Thread: Social Security

Heres how it works and why, if you can't even figure that out

Who was the first to receive Social Security benefits?
During the Social Security program's start-up period between January 1937 and December 1939, the SSA only made one-time, lump-sum payments. According to SSA historians, Ernest Ackerman was the first recipient of Social Security benefits -- 17 cents, paid to him in January 1937

That first Social Security record was assigned to a 23-year-old New York man, John David Sweeney, Jr.. Ironically, Sweeney died in 1974 at the age of 61 without ever receiving any Social Security benefits (full retirement age was initially set at 65; today, benefits are reduced by five-ninths of 1 percent for each month you are retired before 65, up to a maximum of 20 percent for people who retire the month they reach 62).

Organized theft? One person 'pays' and gets nothing while another 'pays' nothing and gets everything?

Every example you post just ends up shooting you in the foot.

Milkman, That is all well and good, unless the market dumps, which it can and does try every once in awhile, and is propped back up by thr govt. but not before some loose a lot of their money if not all,
Look what happen to ENRON and a few others, I don't pay much attention to that because I will never be into it,
I did buy a ins/retirement policy when i was first married in 1954 and it was a pretty high premium and a high payout if I died, I paid on it every month for years and in 1967 when i was getting ready to go to Vietnam I signed control over to my wife, I did come back but never had it signed back over to me, then in 1983 I met this cute little dolly, I was running with a biker club,, and this fox could give the best head in the world and had a teeny little pussy so dumped my wife of 32 years and loaded the chicky on my scoot and split, anyway she met a dude in calif. and in 1989 sold my god damn retirement policy for cash and bought a god damn house.
All I got out of it was some fantastic head and some tight snatch..

Only feel that way if you are an underachiever and a stingy all for me and none for you kind of asshole.
Sure be a hell of a place to have to live if everyone felt that way.
I dont think you will ever live to retire anyway, being so tight you can't fart and will blow up someday soon, damn I hope I see that..HA

Originally Posted by stroller

Fascinating, I didn't know this varies so much between states. Is there no "Federal Tax"?

There are several levels of taxation (ironically the reason given for the Revolution was taxes....not the big lie about 'taxation without representation' as taught but in reality the power to tax and spend locally is what the war was about).

Federal taxes: varying sources; mostly from income taxes on corporate earnings and personal income; taxes on imports; money raised by the sale of the broadcast spectrum, etc. Personal income taxes are reported on any activity which generates profit (sale of a home, working, owning a business, sale of stock, etc). Personal income taxes consist of three taxes: Federal income tax, Social Security tax, and Medicare taxes. Federal income taxes have several different tiers depending on adjusted gross income...from about 15% up to 33%. Social Security tax is a flat 12.5% on all income from $1 up to $97,000. Medicare is about 1.5% on all income from $1 to infinity.

State taxes: most states have income taxes that range from 1% up to around 9% (with some states having no income tax whatsoever).

Individual Income Tax Rates-2007

Many states also have a sales tax on most goods purchased with the usual exceptions of uncooked food, clothes, drugs, and gasoline. States may also have a statewide tax to pay for special projects for a fixed length of time.

Cities and counties: this is where it gets messy. They may have income taxes, sales taxes, bed taxes, property taxes on houses and/or vehicles and boats, restaurant taxes, etc. Bond issues may allow for temporary taxes as well. Regional authorities may also impliment taxes for such things as mass transit or wastewater treatment.

This thread deals with one specific tax only: the separate Social Security tax that all people (with some exception due to religious reasons) must pay on their paychecks (or must pay if self-employed) that is paid only to the Federal government and is only subject to the $97000 income limit.

I propose we eliminate this tax and all other income taxes entirely and replace them with personal responsibility and consumption taxes.

Originally Posted by blackgang

Only feel that way if you are an underachiever and a stingy all for me and none for you kind of asshole.
Sure be a hell of a place to have to live if everyone felt that way.
I dont think you will ever live to retire anyway, being so tight you can't fart and will blow up someday soon, damn I hope I see that..HA

The worst kind of asshole is the leech who expects others to work so he can keep the Social Security checks flowing.

By the year 2080 both Social Security and Medicare are expected to consume almost 20% of the U.S. GDP. That means for every $5 of economic activity taking care of the elderly using the big taxpayer credit card will consume $1 of that output. Trillions of dollars. That is not fair.

Now I wait for someone to tell me that the SS Trustees are lying and don't know what they speak of.

Question: when outlays exceed inflow then how will a trust fund exist? You can't even sell worthless bonds to the Federal government without a surplus.

Failure.

Social Security
The annual cost of Social Security benefits represents 4.2 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) in 2005 and is projected to rise to 6.2 percent of GDP in 2030, and then slightly to 6.3 percent of GDP in 2080. The projected 75-year actuarial deficit in the combined Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) and Disability Insurance (DI) Trust Funds is 2.02 percent of taxable payroll, up from 1.92 percent in last year's report. This increase is due primarily to advancing the projection period, the availability of recent data that led to revisions in key assumptions, and to changes in methods. Although the program passes our short-range test of financial adequacy, it continues to fail our long-range test of close actuarial balance by a wide margin. Projected OASDI tax income will begin to fall short of outlays in 2017, and will be sufficient to finance only 74 percent of scheduled annual benefits in 2040, when the combined OASDI trust fund is projected to be exhausted.

Social Security could be brought into actuarial balance over the next 75 years in various ways, including an immediate increase of 16 percent in payroll tax revenues or an immediate reduction in benefits of 13 percent (or some combination of the two). To the extent that changes are delayed or phased in gradually, greater adjustments in scheduled benefits and revenues would be required. Ensuring that the system is solvent on a sustainable basis over the next 75 years and beyond would also require larger changes.

Medicare
As we reported last year, Medicare's financial difficulties come sooner-and are much more severe-than those confronting Social Security. While both programs face demographic challenges, the impact is more severe for Medicare because health care costs increase at older ages. Moreover, underlying health care costs per enrollee are projected to rise faster than the wages per worker on which the payroll tax is paid and on which Social Security benefits are based. As a result, while Medicare's annual costs were 2.7 percent of GDP in 2005, or over 60 percent of Social Security's, they are now projected to surpass Social Security expenditures in a little more than 20 years and reach 11 percent of GDP in 2080.

Summary of the 2006 Annual Reports

OH, OK Now I think I realize what sukasak has been talking and bitching about when he said "I can go the the bank and get my money in cash" or"The social Security Fund is broke, they have no money".
Well it appears that he is so fucking stupid that he thinks that everything is cash,green frog skin dollars, he thinks that because a Bank says it has 123 billion dollars in assets that in that bank should be 123 billion dollars in frog skins, and the general fund says they have $96 trillion that they will have that amount of US $1 bills in a pile. Must think that all money listed by anyone will be in actual green and buried in a tomato can out in the back yard.
He is just the kind of mentality that we are going to have to leave this world to and so in the near future that kind of stupidity can be in evidence when this world finally self destructs and the powers that be can see this, and thats why my friends that the world is in such shape, as there is no hope for a lasting world with such thinking inside the box.

Could somebody please beat some guilt into me for drawing my retired military welfare pension ? I feel so guilty ... and it's only going to get worse when I turn 62 in about 17 years.

Some posters in this thread sound pretty sour about their inability to do a little prior proper planning for their future. Instead of doing your par for the course wanking ... tell us what you're doing to overcome your dire predictions. It would be more constructive moron.

P.S. (Getting those annual cost of living adjustments is gonna be a bummer as well)

Originally Posted by Storekeeper

Could somebody please beat some guilt into me for drawing my retired military welfare pension ? I feel so guilty ... and it's only going to get worse when I turn 62 in about 17 years.

Some posters in this thread sound pretty sour about their inability to do a little prior proper planning for their future. Instead of doing your par for the course wanking ... tell us what you're doing to overcome your dire predictions. It would be more constructive moron.

P.S. (Getting those annual cost of living adjustments is gonna be a bummer as well)

I think the posters that have made "sour" comments about SSA, are planning ahead right now.

401K, ROTH IRAs, Target Retirement Funds, and some RE, stocks, mutuals and other things on the side.

This isn't really about a failure to plan, IMO.

I think it's about the structure and solvency of not only the current, but
future SSA.

I've read letters and editorials in magazines such as Kiplingers and Money where some economists claim the dire predictions for SS are simply untrue.

I'm not going to worry about it any more. I believe SS will always be around in some form.

And I don't believe your smart ass comments towards those who are already drawing SS serve any useful purpose. If they're drawing it ... they EARNED it ... period.

They don't deserve my money or support.

If everyone stopped contributing the elderly would get nothing.

It's little more than organized theft.

If it's still around when you're eligible ... hopefully you'll stand by your principles and not draw it.

The elderly aren't stealing anything. They earned it.

Originally Posted by Storekeeper

I've read letters and editorials in magazines such as Kiplingers and Money where some economists claim the dire predictions for SS are simply untrue.

I'm not going to worry about it any more. I believe SS will always be around in some form.

And I don't believe your smart ass comments towards those who are already drawing SS serve any useful purpose. If they're drawing it ... they EARNED it ... period.

Perhaps you haven't read my posts carefully enough.

I don't recall making smart ass comments towards people drawing, although I may have criticized some.

I also have stated that people that are getting it now, should be compensated. But that the conditions and age of eligibility should be changed.

Of course SS "will be around" in some form or another. That's not the issue.

As for some economists in Kiplinger's and Money making these claims, they are in the minority.

Check out what Greenspan and Bernanke are saying.

By the way ... you can still start drawing at 62. Your OP is misleading that you won't be eligible till your 67.

Originally Posted by Milkman

People in their sixties should be cut-off from all social security, forced to pay it back to people that actually work for a living.

When these welfare dirtbags in their 60s are 75, then they should get this welfare called "social security" because they hopefully be dead within 3 years.

Please die soon, old useless, farts. You're f*cking useless.

^ Please provide a link.

You need to put up a link to these words of wisdom.


Thank you.

Earning is what one achieves through work.

Taking money without working is either welfare or theft.
Now, if the elderly were out picking up trash in exchange for those SS checks then that would be earning the money.

It's time to shut down the scam, pay back everyone $1 for every $1 that they paid in, and put an end to politicians having control of 15% of our money.

Originally Posted by Milkman

^ Please provide a link.

You need to put up a link to these words of wisdom.


Thank you.

Don't you get an annual SS statement ?

The law was changed several years ago that you don't draw FUll benefits till 67.

I know I'm right and I'm not going to research it to find a link for you.

You don't get the SS benefits unless you worked to earn them.

You need to work to change the laws if you don't like them instead of flappin' your jaws.

Originally Posted by Milkman

^ I get an SS statement every year.

I've got mine right in front of me. It tells me I'll be drawing $1208 a month at age 62 at my current earnings rate and $1763 at age 67.

It also states that unless there are changes SS will be exhausted by 2040.

Are you sure you get a statement ?

I've paid over $42,000 into the SSTF and my employer has matched it at age 45.

I've earned the right to draw it. And since I've earned a healthy military retirement I'm willing to forfeit my SS if it will help the elderly.