance growth and risk, and that balance should change throughout your lifetime. If you are young, then you can take some risk in order to maximize your return. If they go bust, then at least you have several decades to earn it back. The older you get, the less risky your investments should be.
 
Southern Man said:
You seem to be spending a lot of time trying to avoid the facts and derail the discussion.
Click to expand...


He's trying to put the discussion on the proper track. You are criticizing Social Security from an investment perspective when Social Security isn't an investment program. It's an insurance program.
 
Dungheap said:
You have proven that you don't understand the purpose of social security.
Click to expand...
Perhaps you can provide a government link to what the stated purpose is. However that doesn't really matter. If I forced you into paying $100 into something worth $20, I could call it whatever I wanted, but you'd call me a thief, and rightly so.
 
Whatever SM...........

Southern Man said:
I've proven that even with near zero risk municipal bonds paying a paultry 5% the amount that you pay in SS would result in a post retirement income twice what it was when you were working. When was the last time a municipality in the US went bankrupt and did not pay back its bonds? What are the chances of a diversified portfoli of muni bonds with a significant percentage going bankrupt? Probably less than the chance of the Federal government going bankrupt, wouldn't you say? After all many municipalities have existing within current US borders far longer that the US itself.

In reality many would, and should invest in higher risk stocks, especailly when they are young. Over a 45 year time period the DOW has increased well beyond 5%, even when that period includes the 1929 stock market crash. 8-10% is what most people should expect, which means that they are likey to retire early.

Your portfoli should be divested in order to balance growth and risk, and that balance should change throughout your lifetime. If you are young, then you can take some risk in order to maximize your return. If they go bust, then at least you have several decades to earn it back. The older you get, the less risky your investments should be.
Click to expand...


Life is not a 'Rose Garden'..and by no means is anything guaranteed...if you believe that...well what can I say? SS is a necessity in life as we know it...it is no more than a retirement insurance premium to benefit those who fall between the cracks or for those who want a guaratee of some money to live on should the market crash again...just like auto insurance...most good drivers never collect...but if a accident happens they won't go under and live on the streets...end of story!:shock:
 
Dungheap said:
He's trying to put the discussion on the proper track. You are criticizing Social Security from an investment perspective when Social Security isn't an investment program. It's an insurance program.
Click to expand...

Lets go with your theory then. You've got $100 and the government tells you that they can give you $20 worth of investment back. Or you can take that $100 and buy private insurance with some of it, then invest the remainder. Which deal would you take?
 
Battleborne said:
Life is not a 'Rose Garden'..and by no means is anything guaranteed...if you believe that...well what can I say? SS is a necessity in life as we know it...it is no more than a retirement insurance premium to benefit those who fall between the cracks or for those who want a guaratee of some money to live on should the market crash again...just like auto insurance...most good drivers never collect...but if a accident happens they won't go under and live on the streets...end of story!:shock:
Click to expand...
Same could be done with much less money with an annuity.
 
Southern Man said:
Perhaps you can provide a government link to what the stated purpose is. However that doesn't really matter. If I forced you into paying $100 into something worth $20, I could call it whatever I wanted, but you'd call me a thief, and rightly so.
Click to expand...

yep like paying a trillion or so for the iraq war.

worth nothing but paying dearly in money and lives though.
 
Last edited:
Southern Man said:
I've proven that even with near zero risk municipal bonds paying a paultry 5% the amount that you pay in SS would result in a post retirement income twice what it was when you were working. When was the last time a municipality in the US went bankrupt and did not pay back its bonds? What are the chances of a diversified portfoli of muni bonds with a significant percentage going bankrupt? Probably less than the chance of the Federal government going bankrupt, wouldn't you say? After all many municipalities have existing within current US borders far longer that the US itself.

In reality many would, and should invest in higher risk stocks, especailly when they are young. Over a 45 year time period the DOW has increased well beyond 5%, even when that period includes the 1929 stock market crash. 8-10% is what most people should expect, which means that they are likey to retire early.

Your portfoli should be divested in order to balance growth and risk, and that balance should change throughout your lifetime. If you are young, then you can take some risk in order to maximize your return. If they go bust, then at least you have several decades to earn it back. The older you get, the less risky your investments should be.
Click to expand...


The fundamental problem with your argument is that you're not including the insurance piece of it it. If SS were ONLY an annuity, then yes you're loosely conscripted analysis would be worth debating. but you're just comparing stock returns. SS is more than just an annuity.
 
Private companies always provide a better/ cheaper service that the government. If you want insurance, then take some of the money that you would be saving and buy it. By requiring citizens to pay into SS the government has eliminated private companies from providing a similar but higher level of service.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top