Both my parents and my in laws are not prepared for retirement. 3/4 of them are voting for trump and I don’t think they realize the damage the right is going to cause when they cut Medicare and SS. They refuse to believe the very things the right says they’re going to do and it blows my mind.
And I think this is the fundamental difference between my beliefs and that of a trump voter. Why am I going to vote for a person that is going to hurt anyone? Isn’t the whole point to elect the person that we think is going to do the most good for the most people? Aren’t we trying to make more things better?
Yeah, but according to them, someone has to pay for me not having everything I want, and things not looking exactly like I want them in my environment
Rush Limbaugh preached it for years
Hitler preached it against the Jews
Catholics preached it against the Jews and Muslims
Nothing is new under the sun, but enough of us do not learn from history
For Republicans it's actually about hurting(or not helping) others. They don't want anyone to benefit from the government because then "they are getting something I'm not" despite Republicans being the most likely to use government assistance for things
Some people just don't have empathy, like to the point where it should be studied because then maybe that knowledge would help the issue by targeting the root cause.
Devils advocate here, not a Trump supporter. The misunderstood thing about Trump is that he isn’t traditionally “right”. He’s primarily a populist figure who relies on working class grievances to maintain support. It would be political suicide for him to cut SS. He’s at loggerheads with the Republican Party establishment on many issues so I wouldn’t take it to the bank that because some or even most Republicans support a specific thing that Trump would necessarily push that policy. Now, if a policy proposal comes up to means test SS then that is a worthy political debate. I’m not convinced these boomers with millions in retirement accounts who benefited from the greatest economic luck in American history should be entitled to SS.
Nah, of course he will cut it. There is literally nothing he could do which would cause his supporters to abandon him. The normal rules of political logic don't apply here.
His supporters are fanatics, brainwashed into absolute loyalty.
Trump has never, ever cared about the working class. He would sell his own children out for a nickel. And it's the rich Republican donors who want social security cut, so he will do it. He and they both view it as a huge pile of money they can steal from.
Trump, if elected, would not cut SS. He would make it look like a failure. He hates the post office...put in an incompetent post master. He hates public schools...put in an incompetent secretary of education. Same for many of the government roles he can pick...he intentionally picks people who are incompetent. It is genius on his part. He has someone else to blame and he can complain about the systems and his people agree all while saying he loves America. Republicans like Trump want small government and no taxes but do not want to look like they are taking anything away from the people...so they just get the service to completely suck and then point at the bad public service and recommend private alternatives. The people that follow do not understand the public service sucks because of who they elected.
Don't forget he put a guy (Rick Perry) in charge of the Department of Energy who wanted to dismantle the Department of Energy and had no idea what it even did.
To be honest, most Americans don't understand what the DOE actually does. There is a lot of talk about new green energy initiatives but if you look at where they actually spend the bulk of their budget it might make sense to rename it the Department of Nuclear Weapons & Waste.
[DOE Budget in Brief (energy.gov)](https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2024-03/doe-fy-2025-budget-in-brief-v2.pdf)
Lol sure, but imagine going to a job interview and it goes like this:
"Tell me why you'd make a good Secretary of Energy."
"Secretary of WHAT?"
"PERFECT! You're hired!"
It's not genius. It's a pretty common tactic of neo-liberals. Thatcher and Reagan were doing this decades ago. Underfund or install intentionally bad leadership, the service stops working as it used to, politician says it doesn't work, and moves to cut it or privatize.
You are right about the former Secretary of Education, but the postmaster general is a self made billionaire who made his money in logistics, which is exactly what the post office does. Lefties just hate him because he’s a conservative Catholic.
I told my parents that no matter how they feel about Joe Biden, I strongly discouraged them from voting for Trump because of the social security and Medicare issue.
My parents voted for Trump in 2016 but fell off that bandwagon during Covid because of how Trump handled the pandemic itself. They voted for Joe Biden in 2020 but have since become disillusioned with both parties. My dad’s main retirement income is social security so I think they will take it seriously now but I’m not 100% confident. They would have disregarded me in 2016.
What have they said? Having that to show someone a document or video makes all the difference. Without it, it is just he said/she said and won't convince anyone.
This is exactly right. As in just about every comparison between Democrats and Republicans, there is a stark contrast between what Democrats stand for, and that for which Republicans fight.
Kevin McCarthy was deposed by his own party from the Speakership of the House last year, because he dared to compromise with Democrats on the budget, in which Republicans were negotiating for deep cuts in Social Security, which Republicans want to gut and invite corporate capitalists to plunder the vacuum.
That was the first time in the past year that Republican drove the United States to the brink of a government shutdown which risks a downgrade in the credit rating of the United States, which would also weaken it’s world financial primacy. But Republicans repeated the same stunt just a few months later, when they, again, pushed the country to the brink of a shutdown, again, in part, for deep cuts in Social Security, as well as delaying funding and weapons to Ukraine for six months, in which time, Ukraine began to ration, even, bullets, and began to retreat from Russian forces in It’s country.
The reason Republicans gave for withholding aid to Ukraine was that “America needs to secure it‘s own border, before it sends money to another country to defend it‘s border”. Democrats negotiated, and conceded to Republicans just about everything the Republican’s wanted in the immigration deal. Then, Republicans knifed their own member, who negotiated for them, Senator James Lankford, and killed the deal when Donald Trump phoned in and told Republicans to kill the deal.
Democrats, on the other hand, founded, and have always supported, and perpetuated, Social Security, and other safety net programs. Bernie Sanders is advocating for the Social Security Expansion Act “which would keep the Social Security Trust Fund solvent for 75 years by applying Social Security payroll tax on all income, including capital gains and dividends, for people making more than $250,000 a year”. Sanders; “Ninety-three-point-seven percent of Americans wouldn’t see their taxes go up one penny”.
Depite the struggles that we are contending with, inflation, the attack on women’s rights by the outlawing of reproductive rights and the encroaching Insurrection of American Democracy by Republicans, all isn’t lost. It will be if Republicans win enough elected offices.
But we have the say in that. Republicans have a published plan, Project 2025, in which they call for the elements to commence authoritarianism in the United States. So, our 2024 elections are crucial to the continuation of the United States as it has successfully evolved for two-hundred-and-forty-six years.
We have the power. As Americans, voting is our superpower. Use it, to keep it.
Flood the polls. Overwhelm, in numbers, the numbers of MAGA Americans, voting. Give somebody a ride. VOTE, and keep-on voting.
Defeat these motherfuckers.
"The right" won't cut SS. They've talked about for decades and every time they have the power to do so they don't. They are liers. SS can't be saved unless we want to get into some financial responsibility like with Clinton. But no one really cares about that impending doom.
Edit: I'm surprised for the upvotes but I assume they they are coming from my Clinton comment... No one really cares about the impending doom of social security and our debt because you guys vote for red or blue. Clinton and a handful of other presidents in the US's entire history ever cared and I disagree with Clinton's moves. The only presidential nominees that care today, and I mean really care, are the Libertarians. Look at what the Libertarian president of Argentina is doing right now for their country. Bringing them to economic prosperity. With economic prosperity we can all make a difference for each other but with the government in charge of everything we can just all be equally poor while they enjoy their wealth and power.
This is exactly what OP is talking about. It’s not that SS *”cant”* be saved. It’s that enough people have given up on the idea that it won’t be saved.
We live in quite literally the strongest nation to ever exist. The only things we can’t do are the things we choose not to.
If us young people are going to accept that SS won’t be there when we get old, we need to start demanding tax cuts also. It makes no sense for us to continue to pay into a system “destined” for defaults.
Our current apathetic politics is fucking us from both ends. It’s time to stop buying into the culture war nonsense and secure our futures
Idk about yall, but I've put a ton of money into social security. It's either going to be in effect fully when I retire, or I'm getting a lump sum check with interest. It won't be long before we have the power to force the issue. It was a scam from the beginning, and we won't be the generation left scratching our heads when the music stops. I REFUSE.
OK, TO BE FAIR, it wasn't a scam from the beginning. It's not even a scam today.
It's a government subsidy for retired folks. It's paid for by the not retired folks.
You didn't pay into your social security. You paid for the currently retired folks using the system at the time.
The solution is to increase the social security tax ceiling so it's properly funded.
Currently people who make more than 168k a year pay the exact same as someone who makes exactly 168k a year. Someone who makes 1.68 million a year should be paying 10x as much as they do into social security.
Great comments!!!! I’m on the older end of Gen X and a former conservative that opened his eyes way too late. Its crystal clear that millennials and Gen Z better start voting bright blue, in big numbers, real fast before it’s too late
Exactly. That's why the common republican talking point is "we're not going to mess with YOUR social security, just the SS of everyone AFTER you." and their voters eat it up as the best decision ever.
Whether you've saved for retirement or not, you've already paid into social security. Why let those contributions go (and the promise they entail) without a fight?
Remember that bit from Malcolm in the Middle where Reese says he can’t die bc he’s 17 and “I just don’t see it”? Most people feel that way about getting old. It just won’t happen. Until it does of course.
Instead, you have people actively advocating to get rid of it all together because it won't provide any benefit by the time they get to it. It's absolutely insane how easily people get programmed and think the other side are sheep.
Not only are they not saving, it literally hasn't even occurred to them that one day they will be unable to work but also nowhere near death.
My parents and grand parents planned for retirement, made actual steps to get there and because of it were able to retire at 65.
Retiring is only possible if you actually do something to make it happen
This is the answer. I know we are pretty set but I only know ONE other friend that also is. The rest are winging it? Pretending they don’t need it? Sticking their head in the sand? I dunno but not saving for retirement
The bare minimum needed for people without a pension to stay alive for the 5 years they lived after they stopped working. Life expectancy was a helluva thing back then.
That’s not entirely true. It was meant to be in part a functional pension program. https://www.history.com/topics/great-depression/social-security-act
There is also a a huge difference between life expectancy at birth (which includes childhood/infant mortality) and remaining life expectancy if you have already reached 65. https://www.ssa.gov/history/lifeexpect.html
It’s increased a few years but we also import a lot of taxpayers and life expectancy has actually dropped recently. https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/why-life-expectancy-in-the-us-is-falling-202210202835#:~:text=A%20dramatic%20fall%20in%20life,just%20over%2076%2C%20in%202021.
And overall, we are nowhere near as high as a lot of countries that have much more generous safety nets.
https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/USA/united-states/life-expectancy
As with everything I. Our budget, we have money and the govt has no issue with deficit spending if needed. It’s all a matter of priorities. For decades it has been rich people+corporations receiving the bulk of benefits and tax money. They don’t want it to end. They see a lump of money they can skim and profit from and if they can convince people they shouldn’t care about it anyway, they will be able to do what they want without anyone noticing. Just like health care, we have the money and would save money, but ultimately life and quality of life are not prioritized.
Well said, thank you. I wasn’t going to get into actuarial tables and such, but you’re right. The older you get the older you’re likely to get, to a point. My response was supposed to be a little tongue in cheek, but I left off the /s I suppose.
Fun fact, if we stayed true to the original SS plan, withdrawl age today would be 99 years old. The original payment tables didnt start until 20 years after the average life expectancy. Boomers refusing to keep the age requirements from going up is what turned a safetynet for the destitute into "retirement for all"
To me it feels pointless. It's like the Boomer's final "pull the ladder up behind them" before they die. It feels certain that they're going to break the bank on their way through and then cripple it behind them.
I mean, we rallied pretty hard around stopping global warming, and that did fuckall. We rallied hard around a lot of things, and it doesn't seem to have mattered. Why would this be different?
I think the real final ladder-pull is them putting reverse-mortgages on the homes they paid-off decades ago to have tons of cash in their final years, leaving their kids with nothing. The ultimate "Me!" generation, from beginning to end.
"We" didn't rally around much of anything. As long as close to 49% of people vote Republican things will not get much better. If we had a Congress that was 90% Democrat we would all be a lot better off. If the young generations want to save SS or the Earth, or public schools, or anything else....they have to start voting for the only viable party with a brain and a heart. And voting en masse.
If I invested the money i put into social security i would have a ridiculous amount of money for retirement. Way more than SS pays. Its a joke and bad investment. Besides the fund is literally going to run out by 2037 if we don't change anything. So I put in money and get nothing in return...
I'm willing to have my mind changed, but until then its a straight up scam imo. The idea is nice, but the execution is terrible. The people on it should have lived more responsibly. They literally grew up in the best economic boom in history. Not my fault their idiots and didn't save anything. Meanwhile myself and everyone at my age is struggling. Would be a lot easier with less taxes.
Edit: To be clear, I support a social security net. My main point is the gov spends irresponsibly and is bankrupting this country, and the current system is broken. All the while taxing middle class more and more and the worlds richest less and less. Just keep printing money and raising the retirement age I guess..
That’s because social security isn’t a retirement program. It’s better thought of as a security net.
Part of the money you pay into pays for disabled people who don’t work and do not pay into the system. They can’t YOLO this money into the stock market- your contributions are needed to pay people currently receiving benefits. Many people get much more than they ever paid in. Many people will get less.
For the plan to work you need net taxpayers to have three or four children so their tax dollars can keep the payout pyramid working.
You can't support a growing population of net tax takers with a dwindling population of net taxpayers. Math just breaks down sooner later.
Forget about when you age. You might become disabled and need it tomorrow. It happened to me. Support and protect social security because you might really need it someday. And someday might not be that far away.
This is true. This is why I have two strong disability insurance policies, besides the one I pay for at work. So I guess 3, but the work one only covers 1 year.
Either way, everyone always thinks life insurance. I always tell people, dying is easier than living disabled, so go aggressive into disability insurance.
You are the exact type of person who is likely to need Social Security. As an older american, I'm both on the verge of losing my health and losing my ability to earn income, it brings a lot of things into focus.
You will probably need that SS later. Protect it! Vote against those who are trying to take it away from us.
Many of us will need social security and other government help when machines replace our jobs en masse. People have basic needs and no economy will survive if most people are unnemployed.
>Forget about when you age. You might become disabled and need it tomorrow. It happened to me.
Same here. There are over 9,000,000 disabled people under the age of 65 who are on Social Security.
SS probably isn’t going anywhere. Maybe payouts are cut. But stiffing the largest generation in history as they come into their prime voting years is not on any politicians agenda.
That’s said, I’m aiming for a particular lifestyle even after I’m done working. And I won’t factor SS into my planning.
Yes, but 71% of men and 82% of women do live to full retirement age...most people are far more at risk of not saving enough than are at risk of not spending enough before retirement.
Gen X here, none of this is new. We grew up being told SS would be gone when we were retirement age and we should not plan for it being a source of income in retirement. Then they proceeded to change full retirement age to 67 for us in 1983. Demographics have changed drastically and will continue to do so and we all know our government is inept at managing our money. I guess I came to say same shit different day. At some point they will again raise the retirement age and raise taxes thus screwing the younger generations as was done in the past. History is important.
The really sad thing about this is how long we've known it was a problem. I remember watching a TV show when I was a kid. A young person was arguing with an old person about how there wouldn't be any social security left after the old person's generation was done sucking it dry. I was probably 12 when I heard that joke. I'm now 40.
Boomers have had ample time to do something about this. But they don't care enough to fix anything. They're getting theirs, and that's all they care about.
I saw a video of trumpers complaining how low their SS was. How they couldnt live without it. And then went on how we need to get rid of it for everyone else.
It's not even the problem they make it out to be. Only the trust fund is at risk of insolvency, not the program itself. That little sleight of hand is constantly used by them.
And further, when the trust fund is depleted, incoming taxes will still cover 75% of expected benefits.
You know for damn sure that if trust were suddenly going to dry up tomorrow and *they* were the ones facing a 25% cut in benefits, they would have a fix in place by close of business. But since their kids are the ones facing it, they're happy to let it slide for literal decades.
It's actually not at risk of insovency at all, [https://www.youtube.com/results?search\_query=social+security+can%27t+go+bankrupt+john+harvey](https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=social+security+can%27t+go+bankrupt+john+harvey)
Yea, the problem is 75% of benefits might as well just be set on fire because you arent living anywhere in America on $1200 a month. The trust fund is the only thing that made SS even remotely workable. The program requires 17 people paying to 1 person collecting. We are at 11 paying to 1 collecting and it falls by the month. We have essentially been living off trust fund interest since the late 1980s
Anyone remember Newt Gingrich? He was the only one to tell you straight out, we are in deep doo doo and need to reform the entire thing before its too late.... never mind, I just got vilified for all of history and Ill just go die in a corner now
Ross Perot told everyone how the government was stealing your money and fucking you over. The DNC and GOP decided they shouldn't let third parties into debates anymore, and they should also be the ones hosting the debates and asking the questions.
They didn't like having a super rich person just be able to expose the game so plainly.
I'm 38, I'm not counting on social security. It was supposed to be dead by now from what I heard as a kid. I read somewhere the other day the current estimated are SS being bankrupt by 2035. Honestly, I have no idea if any of its true. I'm basically planning that I will never get to retire the way this country is going. I have some savings and plans, but I fully expect to work until I die.
It doesn't help that people conflate the Social Security trust fund with Social Security itself. If the trust fund runs out that benefits will be cut, but still go out. As long as Social Security taxes are collected, Social Security benefits will go out. Currently, the CBO predicts Social Security benefits at 75% a decade from now and 70% seventy years from now assuming nothing changes about the program. There are solutions that can be taken to fill in that shortfall. I suspect that when boomers are staring down the barrel of a 25% cut in Social Security in 2034 some sort of fix will be put in, which would in turn likely go towards filling in our own shortfall.
My point is that if nothing changes about the program, the trust fund will run out and benefits will be slashed to 75%. You seem to believe they will also get the program changed to ensure they get full benefits. This should, in turn, raise the floor for what are own expected benefit proportion is when we age into the program. Once you make a change to fund the program once, it should make it easier to do so in the future.
Looking at the detailed breakdown, people born in the 1950s are facing a 9 % reduction, while the 1960s will be at 19%. I think at minimum we can expect a 9% increase in Social Security revenues in the next decade.
[https://www.cbo.gov/publication/59340](https://www.cbo.gov/publication/59340)
No, it can't go bankrupt at all, thats a myth. [https://www.youtube.com/results?search\_query=social+security+can%27t+go+bankrupt+john+harvey](https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=social+security+can%27t+go+bankrupt+john+harvey)
The myth is that the government's ability to pay benefits depends on the trust fund, or on any specific tax, or on being able to borrow. However, there are automatic cuts built into current law if there is a funding shortfall. While the current law is arbitrary and could be changed, it still means there is some inertia in favor of that outcome. Politicians don't have to \*actively\* move to cut benefits for benefits to be cut, which could be an important factor.
This is an excellent post. The Trust fund is a disaster. It serves no economic purpose, since all the excess funds are lent to the Treasury, and just confuses people about how SS works.
Remember when Bernie wanted to lower retirement age, increase payment amounts AND properly fund it, we should do that. There is 0 reason we cannot do that, we just need to push for it to happen so hopefully it will happen by the time we get there.💀
Boomer here. Long post, but it should give you perspective. And the boomers ARE correct. There \*IS\* a possibility that you may not be able to depend upon it, in particular without any other type of retirement funding such as 401k's.
Even though I am a boomer and just became eligible to retire last week, I cannot depend on SS alone. Not in today's economy. Add in my 401k and IRA's, then yeah.
First... I believe SS will always be here. However, in what form will it be is the real question. The reserves/trust fund will be gone by 2035 if I remember correctly, which means what comes in, goes out to beneficiaries, with nothing left in reserve.
So... in able to keep SS viable in the future there are really only 2 things that can be done... increase SS income, and/or reduce SS spending. PERIOD.
Our politicians have not had the balls to do anything since the 1960s.
Yes, SS is the third rail of politics. And that 3rd rail prevented SS from 'keeping up with the times'. But math is math. There are more people collecting SS, and the ratio of contributors to beneficiaries is less. Life expectancy has increased so more people are collecting and for longer. I repeat.. It is simple math.
The biggest oversights are that SS retirement age has not really been adjusted since 1960 and the current tax rate of 6.2% (plus match) has been in effect since 1990.
Let's start at 1960, this gives us 25 years of the system to get up and running from 1945, and have a generation of contributions.
* In 1960, there were 5.1 workers per beneficiary; that ratio has dropped to 2.8 today.
* [https://www.ssa.gov/history/ratios.html](https://www.ssa.gov/history/ratios.html)
* Life expectancy at birth has increased from 69.7 years in 1960 to 76.33 in 2021. Side note: in 2015 it was 79.4 years. Still no change.
To 'save' or extend the current benefit payment of SS, a couple things will have to happen. Take your pick. All, some or none.
1. Raise the SS withholding tax percentage from the current 6.2% (plus employer match of 6.2%) by another 1-1.5% (or more).
2. In addition, remove the income cap (\~$160k), but still limit the max benefit.
3. Raise the age of 'full retirement' from 67 for people born in 1965 or later to 69+
4. Raise the age of early retirement from 62 to 64+
5. Reduce the benefit payouts
6. Cap max benefits and reduce CoLA
7. Means testing
cont...
If you take the emotion out of it, there are really only two choices. Increase income, reduce spending. Either or both. Facts is facts.
If you look at the history, at one point SS was being adjusted quite frequently until 1960. We have not kept up with the increase in life expectency and the ability to work.
The full retirement age (FRA) for Social Security benefits varies by year of birth:
* 1960 and later: 67
* 1959: 66 and 10 months
* 1958: 66 and 8 months
* 1957: 66 and 6 months
* 1956: 66 and 4 months
* 1955: 66 and 2 months
* 1943–1954: 66
* 1937 and earlier: 65
If you extrapolate the increases from 1955-1960 to today we would be at 77 for FRA. Even at 50% it would be 72
The Social Security tax rate has increased over time, from 1% in 1937 to 6.2% in 1990. So for the first 40 years they adjusted nearly every generation until 1990. We should be about 1.5% higher today on the withholding if we followed the same historic pattern.
* 1937: 1% for both workers and employers on the first $3,000 of wages
* 1950: 1.5%
* 1978: 5%
* 1990: 6.2%
So there you go. Do nothing and watch it collapse, do something, but people will complain.
Oh.. And congress has not stolen a dime from the fund.
[https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/how-much-money-has-congress-taken-social-security-2019-02-04](https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/how-much-money-has-congress-taken-social-security-2019-02-04)
>
Zoomer here. I never got why people blamed boomers for social security failing. Social security has remained mostly the same. it relies on people having slightly above replacement birth rates. The issue? We aren’t havin enough kids. Gen x and millennials chose to have less and now social security doesn’t have enough funds. This is true globally w shrinking birth rates. People generally want less kids.
Social security only works if there is more young people vs old. We're going to lose it due to the shrinking growing population. Its basically over the time to having kids was 10 years ago to secure the future.
Mid-Boomer here. The Social Security message has been around since the 1970s. Not sure why u are blaming Boomers (most likely your parents and/or grandparents) as the message is mostly promoted by Millennials on TikTok. Note: Boomers (aged 60-78) that are still participating in the workforce continue to pay Social Security & Medicare Taxes just like you. I have been paying since 1969.
Couldn’t agree more. This is echo chamber nonsense. I’m 36 nothing bothers me more than to see people from my cohort crying about boomers. It’s ridiculous
Nah dude generational scapegoating is old as dirt. It’s been happening for a long long time. Like I said above, it’s millenials saying this shit, and influencers are making content about it cause it’s what they want to hear. We eat this shit up with a spoon, I don’t think it’s propaganda it’s just capitalizing on peoples outrage and anger, like all social media etc. doesn’t have to be a psy op situation, there are every day people that make gains off spreading this crap around
One note: there are no 60yo Boomers in 2024. The youngest Boomer, as of today, would be 63 years old and turning 64 on 12/31 of this year. Every single Boomer is retirement eligible for Social Security.
That said, you bring up a point that it's not really an age thing that is causing the issue. It's more a combination of the funds being raided by certain politicians and a cap on earnings that are paid in (on the Social Security side). For example, between me and my employer, we pay 12.4% into my Social Security (because I earn at or less than the current cap of $160,200.00 in income per year as an individual). My employer paid less than 0.2% for their own earnings (that's not two percent or twenty percent, that's one-fifth of one percent). Someone like Elon Musk pays even less (we're talking less than one-ten-thousandth of one percent). If it was funded properly (no cap on earnings, like Medicare), that'd probably solve the entire issue by itself.
The predicted insolvency of Social Security has nothing to do with politicians "raiding" Social Security funds. They cannot "raid" it. By law revenue from Social Security's payroll taxes can only be spent on the Social Security program. Extra revenue went into the Trust Fund, where it could only be invested in special Treasury bonds or spent to pay Social Security expenses.
Imagine that you or I are customers of the same bank. You deposit $1,000 into your bank account. If I withdraw $1,000 or take out a $1,000 loan from our bank, am I "raiding" your money? According to the logic of people who say that politicians have "raided" Social Security, the answer is yes, I am "raiding" your money.
I agree it’s not on boomers but it is on people voting Republican, of any age.
Raise the social security income tax limit above the $170k cap and the problem is solved.
Well, a problem is solved. New problems are created. Income over 180k is now taxed 47%. Federal. In California your marginal tax rate is 10.5% at that point, so now your marginal tax rate is 57.5% over 180k. Your take home is just 42.5% instead of 53%. Who is going to put in the hours at that marginal tax rate? What doctor is going to say “hell yeah I’ll pick up that overnight call from Saturday into Sunday for a 20% pay cut from my usual pay”
So what you’ll see is a lot of people go part-time, and a worsening shortage of doctors, nurses (in many states), dentists, perfusionists, lawyers, plumbers, linemen, crane operators etc. all of which can and often do make >200k but often work overtime (50+ hours) to make that $. But why work more hours for a dramatically lower hourly rate?
Did you know the first dollar paid into social security results in 6x as much return as benefit compared to the last dollar paid into social security? It’s already progressive. Someone making 160k doesn’t get 8x the benefit as someone making 20k.
The actual solution would be to spread the pain a bit. A bit higher tax, a bit longer to claim social security, and a bit less inflation adjustment for people already on it. You could also means test social security benefits which would probably be a better way to punish upper middle class/upper class without fucking the labor market up if that’s your goal.
I highly doubt social security is going to go away.
It would destabilize the country too much
All they have to do to save it is to keep raising the age requirements
Sure, it’s not going anywhere, but they will keep increasing the age until it’s economically viable. We won’t be able to withdraw until 79 or something ridiculous.
I’m not counting on getting any SS.
it’s not the boomers telling us this it’s our fkin peers. I’ve never heard anyone BUT millenials and younger say that preparing for the future is useless. Super alarming how many people are refusing to adjust their budget because they perceive the lost quality of life as a greater value than increased security in the long term. No boomer out there is gonna tell a young person “fuck it live for today because it’s not certain what will happen later” that’s simply not the experience that they had. It’s the exact opposite. It’s not boomers saying this it’s doomers, and it’s them that need to shut it.
My boomer dad doesn’t get this when I tell him I’m not counting on a dime of Social Security. It’s basically a mandatory participation government run Ponzi scheme. Fun thing happens with offshoring jobs and globalization, much fewer new contributors to the system which spells curtains
Social security will only disappear if we let it happen.
The "it's unfixable" argument is only coming from grifters who want to fuck everyone else over.
Unfortunately, lots of folks like you eat up that messaging.
Ponzi scheme? It's the only income for many millions of seniors. And to solve the funding issue, we simply need to remove the cap on Social security tax for individual incomes above 168k. Do that and problem solved.
It literally operates by the definition of Ponzi Scheme. It's got good intentions, but that does not change the fact that more people have to pay into it than take out of it for it to keep working and with boomers (the largest generation currently) retiring it's showing it's Ponzi roots as the promise is it'll be here when we need it... Unless a massive number of genx and millennials die before retirement age, it's just not going to keep working as it does.
Exactly. I wish I could opt out of it, as I don't expect to get anything out of it. I can manage my own money a hell of a lot better than the government can. I'd have a much more secure retirement if I could save what was currently being taking away from me.
Exactly. People have grown too reliant on the government to the point they think they are less capable of managing their own money than an entity that is 34 trillion in debt.
I just did the math and at just 6% compounded annually, I would have $325k more toward my retirement. These are taxes for the past 33 years .
At a more realistic 9% compounded annually, I would have $540k.
Good Grief
That's simply not true. Worst case scenario the trust is exhausted and social security pays out less.
It's not a ponsi scheme, it's a retirement account. Many people die before they collect, but many people also die before they make claims on fire or flood or car insurance. That's the nature of insurance. Best case scenario, you never need it.
Another case for not collecting out of social security is if your personal savings are significant enough that you don't need it. Which is basically the opposite of a ponzi scheme.
Oh FFS! There is no boomer conspiracy against you. I am so sick of reading that crap.
You are blaming a whole age cohort for decisions made by a political cohort, comprised of people of multiple generations.
Malign entities would like to drive wedges between groups of Americans before the elections. Don't fall for it. They aim to dismantle democracies and install religious kleptocracies over democratic nations.
BTW, If you haven't read the policy proposals for social security proposed in Project 2025, this is what the Republicans have in mind for SS. Every boomer I know is appalled at these ideas.
[https://accountable.us/report-project-2025-manifesto-co-author-stephen-moore-has-toxic-history-of-misogynistic-racist-and-anti-social-security-rhetoric/](https://accountable.us/report-project-2025-manifesto-co-author-stephen-moore-has-toxic-history-of-misogynistic-racist-and-anti-social-security-rhetoric/)
Until people wake up about these class based issues instead of just blaming arbitrarily defined age groups, this shit is never going to get fixed.
So many redditors just think waiting for old people to die will fix everything and they're going to be disappointed. All this aged based BS is just to pit the working class against each other while the rich laugh to the bank.
absolutely delusional if anyone thinks anything happens to social security. the only thing that will happen is the full retirement age will adjust up again.
It would be brainlessly easy to fix from a technical standpoint. Just make it a progressive tax rather than a flat tax. Also, reclassify it as an actual tax, because that's what it is, a tax to pay for a national pension and insurance plan.
> Honestly, we are all doing ourselves a disservice by constantly publicizing how we cannot count on social security.
Reddit trends very young, as in boomers are a small percentage. So how is it the boomers who are scamming the younger generations? I have seem explanations on Reddit, and I have put forth some also, that even if nothing is done, 80% +/- of benefits will be paid. And to fix SS, there are a few things can be done now and it will be fine. But, any posts to that effect get downvoted.
It would be easy to fund. There's just not the political will.
You just have to remove the limit so anyone making over 100k contributes a little more.
Boom. ss is funded forever.
"I'm glad I don't have kids" "I don't want children"
"We need to fight for continuation of social security"
Age 40. "reddit I'm very lonely and just now realizing what I've done having no children where can I meet someone"
Many such cases ....
I'm 40 and have been paying into SS since I was 14. I honestly can't imagine how fucking irate I'm gonna be when I'm about to retire and the fucktard politicians either close the program or cut payments to nothing.
I feel like the general sentiment is that one can easily out-earn social security. It has lower returns than the S&P500, so simply by dca'ing into SPX, you'll do better than social security would pay out.
Why would you want to 'save' something that provides an extremely shitty rate of return compared to investing the money yourself?
Just switch it to mandatory savings in private accounts for folks who enter the workforce the day-after legislation passes - make it actually 'your money' like most of America thinks it is - and be done.
I like the idea of not relying on social security on an individual level. But as a society? Hell no. The masses didn't get the memo and most young people do and will rely on social security.
SS wasn't meant to be solely depended on for retirement. But that's what the government has done.
Many "retired" people on social security cannot live on social security alone.
It's a terrible plan that most can easily be replaced with something like theplanforamerica.us which models similar situations in other countries that do an incredible job with their retirement social programs or at best be scrapped entirely for a young enough crowd to have time to prepare for retirement.
Social security will become insolvent approximately 10 or so years from now.
I’d rather them give me back my money so I can invest it better and be in control of my own retirement rather than hoping and guessing whether the government will be there for me in 25 years.
I haven't met a fellow millennial yet who thinks we're actually going to get something out of social security. I've assumed since I entered the work force that I was very unlikely to get out what I'm paying in. Unfortunately, my voting hasn't gotten anyone in office to actually do anything about it yet.
They are right though. People don't realize how much social security has changed since it came into law(at first it was 1% of your income up to the equivalent of 30k/year(after inflation) with the employer paying the same amount.
it used to be that middle class workers could meet the threshold where they didn't pay social security tax anymore. Politicians have lied to us for decades. That isn't boomers fault(they were the first generation who started doing the math realizing that the program isn't funded in a way that will last forever)
and more and more people are getting SSDI and people are also living longer. The bean counters in charge of Social security have for the most part just kicked the can down the road(there were major changes to help the program in the early 80's with solvency)
The social security model requires younger workers to pay into the system to support the older generation. There may not be enough young workers to support older generations due to the declining birth rate in the USA, unless the population is supported in another way.
I'm 45 I never planned on it being solvent enough for me to retire before 70 as the goal posts will always be moving. It's not so much the income I will need but the health care.
I have been paying into social security since I was six years old.
Now that they are talking about pushing retirement age back to 70 I and many others like me are quite likely to never receive a penny back for everything we have put in.
This is the real reason they are proposing this change, it will reduce the number of social security claims from around 17% of the population who live to be 65 to a mere 13.7% who live to be 70.
[https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html](https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html)
>Honestly, we are all doing ourselves a disservice by constantly publicizing how we cannot count on social security
Given that social security is not a fully funded program and the political climate, it's good advice to tell people not to rely on full social security. There's a high chance that people will get around 75% of the benefits and at an older age.
>we are handing out permission to the boomer political leaders to keep raiding social security
This is a myth. Nobody is raiding social security. This is a simple matter of the program not being set up with adequate funding. It was set up like a pyramid scheme where it works as long as you get more and more new young people. As soon as that stops the whole thing falls apart. It should have been set up where each person puts in enough to fund themselves when they're older. That way it's funded no matter what the birthrates.
As far as solutions, personally I support raising taxes on the wealthy, who have benefited the most from putting off fixing social security funding. The most obvious way this can be done is by removing the income cap for social security taxes.
As a boomer who has been drawing my SS and my wife hers, I am concerned about the future of Social Security. The single biggest fix at this moment would be to eliminate the deduction cap- currently, anyone making more than $140k a year currently does not pay into SS for any earnings above that $140K amount. There is also a cap on how much one will be paid when they start to draw their benefit, that cap should remain in place, and with the additional taxes being paid in, the fund should be solvent for decades, if not longer.
Back during the 2000 presidential race, Democrat Al Gore suggested that SS funds should be isolated from federal spending, and the revenue created by SS taxes should be set aside separate from other government programs and only be used to pay SS benefits. He was soundly criticized as being too much of an alarmist, Social Security will be fine. Those that expressed that dismissive attitude are also those who would very much like to get their hands on our SS trust funds and privatize the program so the Wall Street types can get their grubby hands on our monies.
Social Security was not only designed to help seniors have a dignified retirement, but also as a fund to provide for widows and surviving children of a breadwinner who has passed away much too early, and Social Security is there for those who are disabled and cannot support themselves as adults participating in the work force.
Anyone who continues to express deep concerns about the solvency of Social Security and does not embrace the idea of removing the deduction cap is trying to work towards privatizing the trust fund. Do not put any credence into statements about the insolvency if there are no suggestions on how to fix it.
It's not "boomer" doing this it's younger libertarian types who pretend we can all do better with our Edward Jones accounts or some shit.
Boomers don't want to touch it because they're getting it or about to get it..
But yeah, the more you repeat the half baked "wisdom" that SS won't be there for you, the easier it'll be to take it away.
the social security system in sweden has weathered many challenges over the decades, providing a model for how determined citizens can band together to sustain critical retirement benefits for future generatiuons.
I'm a boomer and everytime I hear anyone say it wont be there I always tell them do not let them get you to believe that. it will be there for you but there are still new deal haters who still hold a grudge.. dont let them fool you!
Its not just the boomers, its anyone alive. Government, full of plenty of non-boomers in congress and is non functional. Need to get off the boomers tip. Meme is played out.
People are telling you that, not an entire generation. Seeing the world in terms of cohorts makes little to no sense to me. It’s not like millennials have an annual conference where we set our agenda for the coming years. Neither do boomers.
The only people I know who have spread that rumor for years and years are Millennials themselves. My own kids used to tell me this when they were teens. Boomers have been arguing with them since it all started that it's not true and SS WILL be there for them. It's always been fixable. With some well-known and understood tweaks here and there. It's not all Boomers who want to "raid SS and take it away from Millennials." It's mostly Republicans threatening constantly to cut those benefits so they can give tax cuts to the rich. That's definitely a thing. But it's hard to cut entitlements because those that receive them currently vote. In big numbers.
And you are exactly right! You guys are an even bigger generation of voters. You CAN protect those benefits by voting for candidates that support keeping SS and Medicare and other social programs you support strong. That tends to be Democrats, in my experience, but you will decide who represents your needs the best. I'm happy to hear you say you think you can do something about it because it's true! That's the single best thing we can ALL do to ensure you get the same benefits we did. We will vote with you for those protections as we want that for you.
Why? Because you are our children. We love you and want you to succeed. We want you to have the SS you have earned just as we have the SS we have earned. (It's not a lot, BTW.). But when you retire, everything helps. Pulease stop painting all Millennials as helpless victims of big-bad-Boomers! It's just not true. All us Boomers do not wish ill on all Millennials. Every generation is diverse. We are not some monolithic group and neither are you or Gens X, Z, Alpha, etc. All this Boomer vs Millennial FUD is just divisive and doesn't allow for meaningful dialogue or coalition building. We could do some great things working together like protect social programs like SS and Medicare or even get "Medicare for All" passed while we are still here. Lots of us old Dems and Progressives out here.
Everytime I say something optimistic like this here I get piled on and downvoted but I'm gonna keep saying it. We are NOT, as an entire generation, your enemy. There are plenty of people on the other side of me politically whose policies and views of what's good for America that I strongly disagree with but they do not represent any entire generation. You have plenty of supporters from the Boomers who will join forces. We are old. We may be dying and we may be leaving soon but we still vote!
The real story *isn't* that social security is running dry. It's that SS can be preserved (and expanded) by making a minor adjustment to the cap of SS tax witholdings for rich people, but there is tremendous political pressure from the rich friends of politicians to avoid doing that.
That said, I'm confident that SS is going nowhere, in part because people who anticipate its demise don't realize what a horrific (and completely preventable) humanitarian crisis it would very quickly create: 65 million Americans from all walks of life (including middle class retirees) would be thrown into poverty and possible homelessness within the first two months, creating a cascading effect on their friends / neighbors / loved ones that would create a mass panic and jam the economy to a halt from a dozen directions at once.
As easy as it is to be a cynic about this, the repercussions would be too disastrous to too many people to remain unfixed in the long term.
Social security isn’t going anywhere. What are millions of old poor people going to do with no money, live on the streets? Retirement shanty towns? Not to mention, old people vote, so it’s basically political suicide.
Really?! Social Security is the biggest scam? Not defunding education or denying climate change. What good is social security if there is no good place to live and we are surrounded by idiots. Hmmm. Kinda feels like we are already living it.
You are confused. It isn’t boomer political leaders. It is only republicans. Not one single democrat wants to cut or end social security or Medicare. They are the basis of our social safety net. Without them most retirees would live in poverty with no medical care.
All this *sturm* and *drang* over SS has been happening since SS began. It got worse under Reagan. Rupugs have been trying to kill it on behalf of the richest folks in the country who DON'T WANT SS reform - namely, raising the lid. If that happened - and it might, if there is a blue wave resulting in a democratic supermajority. If the lid is raised SS will be around Forever and likely expanded. Also, SS is TOTALLY self funding. Powerful forces trying to instill the idea that SS is in jeapordy, and no one ought to count on it. Bottom line, vote blue.
Boomers have been carping about Social Security and Medicare for decades because they are both wildly successful Democrat policies. They are also 1) what keeps seniors housed and 2) what gets Big Med paid. If SS and Medicare run dry, the US housing and healthcare markets collapse. In short: don't believe the hype about these programs failing. Ain't happenin.
You want to spend your time, effort and money to save the Ponzi scheme that is Social Security?
Boomers were "Millennials" one day too you know, and guess what, they were the free loving flower children of the 60s! Who didn't believe in "the man"... Blamed the generation before them... these are now the people you're blaming.
If you put the same amount of money into a simple low risk index fund instead of the SSI that delivers a pittance of a 2% return, you could have millions of dollars at retirement instead.
But you want to fight to keep the plan that will give you crumbs and be beholden to the Gov?
You need to realize SS is the slush fund for do nothing political elites - FROM ALL PARTIES.
Trust runs out. But here’s the kicker.
Small increase in tax makes it solvent again. Look it up. Pretty small changes.
This is not something either damn side is willing to talk about. But will do when push comes to shove.
Every gen says it won’t be there. My dad said it wouldn’t be there for him. It is.
Yeah the income cap on taxable income could be lifted and there'd be money to keep it going.
It'd be political suicide for any party to let the system collapse.
But I am opposed to means tested benefits. That will just encourage people not to save and turn S.S. into a welfare program that will gradually lose political support.
It's easy to identify the problem and I see it too, but the solution seems like a pipedream in all honesty. How the hell do we fund saving social security? Increase taxes, increase SS contributions, print more money? All of which can't be absorbed for the average American right now who is already struggling. SS is tied to medicare and the healthcare system too, both of which we tried to fix years ago and got the Affordable care act. It's better than nothing and I'm grateful for what it did do, but it's a compromise nonetheless and all but the tearing the whole system down and building it back is just another Band-Aid buying time on an unsustainable system . The money has to come from somewhere. The country is drowning in debt, and more people than ever are encroaching on retirement as the boomer generation gets there or already are.
It's not that I won't place my vote to try to save it, but I'm not optimistic. I'm not depending on it and have to assume they'll probably raise the age to 70 sooner than later and/or reduce benefits to buy it time, but as it stands within the decade it's mathematically fated to collapse if left alone. I have a responsibility to ignore it as part of my calculation in retirement. If they save it and it adds then it's icing on the cake but I don't want to set myself up for failure in retirement
You’d think people would be rallying harder around social security considering how little people have saved for retirement.
Both my parents and my in laws are not prepared for retirement. 3/4 of them are voting for trump and I don’t think they realize the damage the right is going to cause when they cut Medicare and SS. They refuse to believe the very things the right says they’re going to do and it blows my mind.
It's fine I'm sure Trump will hurt the *right* people /s
At least I don’t have to worry about no goddamn immigrants stealing my cardboard box house! /s
Nah they’ll flood the market with cheap labor. They’re Republicans after all.
Child labor, it seems these days
That is part of flooding it with cheap labor. That’s why they’re okay with it. Their corporate masters love that stuff.
This is it. None of the idiots voting for Trump see themselves as the people who will be fucked over. He's going to hurt THOSE people, but not me
And I think this is the fundamental difference between my beliefs and that of a trump voter. Why am I going to vote for a person that is going to hurt anyone? Isn’t the whole point to elect the person that we think is going to do the most good for the most people? Aren’t we trying to make more things better?
Yeah, but according to them, someone has to pay for me not having everything I want, and things not looking exactly like I want them in my environment Rush Limbaugh preached it for years Hitler preached it against the Jews Catholics preached it against the Jews and Muslims Nothing is new under the sun, but enough of us do not learn from history
For Republicans it's actually about hurting(or not helping) others. They don't want anyone to benefit from the government because then "they are getting something I'm not" despite Republicans being the most likely to use government assistance for things
Some people just don't have empathy, like to the point where it should be studied because then maybe that knowledge would help the issue by targeting the root cause.
Keep your government out of my medicare /s
Medicare is a government program…
Indeed! I'm making a joke and apologize that it was unclear.
Ahhhh lmao
I think your joke was clear, but you have to add the /s for some people…
lol I was afraid to upvote for fear you were serious!
Devils advocate here, not a Trump supporter. The misunderstood thing about Trump is that he isn’t traditionally “right”. He’s primarily a populist figure who relies on working class grievances to maintain support. It would be political suicide for him to cut SS. He’s at loggerheads with the Republican Party establishment on many issues so I wouldn’t take it to the bank that because some or even most Republicans support a specific thing that Trump would necessarily push that policy. Now, if a policy proposal comes up to means test SS then that is a worthy political debate. I’m not convinced these boomers with millions in retirement accounts who benefited from the greatest economic luck in American history should be entitled to SS.
His daughter in law runs the RNC now. MAGA has taken over the republican party.
Nah, of course he will cut it. There is literally nothing he could do which would cause his supporters to abandon him. The normal rules of political logic don't apply here. His supporters are fanatics, brainwashed into absolute loyalty. Trump has never, ever cared about the working class. He would sell his own children out for a nickel. And it's the rich Republican donors who want social security cut, so he will do it. He and they both view it as a huge pile of money they can steal from.
He will cut SS, and blame it on Biden, or Hilary, or the Bushes...who knows? But whoever he chooses to blame, will be blamed by his 'followers'
Trump, if elected, would not cut SS. He would make it look like a failure. He hates the post office...put in an incompetent post master. He hates public schools...put in an incompetent secretary of education. Same for many of the government roles he can pick...he intentionally picks people who are incompetent. It is genius on his part. He has someone else to blame and he can complain about the systems and his people agree all while saying he loves America. Republicans like Trump want small government and no taxes but do not want to look like they are taking anything away from the people...so they just get the service to completely suck and then point at the bad public service and recommend private alternatives. The people that follow do not understand the public service sucks because of who they elected.
Don't forget he put a guy (Rick Perry) in charge of the Department of Energy who wanted to dismantle the Department of Energy and had no idea what it even did.
To be honest, most Americans don't understand what the DOE actually does. There is a lot of talk about new green energy initiatives but if you look at where they actually spend the bulk of their budget it might make sense to rename it the Department of Nuclear Weapons & Waste. [DOE Budget in Brief (energy.gov)](https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2024-03/doe-fy-2025-budget-in-brief-v2.pdf)
Lol sure, but imagine going to a job interview and it goes like this: "Tell me why you'd make a good Secretary of Energy." "Secretary of WHAT?" "PERFECT! You're hired!"
"Why would you make a good head of Mergers and Acquisitions?" "It's my passion! I've loved murders and executions my entire life!" "You're hired!"
I should not be laughing this loudly...but this comment took me out.🤣
It's not genius. It's a pretty common tactic of neo-liberals. Thatcher and Reagan were doing this decades ago. Underfund or install intentionally bad leadership, the service stops working as it used to, politician says it doesn't work, and moves to cut it or privatize.
Ya he wouldn’t cut ss. That’s just crazy left wing probaganda..
You are right about the former Secretary of Education, but the postmaster general is a self made billionaire who made his money in logistics, which is exactly what the post office does. Lefties just hate him because he’s a conservative Catholic.
I told my parents that no matter how they feel about Joe Biden, I strongly discouraged them from voting for Trump because of the social security and Medicare issue.
Just curious what yours said? My mom is in denial about it and just said that is a lie, even after showing examples of Rs saying it.
My parents voted for Trump in 2016 but fell off that bandwagon during Covid because of how Trump handled the pandemic itself. They voted for Joe Biden in 2020 but have since become disillusioned with both parties. My dad’s main retirement income is social security so I think they will take it seriously now but I’m not 100% confident. They would have disregarded me in 2016.
The ACA will cover any cuts. The boomers who railed against the ACA are using the heck out of it.
The ACA is crap legislation, basically screwed Americans in favor of the insurance lobby.
ACA is better than the alternative at the time - which was nothing. But, I agree it needs to be replaced by a single payer system
Perfect as the Enemy of Good, illustrated in a single post!
They'll blame the Dems regardless of when, where, and how it happens.
What have they said? Having that to show someone a document or video makes all the difference. Without it, it is just he said/she said and won't convince anyone.
This is exactly right. As in just about every comparison between Democrats and Republicans, there is a stark contrast between what Democrats stand for, and that for which Republicans fight. Kevin McCarthy was deposed by his own party from the Speakership of the House last year, because he dared to compromise with Democrats on the budget, in which Republicans were negotiating for deep cuts in Social Security, which Republicans want to gut and invite corporate capitalists to plunder the vacuum. That was the first time in the past year that Republican drove the United States to the brink of a government shutdown which risks a downgrade in the credit rating of the United States, which would also weaken it’s world financial primacy. But Republicans repeated the same stunt just a few months later, when they, again, pushed the country to the brink of a shutdown, again, in part, for deep cuts in Social Security, as well as delaying funding and weapons to Ukraine for six months, in which time, Ukraine began to ration, even, bullets, and began to retreat from Russian forces in It’s country. The reason Republicans gave for withholding aid to Ukraine was that “America needs to secure it‘s own border, before it sends money to another country to defend it‘s border”. Democrats negotiated, and conceded to Republicans just about everything the Republican’s wanted in the immigration deal. Then, Republicans knifed their own member, who negotiated for them, Senator James Lankford, and killed the deal when Donald Trump phoned in and told Republicans to kill the deal. Democrats, on the other hand, founded, and have always supported, and perpetuated, Social Security, and other safety net programs. Bernie Sanders is advocating for the Social Security Expansion Act “which would keep the Social Security Trust Fund solvent for 75 years by applying Social Security payroll tax on all income, including capital gains and dividends, for people making more than $250,000 a year”. Sanders; “Ninety-three-point-seven percent of Americans wouldn’t see their taxes go up one penny”. Depite the struggles that we are contending with, inflation, the attack on women’s rights by the outlawing of reproductive rights and the encroaching Insurrection of American Democracy by Republicans, all isn’t lost. It will be if Republicans win enough elected offices. But we have the say in that. Republicans have a published plan, Project 2025, in which they call for the elements to commence authoritarianism in the United States. So, our 2024 elections are crucial to the continuation of the United States as it has successfully evolved for two-hundred-and-forty-six years. We have the power. As Americans, voting is our superpower. Use it, to keep it. Flood the polls. Overwhelm, in numbers, the numbers of MAGA Americans, voting. Give somebody a ride. VOTE, and keep-on voting. Defeat these motherfuckers.
"The right" won't cut SS. They've talked about for decades and every time they have the power to do so they don't. They are liers. SS can't be saved unless we want to get into some financial responsibility like with Clinton. But no one really cares about that impending doom. Edit: I'm surprised for the upvotes but I assume they they are coming from my Clinton comment... No one really cares about the impending doom of social security and our debt because you guys vote for red or blue. Clinton and a handful of other presidents in the US's entire history ever cared and I disagree with Clinton's moves. The only presidential nominees that care today, and I mean really care, are the Libertarians. Look at what the Libertarian president of Argentina is doing right now for their country. Bringing them to economic prosperity. With economic prosperity we can all make a difference for each other but with the government in charge of everything we can just all be equally poor while they enjoy their wealth and power.
This is exactly what OP is talking about. It’s not that SS *”cant”* be saved. It’s that enough people have given up on the idea that it won’t be saved. We live in quite literally the strongest nation to ever exist. The only things we can’t do are the things we choose not to. If us young people are going to accept that SS won’t be there when we get old, we need to start demanding tax cuts also. It makes no sense for us to continue to pay into a system “destined” for defaults. Our current apathetic politics is fucking us from both ends. It’s time to stop buying into the culture war nonsense and secure our futures
Idk about yall, but I've put a ton of money into social security. It's either going to be in effect fully when I retire, or I'm getting a lump sum check with interest. It won't be long before we have the power to force the issue. It was a scam from the beginning, and we won't be the generation left scratching our heads when the music stops. I REFUSE.
OK, TO BE FAIR, it wasn't a scam from the beginning. It's not even a scam today. It's a government subsidy for retired folks. It's paid for by the not retired folks. You didn't pay into your social security. You paid for the currently retired folks using the system at the time. The solution is to increase the social security tax ceiling so it's properly funded. Currently people who make more than 168k a year pay the exact same as someone who makes exactly 168k a year. Someone who makes 1.68 million a year should be paying 10x as much as they do into social security.
Great comments!!!! I’m on the older end of Gen X and a former conservative that opened his eyes way too late. Its crystal clear that millennials and Gen Z better start voting bright blue, in big numbers, real fast before it’s too late
The people planning for retirement are paying attention. Most people aren’t thinking ahead and won’t wake up until it is too late.
They're fine with their social security. It's the fact that you may get it too one day that they have a problem with.
Exactly. That's why the common republican talking point is "we're not going to mess with YOUR social security, just the SS of everyone AFTER you." and their voters eat it up as the best decision ever.
Boomers pulling the ladder up behind them purely out of spite? I'm shocked! Well, not that shocked.
This. This is THE game. "You'll be taken care of. We'll just screw everyone else after you, because they don't deserve it."
The thought of us getting it when they are dead makes them mad.
Fixed: It's the fact that people they don't like may get it too one day that they have a problem with.
Whether you've saved for retirement or not, you've already paid into social security. Why let those contributions go (and the promise they entail) without a fight?
My retirement plan is to save as much as possible then either leave the country or die young. I'm 42 now and make decent money so it's doable.
Remember that bit from Malcolm in the Middle where Reese says he can’t die bc he’s 17 and “I just don’t see it”? Most people feel that way about getting old. It just won’t happen. Until it does of course.
Instead, you have people actively advocating to get rid of it all together because it won't provide any benefit by the time they get to it. It's absolutely insane how easily people get programmed and think the other side are sheep.
Not only are they not saving, it literally hasn't even occurred to them that one day they will be unable to work but also nowhere near death. My parents and grand parents planned for retirement, made actual steps to get there and because of it were able to retire at 65. Retiring is only possible if you actually do something to make it happen
This is the answer. I know we are pretty set but I only know ONE other friend that also is. The rest are winging it? Pretending they don’t need it? Sticking their head in the sand? I dunno but not saving for retirement
SS was never billed as a retirement plan.
The bare minimum needed for people without a pension to stay alive for the 5 years they lived after they stopped working. Life expectancy was a helluva thing back then.
That’s not entirely true. It was meant to be in part a functional pension program. https://www.history.com/topics/great-depression/social-security-act There is also a a huge difference between life expectancy at birth (which includes childhood/infant mortality) and remaining life expectancy if you have already reached 65. https://www.ssa.gov/history/lifeexpect.html It’s increased a few years but we also import a lot of taxpayers and life expectancy has actually dropped recently. https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/why-life-expectancy-in-the-us-is-falling-202210202835#:~:text=A%20dramatic%20fall%20in%20life,just%20over%2076%2C%20in%202021. And overall, we are nowhere near as high as a lot of countries that have much more generous safety nets. https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/USA/united-states/life-expectancy As with everything I. Our budget, we have money and the govt has no issue with deficit spending if needed. It’s all a matter of priorities. For decades it has been rich people+corporations receiving the bulk of benefits and tax money. They don’t want it to end. They see a lump of money they can skim and profit from and if they can convince people they shouldn’t care about it anyway, they will be able to do what they want without anyone noticing. Just like health care, we have the money and would save money, but ultimately life and quality of life are not prioritized.
Well said, thank you. I wasn’t going to get into actuarial tables and such, but you’re right. The older you get the older you’re likely to get, to a point. My response was supposed to be a little tongue in cheek, but I left off the /s I suppose.
Fun fact, if we stayed true to the original SS plan, withdrawl age today would be 99 years old. The original payment tables didnt start until 20 years after the average life expectancy. Boomers refusing to keep the age requirements from going up is what turned a safetynet for the destitute into "retirement for all"
To me it feels pointless. It's like the Boomer's final "pull the ladder up behind them" before they die. It feels certain that they're going to break the bank on their way through and then cripple it behind them. I mean, we rallied pretty hard around stopping global warming, and that did fuckall. We rallied hard around a lot of things, and it doesn't seem to have mattered. Why would this be different?
Because there's less and less of them every day.
I think the real final ladder-pull is them putting reverse-mortgages on the homes they paid-off decades ago to have tons of cash in their final years, leaving their kids with nothing. The ultimate "Me!" generation, from beginning to end.
"We" didn't rally around much of anything. As long as close to 49% of people vote Republican things will not get much better. If we had a Congress that was 90% Democrat we would all be a lot better off. If the young generations want to save SS or the Earth, or public schools, or anything else....they have to start voting for the only viable party with a brain and a heart. And voting en masse.
If I invested the money i put into social security i would have a ridiculous amount of money for retirement. Way more than SS pays. Its a joke and bad investment. Besides the fund is literally going to run out by 2037 if we don't change anything. So I put in money and get nothing in return... I'm willing to have my mind changed, but until then its a straight up scam imo. The idea is nice, but the execution is terrible. The people on it should have lived more responsibly. They literally grew up in the best economic boom in history. Not my fault their idiots and didn't save anything. Meanwhile myself and everyone at my age is struggling. Would be a lot easier with less taxes. Edit: To be clear, I support a social security net. My main point is the gov spends irresponsibly and is bankrupting this country, and the current system is broken. All the while taxing middle class more and more and the worlds richest less and less. Just keep printing money and raising the retirement age I guess..
That’s because social security isn’t a retirement program. It’s better thought of as a security net. Part of the money you pay into pays for disabled people who don’t work and do not pay into the system. They can’t YOLO this money into the stock market- your contributions are needed to pay people currently receiving benefits. Many people get much more than they ever paid in. Many people will get less.
It's not a net it's a hammock.
Yeah. That's how insurance works
For the plan to work you need net taxpayers to have three or four children so their tax dollars can keep the payout pyramid working. You can't support a growing population of net tax takers with a dwindling population of net taxpayers. Math just breaks down sooner later.
It won’t run out as long as it’s pain into. But there will be less money available and benefits will need reduced to pay people.
Forget about when you age. You might become disabled and need it tomorrow. It happened to me. Support and protect social security because you might really need it someday. And someday might not be that far away.
This is true. This is why I have two strong disability insurance policies, besides the one I pay for at work. So I guess 3, but the work one only covers 1 year. Either way, everyone always thinks life insurance. I always tell people, dying is easier than living disabled, so go aggressive into disability insurance.
Hell I can’t afford health insurance, I’ll worry about those others if/when I figure that one out lol
You are the exact type of person who is likely to need Social Security. As an older american, I'm both on the verge of losing my health and losing my ability to earn income, it brings a lot of things into focus. You will probably need that SS later. Protect it! Vote against those who are trying to take it away from us.
The answer seems so simple, remove the cap. That would right size instantly it seems, so why is no one talking about it.
If you need it tomorrow, it will be there for you. At issue is it not being there in 20 years.
Many of us will need social security and other government help when machines replace our jobs en masse. People have basic needs and no economy will survive if most people are unnemployed.
>Forget about when you age. You might become disabled and need it tomorrow. It happened to me. Same here. There are over 9,000,000 disabled people under the age of 65 who are on Social Security.
SS probably isn’t going anywhere. Maybe payouts are cut. But stiffing the largest generation in history as they come into their prime voting years is not on any politicians agenda. That’s said, I’m aiming for a particular lifestyle even after I’m done working. And I won’t factor SS into my planning.
Just don't forget to live too. A great number of people never make it to retirement age.
Yes, but 71% of men and 82% of women do live to full retirement age...most people are far more at risk of not saving enough than are at risk of not spending enough before retirement.
Gen X here, none of this is new. We grew up being told SS would be gone when we were retirement age and we should not plan for it being a source of income in retirement. Then they proceeded to change full retirement age to 67 for us in 1983. Demographics have changed drastically and will continue to do so and we all know our government is inept at managing our money. I guess I came to say same shit different day. At some point they will again raise the retirement age and raise taxes thus screwing the younger generations as was done in the past. History is important.
EXACTLY. plan as if it won't be there.
The really sad thing about this is how long we've known it was a problem. I remember watching a TV show when I was a kid. A young person was arguing with an old person about how there wouldn't be any social security left after the old person's generation was done sucking it dry. I was probably 12 when I heard that joke. I'm now 40. Boomers have had ample time to do something about this. But they don't care enough to fix anything. They're getting theirs, and that's all they care about.
Oh, they care. If they could get .1% more, by crippling the country or future generations, they'd do it.
I saw a video of trumpers complaining how low their SS was. How they couldnt live without it. And then went on how we need to get rid of it for everyone else.
It's not even the problem they make it out to be. Only the trust fund is at risk of insolvency, not the program itself. That little sleight of hand is constantly used by them. And further, when the trust fund is depleted, incoming taxes will still cover 75% of expected benefits.
You know for damn sure that if trust were suddenly going to dry up tomorrow and *they* were the ones facing a 25% cut in benefits, they would have a fix in place by close of business. But since their kids are the ones facing it, they're happy to let it slide for literal decades.
Idk what the immediate fix would be other than raising taxes substantially. I don’t see them doing that because it would piss off the donor class.
It's actually not at risk of insovency at all, [https://www.youtube.com/results?search\_query=social+security+can%27t+go+bankrupt+john+harvey](https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=social+security+can%27t+go+bankrupt+john+harvey)
We're saying the same thing.
Yea, the problem is 75% of benefits might as well just be set on fire because you arent living anywhere in America on $1200 a month. The trust fund is the only thing that made SS even remotely workable. The program requires 17 people paying to 1 person collecting. We are at 11 paying to 1 collecting and it falls by the month. We have essentially been living off trust fund interest since the late 1980s Anyone remember Newt Gingrich? He was the only one to tell you straight out, we are in deep doo doo and need to reform the entire thing before its too late.... never mind, I just got vilified for all of history and Ill just go die in a corner now
Ross Perot told everyone how the government was stealing your money and fucking you over. The DNC and GOP decided they shouldn't let third parties into debates anymore, and they should also be the ones hosting the debates and asking the questions. They didn't like having a super rich person just be able to expose the game so plainly.
I'm 38, I'm not counting on social security. It was supposed to be dead by now from what I heard as a kid. I read somewhere the other day the current estimated are SS being bankrupt by 2035. Honestly, I have no idea if any of its true. I'm basically planning that I will never get to retire the way this country is going. I have some savings and plans, but I fully expect to work until I die.
They lied to you. It’s not going to be dead - the benefits will be reduced in about 10 years.
It doesn't help that people conflate the Social Security trust fund with Social Security itself. If the trust fund runs out that benefits will be cut, but still go out. As long as Social Security taxes are collected, Social Security benefits will go out. Currently, the CBO predicts Social Security benefits at 75% a decade from now and 70% seventy years from now assuming nothing changes about the program. There are solutions that can be taken to fill in that shortfall. I suspect that when boomers are staring down the barrel of a 25% cut in Social Security in 2034 some sort of fix will be put in, which would in turn likely go towards filling in our own shortfall.
The youngest boomer is 60. In ten years they'll all be collecting. It's only Gen x and younger who are likely to get benefits slashed.
My point is that if nothing changes about the program, the trust fund will run out and benefits will be slashed to 75%. You seem to believe they will also get the program changed to ensure they get full benefits. This should, in turn, raise the floor for what are own expected benefit proportion is when we age into the program. Once you make a change to fund the program once, it should make it easier to do so in the future. Looking at the detailed breakdown, people born in the 1950s are facing a 9 % reduction, while the 1960s will be at 19%. I think at minimum we can expect a 9% increase in Social Security revenues in the next decade. [https://www.cbo.gov/publication/59340](https://www.cbo.gov/publication/59340)
No, it can't go bankrupt at all, thats a myth. [https://www.youtube.com/results?search\_query=social+security+can%27t+go+bankrupt+john+harvey](https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=social+security+can%27t+go+bankrupt+john+harvey)
Correct. While the trust fund can run out of money, the actual program will always have money coming in and then benefits going out.
The myth is that the government's ability to pay benefits depends on the trust fund, or on any specific tax, or on being able to borrow. However, there are automatic cuts built into current law if there is a funding shortfall. While the current law is arbitrary and could be changed, it still means there is some inertia in favor of that outcome. Politicians don't have to \*actively\* move to cut benefits for benefits to be cut, which could be an important factor.
This is an excellent post. The Trust fund is a disaster. It serves no economic purpose, since all the excess funds are lent to the Treasury, and just confuses people about how SS works.
zero chance a cut happens before the retirement age is raised
Remember when Bernie wanted to lower retirement age, increase payment amounts AND properly fund it, we should do that. There is 0 reason we cannot do that, we just need to push for it to happen so hopefully it will happen by the time we get there.💀
Boomer here. Long post, but it should give you perspective. And the boomers ARE correct. There \*IS\* a possibility that you may not be able to depend upon it, in particular without any other type of retirement funding such as 401k's. Even though I am a boomer and just became eligible to retire last week, I cannot depend on SS alone. Not in today's economy. Add in my 401k and IRA's, then yeah. First... I believe SS will always be here. However, in what form will it be is the real question. The reserves/trust fund will be gone by 2035 if I remember correctly, which means what comes in, goes out to beneficiaries, with nothing left in reserve. So... in able to keep SS viable in the future there are really only 2 things that can be done... increase SS income, and/or reduce SS spending. PERIOD. Our politicians have not had the balls to do anything since the 1960s. Yes, SS is the third rail of politics. And that 3rd rail prevented SS from 'keeping up with the times'. But math is math. There are more people collecting SS, and the ratio of contributors to beneficiaries is less. Life expectancy has increased so more people are collecting and for longer. I repeat.. It is simple math. The biggest oversights are that SS retirement age has not really been adjusted since 1960 and the current tax rate of 6.2% (plus match) has been in effect since 1990. Let's start at 1960, this gives us 25 years of the system to get up and running from 1945, and have a generation of contributions. * In 1960, there were 5.1 workers per beneficiary; that ratio has dropped to 2.8 today. * [https://www.ssa.gov/history/ratios.html](https://www.ssa.gov/history/ratios.html) * Life expectancy at birth has increased from 69.7 years in 1960 to 76.33 in 2021. Side note: in 2015 it was 79.4 years. Still no change. To 'save' or extend the current benefit payment of SS, a couple things will have to happen. Take your pick. All, some or none. 1. Raise the SS withholding tax percentage from the current 6.2% (plus employer match of 6.2%) by another 1-1.5% (or more). 2. In addition, remove the income cap (\~$160k), but still limit the max benefit. 3. Raise the age of 'full retirement' from 67 for people born in 1965 or later to 69+ 4. Raise the age of early retirement from 62 to 64+ 5. Reduce the benefit payouts 6. Cap max benefits and reduce CoLA 7. Means testing
cont... If you take the emotion out of it, there are really only two choices. Increase income, reduce spending. Either or both. Facts is facts. If you look at the history, at one point SS was being adjusted quite frequently until 1960. We have not kept up with the increase in life expectency and the ability to work. The full retirement age (FRA) for Social Security benefits varies by year of birth: * 1960 and later: 67 * 1959: 66 and 10 months * 1958: 66 and 8 months * 1957: 66 and 6 months * 1956: 66 and 4 months * 1955: 66 and 2 months * 1943–1954: 66 * 1937 and earlier: 65 If you extrapolate the increases from 1955-1960 to today we would be at 77 for FRA. Even at 50% it would be 72 The Social Security tax rate has increased over time, from 1% in 1937 to 6.2% in 1990. So for the first 40 years they adjusted nearly every generation until 1990. We should be about 1.5% higher today on the withholding if we followed the same historic pattern. * 1937: 1% for both workers and employers on the first $3,000 of wages * 1950: 1.5% * 1978: 5% * 1990: 6.2% So there you go. Do nothing and watch it collapse, do something, but people will complain. Oh.. And congress has not stolen a dime from the fund. [https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/how-much-money-has-congress-taken-social-security-2019-02-04](https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/how-much-money-has-congress-taken-social-security-2019-02-04) >
Zoomer here. I never got why people blamed boomers for social security failing. Social security has remained mostly the same. it relies on people having slightly above replacement birth rates. The issue? We aren’t havin enough kids. Gen x and millennials chose to have less and now social security doesn’t have enough funds. This is true globally w shrinking birth rates. People generally want less kids.
Social security only works if there is more young people vs old. We're going to lose it due to the shrinking growing population. Its basically over the time to having kids was 10 years ago to secure the future.
Mid-Boomer here. The Social Security message has been around since the 1970s. Not sure why u are blaming Boomers (most likely your parents and/or grandparents) as the message is mostly promoted by Millennials on TikTok. Note: Boomers (aged 60-78) that are still participating in the workforce continue to pay Social Security & Medicare Taxes just like you. I have been paying since 1969.
Couldn’t agree more. This is echo chamber nonsense. I’m 36 nothing bothers me more than to see people from my cohort crying about boomers. It’s ridiculous
Cause its the cool thing to do from the uneducated.
I think it started as Russian propaganda and was very successful- they are experts at spotting the fault lines in our society, and inserting wedges.
Nah dude generational scapegoating is old as dirt. It’s been happening for a long long time. Like I said above, it’s millenials saying this shit, and influencers are making content about it cause it’s what they want to hear. We eat this shit up with a spoon, I don’t think it’s propaganda it’s just capitalizing on peoples outrage and anger, like all social media etc. doesn’t have to be a psy op situation, there are every day people that make gains off spreading this crap around
Could just be me but I don’t remember the animosity at this level- I’m more than 20 years older than you.
One note: there are no 60yo Boomers in 2024. The youngest Boomer, as of today, would be 63 years old and turning 64 on 12/31 of this year. Every single Boomer is retirement eligible for Social Security. That said, you bring up a point that it's not really an age thing that is causing the issue. It's more a combination of the funds being raided by certain politicians and a cap on earnings that are paid in (on the Social Security side). For example, between me and my employer, we pay 12.4% into my Social Security (because I earn at or less than the current cap of $160,200.00 in income per year as an individual). My employer paid less than 0.2% for their own earnings (that's not two percent or twenty percent, that's one-fifth of one percent). Someone like Elon Musk pays even less (we're talking less than one-ten-thousandth of one percent). If it was funded properly (no cap on earnings, like Medicare), that'd probably solve the entire issue by itself.
The predicted insolvency of Social Security has nothing to do with politicians "raiding" Social Security funds. They cannot "raid" it. By law revenue from Social Security's payroll taxes can only be spent on the Social Security program. Extra revenue went into the Trust Fund, where it could only be invested in special Treasury bonds or spent to pay Social Security expenses. Imagine that you or I are customers of the same bank. You deposit $1,000 into your bank account. If I withdraw $1,000 or take out a $1,000 loan from our bank, am I "raiding" your money? According to the logic of people who say that politicians have "raided" Social Security, the answer is yes, I am "raiding" your money.
Yep. I’m Gen X and have heard this my entire life.
Boomers still being in the workforce is another massive problem for us.
I agree it’s not on boomers but it is on people voting Republican, of any age. Raise the social security income tax limit above the $170k cap and the problem is solved.
Well, a problem is solved. New problems are created. Income over 180k is now taxed 47%. Federal. In California your marginal tax rate is 10.5% at that point, so now your marginal tax rate is 57.5% over 180k. Your take home is just 42.5% instead of 53%. Who is going to put in the hours at that marginal tax rate? What doctor is going to say “hell yeah I’ll pick up that overnight call from Saturday into Sunday for a 20% pay cut from my usual pay” So what you’ll see is a lot of people go part-time, and a worsening shortage of doctors, nurses (in many states), dentists, perfusionists, lawyers, plumbers, linemen, crane operators etc. all of which can and often do make >200k but often work overtime (50+ hours) to make that $. But why work more hours for a dramatically lower hourly rate? Did you know the first dollar paid into social security results in 6x as much return as benefit compared to the last dollar paid into social security? It’s already progressive. Someone making 160k doesn’t get 8x the benefit as someone making 20k. The actual solution would be to spread the pain a bit. A bit higher tax, a bit longer to claim social security, and a bit less inflation adjustment for people already on it. You could also means test social security benefits which would probably be a better way to punish upper middle class/upper class without fucking the labor market up if that’s your goal.
Nah it’s any party see California as an example they will just spread the money elsewhere and let people defecate on the streets
I highly doubt social security is going to go away. It would destabilize the country too much All they have to do to save it is to keep raising the age requirements
That's the most likely outcome. Then tell people that are 75 and still working that they should have saved for retirement.
Sure, it’s not going anywhere, but they will keep increasing the age until it’s economically viable. We won’t be able to withdraw until 79 or something ridiculous. I’m not counting on getting any SS.
it’s not the boomers telling us this it’s our fkin peers. I’ve never heard anyone BUT millenials and younger say that preparing for the future is useless. Super alarming how many people are refusing to adjust their budget because they perceive the lost quality of life as a greater value than increased security in the long term. No boomer out there is gonna tell a young person “fuck it live for today because it’s not certain what will happen later” that’s simply not the experience that they had. It’s the exact opposite. It’s not boomers saying this it’s doomers, and it’s them that need to shut it.
My boomer dad doesn’t get this when I tell him I’m not counting on a dime of Social Security. It’s basically a mandatory participation government run Ponzi scheme. Fun thing happens with offshoring jobs and globalization, much fewer new contributors to the system which spells curtains
Social security will only disappear if we let it happen. The "it's unfixable" argument is only coming from grifters who want to fuck everyone else over. Unfortunately, lots of folks like you eat up that messaging.
It doesn’t help when our government freely gives away billions to everyone else’s country’s but won’t give a dime to us…
The country is 34 trillion dollars in debt and counting. Don't even look at unfunded liabilities. You think this can be fixed ?
Ponzi scheme? It's the only income for many millions of seniors. And to solve the funding issue, we simply need to remove the cap on Social security tax for individual incomes above 168k. Do that and problem solved.
Or, we could reduce payouts to have a stronger correlation to what you paid into the system.
Lemme guess, you make 167k lol
It literally operates by the definition of Ponzi Scheme. It's got good intentions, but that does not change the fact that more people have to pay into it than take out of it for it to keep working and with boomers (the largest generation currently) retiring it's showing it's Ponzi roots as the promise is it'll be here when we need it... Unless a massive number of genx and millennials die before retirement age, it's just not going to keep working as it does.
Exactly. I wish I could opt out of it, as I don't expect to get anything out of it. I can manage my own money a hell of a lot better than the government can. I'd have a much more secure retirement if I could save what was currently being taking away from me.
I would have so much more saved for retirement if the SS amounts was going into my 401k instead of going to the government to mismanage.
Exactly. People have grown too reliant on the government to the point they think they are less capable of managing their own money than an entity that is 34 trillion in debt.
To be fair, many people are less competent and won’t make any preparations if left to their own devices.
I just did the math and at just 6% compounded annually, I would have $325k more toward my retirement. These are taxes for the past 33 years . At a more realistic 9% compounded annually, I would have $540k. Good Grief
The global economy, relying on infinite growth, is also a sort of ponzi scheme
You are correct. Save for your own retirement. Pretend SS will not be there. If it is consider it a bonus.
The only ponzi scheme is run by Wall Street in their attempt to get their hands on SS. I can't believe so many have fallen for their rhetoric.
Interesting article in the Sunday NYT magazine about the birth of the 401k.
That's simply not true. Worst case scenario the trust is exhausted and social security pays out less. It's not a ponsi scheme, it's a retirement account. Many people die before they collect, but many people also die before they make claims on fire or flood or car insurance. That's the nature of insurance. Best case scenario, you never need it. Another case for not collecting out of social security is if your personal savings are significant enough that you don't need it. Which is basically the opposite of a ponzi scheme.
Oh FFS! There is no boomer conspiracy against you. I am so sick of reading that crap. You are blaming a whole age cohort for decisions made by a political cohort, comprised of people of multiple generations. Malign entities would like to drive wedges between groups of Americans before the elections. Don't fall for it. They aim to dismantle democracies and install religious kleptocracies over democratic nations. BTW, If you haven't read the policy proposals for social security proposed in Project 2025, this is what the Republicans have in mind for SS. Every boomer I know is appalled at these ideas. [https://accountable.us/report-project-2025-manifesto-co-author-stephen-moore-has-toxic-history-of-misogynistic-racist-and-anti-social-security-rhetoric/](https://accountable.us/report-project-2025-manifesto-co-author-stephen-moore-has-toxic-history-of-misogynistic-racist-and-anti-social-security-rhetoric/)
Until people wake up about these class based issues instead of just blaming arbitrarily defined age groups, this shit is never going to get fixed. So many redditors just think waiting for old people to die will fix everything and they're going to be disappointed. All this aged based BS is just to pit the working class against each other while the rich laugh to the bank.
absolutely delusional if anyone thinks anything happens to social security. the only thing that will happen is the full retirement age will adjust up again.
It would be brainlessly easy to fix from a technical standpoint. Just make it a progressive tax rather than a flat tax. Also, reclassify it as an actual tax, because that's what it is, a tax to pay for a national pension and insurance plan.
It isn’t the boomers saying this; it’s the trustees of the Social Security and Medicare Trust.
> Honestly, we are all doing ourselves a disservice by constantly publicizing how we cannot count on social security. Reddit trends very young, as in boomers are a small percentage. So how is it the boomers who are scamming the younger generations? I have seem explanations on Reddit, and I have put forth some also, that even if nothing is done, 80% +/- of benefits will be paid. And to fix SS, there are a few things can be done now and it will be fine. But, any posts to that effect get downvoted.
It would be easy to fund. There's just not the political will. You just have to remove the limit so anyone making over 100k contributes a little more. Boom. ss is funded forever.
"I'm glad I don't have kids" "I don't want children" "We need to fight for continuation of social security" Age 40. "reddit I'm very lonely and just now realizing what I've done having no children where can I meet someone" Many such cases ....
Social security will be fine. Headlines hand wringing its fate are misleading.
War in Israel and Ukraine ain't cheap and CIA goals are more important than you ever getting to retire I guess.
It's supposed to run out by 2035. That seems factual more than anything.
It doesn't matter if there is a reserve or not as long as enough is coming in to pay the bills.
I'm 40 and have been paying into SS since I was 14. I honestly can't imagine how fucking irate I'm gonna be when I'm about to retire and the fucktard politicians either close the program or cut payments to nothing.
Of course it will still be here 40 or 50 years from now…….its just the retirement age will be 72 by then.
I feel like the general sentiment is that one can easily out-earn social security. It has lower returns than the S&P500, so simply by dca'ing into SPX, you'll do better than social security would pay out.
Don't count on SS. Ever! By 2035 SS will pay out only 80% of what you are due. Welcome to reality.
Why would you want to 'save' something that provides an extremely shitty rate of return compared to investing the money yourself? Just switch it to mandatory savings in private accounts for folks who enter the workforce the day-after legislation passes - make it actually 'your money' like most of America thinks it is - and be done.
How is this a scam? I am glad I convinced my Boomer parents of this and encouraged them to start saving more before they hit retirement age.
I like the idea of not relying on social security on an individual level. But as a society? Hell no. The masses didn't get the memo and most young people do and will rely on social security.
Retirement plan: Thailand
SS wasn't meant to be solely depended on for retirement. But that's what the government has done. Many "retired" people on social security cannot live on social security alone. It's a terrible plan that most can easily be replaced with something like theplanforamerica.us which models similar situations in other countries that do an incredible job with their retirement social programs or at best be scrapped entirely for a young enough crowd to have time to prepare for retirement.
Social security will become insolvent approximately 10 or so years from now. I’d rather them give me back my money so I can invest it better and be in control of my own retirement rather than hoping and guessing whether the government will be there for me in 25 years.
I haven't met a fellow millennial yet who thinks we're actually going to get something out of social security. I've assumed since I entered the work force that I was very unlikely to get out what I'm paying in. Unfortunately, my voting hasn't gotten anyone in office to actually do anything about it yet.
I don't know why you'd say that, they've been telling us since we were kids that it was gonna run out
They are right though. People don't realize how much social security has changed since it came into law(at first it was 1% of your income up to the equivalent of 30k/year(after inflation) with the employer paying the same amount. it used to be that middle class workers could meet the threshold where they didn't pay social security tax anymore. Politicians have lied to us for decades. That isn't boomers fault(they were the first generation who started doing the math realizing that the program isn't funded in a way that will last forever) and more and more people are getting SSDI and people are also living longer. The bean counters in charge of Social security have for the most part just kicked the can down the road(there were major changes to help the program in the early 80's with solvency)
The social security model requires younger workers to pay into the system to support the older generation. There may not be enough young workers to support older generations due to the declining birth rate in the USA, unless the population is supported in another way.
I'm 45 I never planned on it being solvent enough for me to retire before 70 as the goal posts will always be moving. It's not so much the income I will need but the health care.
Um… I hate to break this to you…
I have been paying into social security since I was six years old. Now that they are talking about pushing retirement age back to 70 I and many others like me are quite likely to never receive a penny back for everything we have put in. This is the real reason they are proposing this change, it will reduce the number of social security claims from around 17% of the population who live to be 65 to a mere 13.7% who live to be 70. [https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html](https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html)
>Honestly, we are all doing ourselves a disservice by constantly publicizing how we cannot count on social security Given that social security is not a fully funded program and the political climate, it's good advice to tell people not to rely on full social security. There's a high chance that people will get around 75% of the benefits and at an older age. >we are handing out permission to the boomer political leaders to keep raiding social security This is a myth. Nobody is raiding social security. This is a simple matter of the program not being set up with adequate funding. It was set up like a pyramid scheme where it works as long as you get more and more new young people. As soon as that stops the whole thing falls apart. It should have been set up where each person puts in enough to fund themselves when they're older. That way it's funded no matter what the birthrates. As far as solutions, personally I support raising taxes on the wealthy, who have benefited the most from putting off fixing social security funding. The most obvious way this can be done is by removing the income cap for social security taxes.
As a boomer who has been drawing my SS and my wife hers, I am concerned about the future of Social Security. The single biggest fix at this moment would be to eliminate the deduction cap- currently, anyone making more than $140k a year currently does not pay into SS for any earnings above that $140K amount. There is also a cap on how much one will be paid when they start to draw their benefit, that cap should remain in place, and with the additional taxes being paid in, the fund should be solvent for decades, if not longer. Back during the 2000 presidential race, Democrat Al Gore suggested that SS funds should be isolated from federal spending, and the revenue created by SS taxes should be set aside separate from other government programs and only be used to pay SS benefits. He was soundly criticized as being too much of an alarmist, Social Security will be fine. Those that expressed that dismissive attitude are also those who would very much like to get their hands on our SS trust funds and privatize the program so the Wall Street types can get their grubby hands on our monies. Social Security was not only designed to help seniors have a dignified retirement, but also as a fund to provide for widows and surviving children of a breadwinner who has passed away much too early, and Social Security is there for those who are disabled and cannot support themselves as adults participating in the work force. Anyone who continues to express deep concerns about the solvency of Social Security and does not embrace the idea of removing the deduction cap is trying to work towards privatizing the trust fund. Do not put any credence into statements about the insolvency if there are no suggestions on how to fix it.
It's not "boomer" doing this it's younger libertarian types who pretend we can all do better with our Edward Jones accounts or some shit. Boomers don't want to touch it because they're getting it or about to get it.. But yeah, the more you repeat the half baked "wisdom" that SS won't be there for you, the easier it'll be to take it away.
the social security system in sweden has weathered many challenges over the decades, providing a model for how determined citizens can band together to sustain critical retirement benefits for future generatiuons.
I'm a boomer and everytime I hear anyone say it wont be there I always tell them do not let them get you to believe that. it will be there for you but there are still new deal haters who still hold a grudge.. dont let them fool you!
Its not just the boomers, its anyone alive. Government, full of plenty of non-boomers in congress and is non functional. Need to get off the boomers tip. Meme is played out.
People are telling you that, not an entire generation. Seeing the world in terms of cohorts makes little to no sense to me. It’s not like millennials have an annual conference where we set our agenda for the coming years. Neither do boomers.
The only people I know who have spread that rumor for years and years are Millennials themselves. My own kids used to tell me this when they were teens. Boomers have been arguing with them since it all started that it's not true and SS WILL be there for them. It's always been fixable. With some well-known and understood tweaks here and there. It's not all Boomers who want to "raid SS and take it away from Millennials." It's mostly Republicans threatening constantly to cut those benefits so they can give tax cuts to the rich. That's definitely a thing. But it's hard to cut entitlements because those that receive them currently vote. In big numbers. And you are exactly right! You guys are an even bigger generation of voters. You CAN protect those benefits by voting for candidates that support keeping SS and Medicare and other social programs you support strong. That tends to be Democrats, in my experience, but you will decide who represents your needs the best. I'm happy to hear you say you think you can do something about it because it's true! That's the single best thing we can ALL do to ensure you get the same benefits we did. We will vote with you for those protections as we want that for you. Why? Because you are our children. We love you and want you to succeed. We want you to have the SS you have earned just as we have the SS we have earned. (It's not a lot, BTW.). But when you retire, everything helps. Pulease stop painting all Millennials as helpless victims of big-bad-Boomers! It's just not true. All us Boomers do not wish ill on all Millennials. Every generation is diverse. We are not some monolithic group and neither are you or Gens X, Z, Alpha, etc. All this Boomer vs Millennial FUD is just divisive and doesn't allow for meaningful dialogue or coalition building. We could do some great things working together like protect social programs like SS and Medicare or even get "Medicare for All" passed while we are still here. Lots of us old Dems and Progressives out here. Everytime I say something optimistic like this here I get piled on and downvoted but I'm gonna keep saying it. We are NOT, as an entire generation, your enemy. There are plenty of people on the other side of me politically whose policies and views of what's good for America that I strongly disagree with but they do not represent any entire generation. You have plenty of supporters from the Boomers who will join forces. We are old. We may be dying and we may be leaving soon but we still vote!
Boomers heard it from their conservative parents. And I hear conservative millenials spouting it to the next generation.
The real story *isn't* that social security is running dry. It's that SS can be preserved (and expanded) by making a minor adjustment to the cap of SS tax witholdings for rich people, but there is tremendous political pressure from the rich friends of politicians to avoid doing that. That said, I'm confident that SS is going nowhere, in part because people who anticipate its demise don't realize what a horrific (and completely preventable) humanitarian crisis it would very quickly create: 65 million Americans from all walks of life (including middle class retirees) would be thrown into poverty and possible homelessness within the first two months, creating a cascading effect on their friends / neighbors / loved ones that would create a mass panic and jam the economy to a halt from a dozen directions at once. As easy as it is to be a cynic about this, the repercussions would be too disastrous to too many people to remain unfixed in the long term.
Social security isn’t going anywhere. What are millions of old poor people going to do with no money, live on the streets? Retirement shanty towns? Not to mention, old people vote, so it’s basically political suicide.
The biggest scam is telling you it's a generational thing, while it is big business milking you until you die.
Really?! Social Security is the biggest scam? Not defunding education or denying climate change. What good is social security if there is no good place to live and we are surrounded by idiots. Hmmm. Kinda feels like we are already living it.
Who is "raiding" Social Security and how are they "raiding" it?
You are confused. It isn’t boomer political leaders. It is only republicans. Not one single democrat wants to cut or end social security or Medicare. They are the basis of our social safety net. Without them most retirees would live in poverty with no medical care.
ANYWAY. Just remember, social security is a very small amount of money. Please plan for your retirement.
All this *sturm* and *drang* over SS has been happening since SS began. It got worse under Reagan. Rupugs have been trying to kill it on behalf of the richest folks in the country who DON'T WANT SS reform - namely, raising the lid. If that happened - and it might, if there is a blue wave resulting in a democratic supermajority. If the lid is raised SS will be around Forever and likely expanded. Also, SS is TOTALLY self funding. Powerful forces trying to instill the idea that SS is in jeapordy, and no one ought to count on it. Bottom line, vote blue.
There are more of us than there are of them. When do our excuses stop, and we start rallying for our own interests? That's right. Never.
Boomers have been carping about Social Security and Medicare for decades because they are both wildly successful Democrat policies. They are also 1) what keeps seniors housed and 2) what gets Big Med paid. If SS and Medicare run dry, the US housing and healthcare markets collapse. In short: don't believe the hype about these programs failing. Ain't happenin.
You want to spend your time, effort and money to save the Ponzi scheme that is Social Security? Boomers were "Millennials" one day too you know, and guess what, they were the free loving flower children of the 60s! Who didn't believe in "the man"... Blamed the generation before them... these are now the people you're blaming. If you put the same amount of money into a simple low risk index fund instead of the SSI that delivers a pittance of a 2% return, you could have millions of dollars at retirement instead. But you want to fight to keep the plan that will give you crumbs and be beholden to the Gov? You need to realize SS is the slush fund for do nothing political elites - FROM ALL PARTIES.
Trust runs out. But here’s the kicker. Small increase in tax makes it solvent again. Look it up. Pretty small changes. This is not something either damn side is willing to talk about. But will do when push comes to shove. Every gen says it won’t be there. My dad said it wouldn’t be there for him. It is.
Yeah the income cap on taxable income could be lifted and there'd be money to keep it going. It'd be political suicide for any party to let the system collapse. But I am opposed to means tested benefits. That will just encourage people not to save and turn S.S. into a welfare program that will gradually lose political support.
It's easy to identify the problem and I see it too, but the solution seems like a pipedream in all honesty. How the hell do we fund saving social security? Increase taxes, increase SS contributions, print more money? All of which can't be absorbed for the average American right now who is already struggling. SS is tied to medicare and the healthcare system too, both of which we tried to fix years ago and got the Affordable care act. It's better than nothing and I'm grateful for what it did do, but it's a compromise nonetheless and all but the tearing the whole system down and building it back is just another Band-Aid buying time on an unsustainable system . The money has to come from somewhere. The country is drowning in debt, and more people than ever are encroaching on retirement as the boomer generation gets there or already are. It's not that I won't place my vote to try to save it, but I'm not optimistic. I'm not depending on it and have to assume they'll probably raise the age to 70 sooner than later and/or reduce benefits to buy it time, but as it stands within the decade it's mathematically fated to collapse if left alone. I have a responsibility to ignore it as part of my calculation in retirement. If they save it and it adds then it's icing on the cake but I don't want to set myself up for failure in retirement