If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
OT SS going to the source
http://www.ssa.gov/retire2/index.htm Quoting here Your Social Security benefits are the foundation on which you can build a secure retirement. Most financial advisors say you'll need about 70 percent of your pre-retirement earnings to comfortably maintain your pre-retirement standard of living. Under current law, if you have average earnings, your Social Security retirement benefits will replace only about 40 percent, so you'll need to supplement your benefits with a pension, savings or investments. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Cheryl Isaak wrote:
Quoting here Your Social Security benefits are the foundation on which you can build a secure retirement. Or, if you are like me, you can kiss that money good-bye permanently and hope there's something extra to save somewhere for retirement, as current projections are that all of my hard-earned "retirement" money will have been spent on other people with nothing left for me/my kids as of 2-5 years (depending on source of calculations) before my retirement - and that's assuming I'm allowed to retire at age 65. Not against SS in theory, but very resentful of those who put the program into place as it is without thinking things through in the first place, leading to massive problems we have now. Also tired of politicians who seem to be concerned only with keeping it solvent through *their* retirement, no matter what the cost to those of us who are younger. (And I hope there are exceptions to that statement!) Barbara HJ |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
On 1/6/05 3:05 PM, in article ,
"Barbara Hass" wrote: Cheryl Isaak wrote: Quoting here Your Social Security benefits are the foundation on which you can build a secure retirement. Or, if you are like me, you can kiss that money good-bye permanently and hope there's something extra to save somewhere for retirement, as current projections are that all of my hard-earned "retirement" money will have been spent on other people with nothing left for me/my kids as of 2-5 years (depending on source of calculations) before my retirement - and that's assuming I'm allowed to retire at age 65. Not against SS in theory, but very resentful of those who put the program into place as it is without thinking things through in the first place, leading to massive problems we have now. Also tired of politicians who seem to be concerned only with keeping it solvent through *their* retirement, no matter what the cost to those of us who are younger. (And I hope there are exceptions to that statement!) Barbara HJ I fully expect to be denied SS by the time I reach 65 - less that 20 years from now. Ditto DH. We have 401k's and savings and despite pouring in dollars, will get nothing. Cheryl |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Cheryl Isaak wrote in
: On 1/6/05 3:05 PM, in article , "Barbara Hass" wrote: Cheryl Isaak wrote: Quoting here Your Social Security benefits are the foundation on which you can build a secure retirement. Or, if you are like me, you can kiss that money good-bye permanently and hope there's something extra to save somewhere for retirement, [snip] I fully expect to be denied SS by the time I reach 65 - less that 20 years from now. Ditto DH. We have 401k's and savings and despite pouring in dollars, will get nothing. If our present administration does nothing, you will get something back. The latest reports have Social Security solvent until 2042, and after that, reduced benefits can still be paid because of money still coming in. http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/TR/TR04/II_p....html#wp105057 I read elsewhere that the amount of money need to keep the SS trust solvent past 2042 is a small fraction of the tax cut afforded by the Bush Administration to the top 1% of Americans. I'll refrain from further comment on that since I can't find the source. :-) K |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re-opening this can of worms, I just heard the statistic that only 35% of
current retirees have pension income. So, that someone doesn't have a pension is *not* a matter of making poor job choices, but actually is statistically twice as likely as having lucked into a job with a pension. -- Finished 12/8/04 -- Army bear ornament WIP: Fireman's Prayer (#2), Amid Amish Life, Angel of Autumn, Calif Sampler, Holiday Snowglobe Paralegal - Writer - Editor - Researcher http://hometown.aol.com/kmc528/KMC.html |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
And of those 35%, I wonder how many didn't have it offered until late in
life. Our situation is one of those. Victoria's comment notwithstanding (luck has nothing to do with it), I beg to differ. There are only so many jobs, a growing population, a set of birth circumstances. Luck (or the gods, if you prefer) can play a huge role. Not to downplay hard work. That certainly also enters into the equation. We're just not all born equally, nor does our society offer equal circumstances. That's a common myth. The idea of pulling oneself up by the bootstraps is a worthy value. But the miracles of a few doesn't make it so for the masses. We can also point to those who make poor choices. But to paint the masses that didn't make it into that proverbial corner is equally unfair and untrue. Dianne Karen C - California wrote: Re-opening this can of worms, I just heard the statistic that only 35% of current retirees have pension income. So, that someone doesn't have a pension is *not* a matter of making poor job choices, but actually is statistically twice as likely as having lucked into a job with a pension. -- "The Journal of Needlework" - The E-zine for All Needleworkers http://journal.heritageshoppe.com |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Hi Barbara
Perhaps I should post some FACTS concerning Social Security, since there are so many MISCONCEPTIONS about it floating around. The Social Security ACT was signed into Law by FDR on 8/14/35. The First Taxes collected to fuel the SSA started on Jan. 1937, with a few LUMP SUM Payments made in that month. The first lump sum payment was 17 cents. Regular monthly benefits did not start until January of 1940. As an aside: Medicare passed into law July 30, 1965, but beneficiaries could not sign up for the program until July 1, 1966. ORIGINALLY: Social Security WAS just a retirement program under 1935 Law. Social Security was designed to be totally self-supporting. At the time of inception, it was estimated that by 1980 there would be over 47 Billion Dollars in Reserve Funds. They reached this Goal 6 years faster than expected, in 1974 they were well ahead of schedule. However, the government dipped into these reserves reducing them to ONLY 26 billion in 1980, they also lost the 6.9% current interest they would have earned on that money. TODAY 2005: The Social Security Reserve Fund is Over 1 Trillion Dollars. From 1937 to 2002: The SSA has taken in 8.7 Trillion Dollars. They have only paid back out 7.4 Trillion Dollars. The Reserve Funds held in Trust by the SSA are invested in INSURED investments, no chance of loss of the principle. By Law the Reserve Funds held in Trust by the SSA, MUST DRAW INTEREST. Since 1974, when the SSA met its Reserve Trust of 47 Billion dollars, it was in perfect Balance. It had the funds to pay all current retirees and those who had paid into the system, if the SSA was shut down. Meaning the money coming into the SSA after that date could be held in Trust for the person paying it into the system. The excess collected, plus the interest collected on the Reserves, was more than sufficient to cover the operating costs of the Social Security system. Source: SSA.gov/History TTUL Gary |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Gary V. Deutschmann, Sr. wrote:
Hi Barbara Perhaps I should post some FACTS concerning Social Security, since there are so many MISCONCEPTIONS about it floating around. ORIGINALLY: Social Security WAS just a retirement program under 1935 Law. But it still started out paying retirement benefits to people who had never paid into the system, correct? Social Security was designed to be totally self-supporting. At the time of inception, it was estimated that by 1980 there would be over 47 Billion Dollars in Reserve Funds. They reached this Goal 6 years faster than expected, in 1974 they were well ahead of schedule. Interesting, did not know that. However, the government dipped into these reserves reducing them to ONLY 26 billion in 1980, they also lost the 6.9% current interest they would have earned on that money. And why don't I trust the gov't with my money? TODAY 2005: The Social Security Reserve Fund is Over 1 Trillion Dollars. From 1937 to 2002: The SSA has taken in 8.7 Trillion Dollars. They have only paid back out 7.4 Trillion Dollars. But according to my most recent mailing from SSA they are estimating running out of money before I reach retirement age. Even if that's not the case, I still wouldn't mind having the option to invest some of that money on my own. Thanks for the figures, Barbara |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Barbara Hass verbositized:
But it still started out paying retirement benefits to people who had never paid into the system, correct? Correct! And why don't I trust the gov't with my money? From what I understand, they (the government) DID pay back the principle, under duress by the people. But according to my most recent mailing from SSA they are estimating running out of money before I reach retirement age. Even if that's not the case, I still wouldn't mind having the option to invest some of that money on my own. They MAY easily RUN OUT OF MONEY, because THEY are PAYING OUT on other programs besides SS retirement, as mandated by the government. Essentially, the government is dipping their hands into the retirement funds AGAIN. TTUL Gary |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Glass Source | Michele Blank | Glass | 12 | July 17th 12 04:39 PM |
FS Machine Knitter's Source, MacKnit Magazines | ellbee | Marketplace | 0 | April 30th 04 10:21 AM |
Great new source for quilt books | Betty in Wi | Quilting | 2 | September 19th 03 12:27 PM |
coconut fibre source? | ms. brookes | Jewelry | 1 | July 26th 03 06:34 PM |
Source for jade | Peter W. Rowe | Jewelry | 0 | July 13th 03 06:20 PM |