# "The demise of social security"



## jimthesailor

It seems like every article I read talks to planning for "the demise of social security". Everyone talks like this is a done deal when in fact we have the ability to "fix" the problem using either an increase of  the income ceiling at which you no longer pay ss tax or a "slight" increase in the tax itself. 

There are many other ways we can be more creative and prop up the fund if we use are heads. It's the old saying "if you say something often enough it will become the truth". I for one don't buy it. The "baby boomers" who are "going to break the bank" are a very large voting block and should write their elected officials and demand this be addressed now while it's less painful and not in the 11th hour when all the drama queens and politicians trying to increase their polls can make a embarrassment out of it. 

Increasing the retirement age might sound appropriate for people who sit at a desk in front of a computer all day (no offense) but people who work hard physically can not keep it up into there 70's. 

We spend more on our defense budget , roughly 10 time more the next closest industrialized nation. Let's quit the discussion about the "demise" and start seeing articles about insuring the future of this vital program. 

The "three legged stool of retirement" used to be social security, company pension, and personal savings. Company pensions are a thing of the past, and if social security is diminished that will put the burden of retirement on the individual. Gee those words are familiar. Tell me what you think.


----------



## Butterfly

What we need to do, and soon, is raise the cap on social security taxable income, or eliminate it altogether.  There is no reason not to do it -- it certainly would not be a burden on the wealthy, although I'm sure they would scream their heads off.  Large employers would probably scream, too, because employers must pay half of the employee's social security tax liability.

As you say, raising the retirement age is really not workable, particularly for those who do physical labor or those whose jobs require a high degree of health, eyesight, etc.


----------



## oldman

I think most Americans of any age believe that the SS tax rate ceiling should be raised. This has been an ongoing debate for some time. There really is no other workable plan that would be fair to the majority. Raising the age limit is not workable for the reasons stated. I was a commercial airline pilot for 34 years. There is a tremendous amount of stress associated with this job and although I did my dream job and would have not wanted to do anything else, at 62, I was ready to step aside, even though I could have continued by FAA rules until 65. When I was offered the "early out incentive package", I did not hesitate to grab it. 

Those that do laborious work are probably more than willing to go out at 62. I have friends that are not professionals. Some are tool and die makers and I have one friend that works for UPS and is 66 and still driving. He complains all the time about his job and how it effects his body and so on, but won't walk away from the money, even though he has a nice pension plan and 401(k)waiting for him. He keeps telling us that when he retires he will make more money being retired than he does working, so figure that one out.


----------



## jimthesailor

Thanks "oldman" for your reply. I used to know a few pilots and air traffic controllers and the stress was a well documented topic of conversation. Congrats on being able to get out at 62 with your sanity in tack. Boy the story about your friend  that is still driving for UPS at 66 certainly resonated with me. Sometimes I feel I am like your friend and can't walk away from the industry I've been involved with for almost 40 years.  I'm a little concerned that my original thread has only gotten two responses. If this is any indication of the number of people who believe SS is a critical program and we should begin an action plan to write our elected officials and demand it's solvency for years to come I feel that inaction will result in the people who want to carve up one of the remaining legs of the stool to do so at will. Anyone who is reading this pls chime in with your feeling on this topic. Thanks again "oldman" spread the word.........


----------



## Josiah

I don't know what sources you're reading, but Social Security isn't going away and I doubt that cost of living adjusted benefits will be lowered or the retirement age raised. Instead the cap on social security taxable income will be raised. I think if the Republicans try to privatize it again they will not find a lot of support throughout the country.


----------



## Lon

Irrespective of what ever happens or is done with Social Security I would like to see the government provide tax incentives to tax payers that encourage & promote personal thrift/savings/investment.


----------



## QuickSilver

Lon said:


> Irrespective of what ever happens or is done with Social Security I would like to see the government provide tax incentives to tax payers that encourage & promote personal thrift/savings/investment.



That would be great for those making enough money to be able to save and invest.  BUT.. what about the folks that are living from paycheck to paycheck now and can barely make ends meet?   How about young families trying to raise kids?   If you give them the money in their check that would have gone to FICA.. do you REALLY think they will save it or invest it?   OR is the more likely scenario that they would buy the kids shoes or clothes that perhaps they were putting off., or put the money toward some other necessity.. like maybe medical bills.    So what happens to these people when they get ready to retire.  Tell the.. hey.. tough.. you didn't invest so now starve? 


Another thing that bugs the hell out of me about privatizing SS.  WHY give our money to the bankers on Wall Street?  Why let them play with it and perhaps gamble it away?   They would never be held accountable for the loses... but the average guy hoping to retire certainly would.  His retirement nest egg would be gone.. and the fat bankers would be bailed out by more taxpayer money...  BAD BAD..idea, this privatization..   We will be back to the days when 90% of the elderly lived in poverty, or did without healthcare..


----------



## Lon

> Quicksilver said: That would be great for those making enough money to be able to save and invest.  BUT.. what about the folks that are living from paycheck to paycheck now and can barely make ends meet?   How about young families trying to raise kids?   If you give them the money in their check that would have gone to FICA.. do you REALLY think they will save it or invest it?   OR is the more likely scenario that they would buy the kids shoes or clothes that perhaps they were putting off., or put the money toward some other necessity.. like maybe medical bills.    So what happens to these people when they get ready to retire.  Tell the.. hey.. tough.. you didn't invest so now starve?



I don't buy that one bit. Saving is a habit and everyone, no matter what they earn needs to save, and the earlier they learn that habit the better. Living from paycheck to paycheck is only necessary for people that can't learn to budget and handle money.


----------



## QuickSilver

Lon said:


> Quicksilver said: That would be great for those making enough money to be able to save and invest.  BUT.. what about the folks that are living from paycheck to paycheck now and can barely make ends meet?   How about young families trying to raise kids?   If you give them the money in their check that would have gone to FICA.. do you REALLY think they will save it or invest it?   OR is the more likely scenario that they would buy the kids shoes or clothes that perhaps they were putting off., or put the money toward some other necessity.. like maybe medical bills.    So what happens to these people when they get ready to retire.  Tell the.. hey.. tough.. you didn't invest so now starve?
> 
> I don't buy that one bit. Saving is a habit and everyone, no matter what they earn needs to save, and the earlier they learn that habit the better. Living from paycheck to paycheck is only necessary for people that can't learn to budget and handle money.




What a crock...  and pretty sanctimonious I may add..  Obviously you have been very fortunate.     BUT..  you didn't answer my question.. if a senior was not able to save and invest.. what happens to them?  Let them die?


----------



## Don M.

Lon said:


> Irrespective of what ever happens or is done with Social Security I would like to see the government provide tax incentives to tax payers that encourage & promote personal thrift/savings/investment.



The IRA/401K program is the Best thing our government has done for people in the past 50 years.  I just wish it had been around when I first started working.  Sure, it was a bit of a hit to the monthly income the first 2 or 3 months, but we quickly adjusted our spending to compensate for the money being withheld.  Now, with some careful monitoring of the mutual funds, it is a Godsend.  Company pensions are a rarity, and public pensions are coming under increased stress.  SS can be maintained with some minor adjustments....but If that's all a person has to count on, they have to watch every penny.  

Social Security Does have One thing going for it....Millions of people who count on that money every month.  Now, if they will just get out and vote Against anyone who wants to ruin that program, perhaps it will still be around for several more decades.


----------



## QuickSilver

See... now I think 401Ks were another giveaway to Banks and Wall Street.   Before that Corporations used pensions as a benefit for employees.  Then regular pensions were eliminated and replaced with 401Ks with minimal fund matching on the part of the employer.   This took all the risk of market fluctuation from the employer and placed it squarely on the retiree.   So they really didn't do their employees any big favors by doing away with pensions and using 401ks instead.


----------



## AZ Jim

Lon said:


> Quicksilver said: That would be great for those making enough money to be able to save and invest.  BUT.. what about the folks that are living from paycheck to paycheck now and can barely make ends meet?   How about young families trying to raise kids?   If you give them the money in their check that would have gone to FICA.. do you REALLY think they will save it or invest it?   OR is the more likely scenario that they would buy the kids shoes or clothes that perhaps they were putting off., or put the money toward some other necessity.. like maybe medical bills.    So what happens to these people when they get ready to retire.  Tell the.. hey.. tough.. you didn't invest so now starve?



LON, You may not "buy that" but it is a fact.  Many here have literally used every dime they had to exist.  That is without a major calamity in their lives, how about those who HAVE such a money sucking situation?  How about those who took food off their tables to buy insurance only to develop a cancer in the family the treatment having eaten up the maximum benefit.  It is easy for the fat cats to sit back and pontificate about the others but the fact is many in this country cannot save and pay their bills, buy their food, pay their rent and transportation costs.  The easy thing for the "haves" to keep a low profile in a country where we're not all "haves" is to not criticize the "have nots".  I don't want everyone to suffer as many do just to feel superior.


----------



## Underock1

Lon said:


> Quicksilver said: That would be great for those making enough money to be able to save and invest.  BUT.. what about the folks that are living from paycheck to paycheck now and can barely make ends meet?   How about young families trying to raise kids?   If you give them the money in their check that would have gone to FICA.. do you REALLY think they will save it or invest it?   OR is the more likely scenario that they would buy the kids shoes or clothes that perhaps they were putting off., or put the money toward some other necessity.. like maybe medical bills.    So what happens to these people when they get ready to retire.  Tell the.. hey.. tough.. you didn't invest so now starve?
> 
> I don't buy that one bit. Saving is a habit and everyone, no matter what they earn needs to save, and the earlier they learn that habit the better. Living from paycheck to paycheck is only necessary for people that can't learn to budget and handle money.



Lon, We agree on many things, but not on this. We worked and saved our way out of poverty.We lived in a rent controlled, vermin infested two and a half room apartment for thirteen years. No vacations. Raised two happy kids in the process. Eventually bought our paid up house in the suburbs. We lived from paycheck to paycheck for many years, living on the thin edge of disaster. 
I tell you true; the major part of our success was just plain dumb luck. I lost my job several times along the way with dim prospects. I was just extremely fortunate to find new ones. A health problem at any time would have meant the end of everything. You can't save in any meaningful way unless you have money left to save. Putting aside 1.98 once a month is not going to do it.


----------



## Lon

QuickSilver said:


> What a crock...  and pretty sanctimonious I may add..  Obviously you have been very fortunate.     BUT..  you didn't answer my question.. if a senior was not able to save and invest.. what happens to them?  Let them die?



You are assuming, as you appear to do with many of your posts, that I  am sanctimonious as well as fortunate, and lady, you haven't got a clue about me. I believe in personal responsibility and good habits. I also believe that that people that are genuinely in need should be helped. I don't believe or want t the government to have the ultimate responsibility to provide for irresponsible people to live in the same manner as those that have lived responsible lives.


----------



## Underock1

AZ Jim said:


> LON, You may not "buy that" but it is a fact.  Many here have literally used every dime they had to exist.  That is without a major calamity in their lives, how about those who HAVE such a money sucking situation?  How about those who took food off their tables to buy insurance only to develop a cancer in the family the treatment having eaten up the maximum benefit.  It is easy for the fat cats to sit back and pontificate about the others but the fact is many in this country cannot save and pay their bills, buy their food, pay their rent and transportation costs.  The easy thing for the "haves" to keep a low profile in a country where we're not all "haves" is to not criticize the "have nots".  I don't want everyone to suffer as many do just to feel superior.




:thumbsup1:


----------



## QuickSilver

Prior to SS 35% of seniors lived in poverty.  That is down to under 10%..  Medicare has eliminated the concern that one major illness will wipe out a life savings and drive someone into poverty after working and saving all their lives..  and SOME think it's a fine idea to eliminate it or privatize it?


----------



## Underock1

Lon said:


> You are assuming, as you appear to do with many of your posts, that I  am sanctimonious as well as fortunate, and lady, you haven't got a clue about me. I believe in personal responsibility and good habits. I also believe that that people that are genuinely in need should be helped. I don't believe or want t the government to have the ultimate responsibility to provide for irresponsible people to live in the same manner as those that have lived responsible lives.



With all due respect, Lon, the reason you believe in personal responsibility and good habits is because you were raised that way. Be thankful for the circumstances you were born into. Others have been born into slightly different ones.


----------



## QuickSilver

Underock1 said:


> Lon, We agree on many things, but not on this. We worked and saved our way out of poverty.We lived in a rent controlled, vermin infested two and a half room apartment for thirteen years. No vacations. Raised two happy kids in the process. Eventually bought our paid up house in the suburbs. We lived from paycheck to paycheck for many years, living on the thin edge of disaster.
> I tell you true; the major part of our success was just plain dumb luck. I lost my job several times along the way with dim prospects. I was just extremely fortunate to find new ones. A health problem at any time would have meant the end of everything. You can't save in any meaningful way unless you have money left to save. Putting aside 1.98 once a month is not going to do it.




:thumbsup1:


----------



## QuickSilver

Underock1 said:


> With all due respect, Lon, the reason you believe in personal responsibility and good habits is because you were raised that way. Be thankful for the circumstances you were born into. Others have been born into slightly different ones.



And many folks think that they hit a triple when in actuality they were born on first base..


----------



## Don M.

QuickSilver said:


> See... now I think 401Ks were another giveaway to Banks and Wall Street.



Au Contraire.  401K's are the Best way for a person to try to build some retirement security...IF they are wise enough to take advantage of these programs.  Sure Wall Street is Evil...But it is the Only game in town.  Bank accounts sure aren't doing anyone any good.  Corporations are in it to make money, and if a person invests Wisely in those corporations, they will get their small slice of the pie.  Insofar as companies managing a retirement portfolio...No company investment counselor has a bigger interest in My retirement funding than I do...I would far rather manage my own finances than to have some Financial Adviser taking charge...whose primary interest is "Churning" those funds so as to increase his fees.  

Sure, there are some at the very bottom of the wage ladder who need every penny they make, but most working people in their younger years can easily find a few dollars a week to put towards their own retirement.  Setting some money aside in a 401K certainly makes more sense than spending $150 a month on a stupid cell phone so they can "text" endlessly on Facebook.


----------



## AZ Jim

As one example of someone's personal life interfering with their ability to save, how about the working man who in addition to providing for his immediate family sends $150 per month to an aged mother.  He COULD save that money, but chooses to exercise his *"personal responsibility" *by taking care of his Mom.  His bother matched his gift and for years it helped their Mom survive in her little mobile home until she passed.  THAT is *personal responsibility *without a selfish motive.


----------



## QuickSilver

Don M. said:


> QuickSilver said:
> 
> 
> 
> See... now I think 401Ks were another giveaway to Banks and Wall Street.
> 
> Au Contraire.  401K's are the Best way for a person to try to build some retirement security...IF they are wise enough to take advantage of these programs.  Sure Wall Street is Evil...But it is the Only game in town.  Bank accounts sure aren't doing anyone any good.  Corporations are in it to make money, and if a person invests Wisely in those corporations, they will get their small slice of the pie.  Insofar as companies managing a retirement portfolio...No company investment counselor has a bigger interest in My retirement funding than I do...I would far rather manage my own finances than to have some Financial Adviser taking charge...whose primary interest is "Churning" those funds so as to increase his fees.
> 
> Sure, there are some at the very bottom of the wage ladder who need every penny they make, but most working people in their younger years can easily find a few dollars a week to put towards their own retirement.  Setting some money aside in a 401K certainly makes more sense than spending $150 a month on a stupid cell phone so they can "text" endlessly on Facebook.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pensions were better... I have three of them from assorted employers before 401Ks took over.   Think about it.  With pensions, employers had the obligation to meet the payments no matter what the market did.  With 401Ks... employers MAY provide matching dollars up to a small amount.. mine matches only up to 3% of my contribution..  BUT..  I take ALL the risk due to market fluctuation.    How much money did your lose in 2009 with the crash?    I lost a bundle.. but fortunately made it back... whose to say we won't have another crash?   That's what I mean about 401Ks being better for the employer than the employee.
Click to expand...


----------



## QuickSilver

AZ Jim said:


> As one example of someone's personal life interfering with their ability to save, how about the working man who in addition to providing for his immediate family sends $150 per month to an aged mother.  He COULD save that money, but chooses to exercise his *"personal responsibility" *by taking care of his Mom.  His bother matched his gift and for years it helped their Mom survive in her little mobile home until she passed.  THAT is *personal responsibility *without a selfish motive.



Jim... it's always easy to blame the other person for their misfortunes. It's like blaming the woman for being raped.  Let's face it.. it's easy to sit up on ones high horse and chastise people for their circumstances.


----------



## AZ Jim

QuickSilver said:


> Jim... it's always easy to blame the other person for their misfortunes. It's like blaming the woman for being raped.  Let's face it.. it's easy to sit up on ones high horse and chastise people for their circumstances.



Yep, the view is different from the castle.


----------



## Don M.

QuickSilver said:


> Don M. said:
> 
> 
> 
> Pensions were better... I have three of them from assorted employers before 401Ks took over.   Think about it.  With pensions, employers had the obligation to meet the payments no matter what the market did.  With 401Ks... employers MAY provide matching dollars up to a small amount.. mine matches only up to 3% of my contribution..  BUT..  I take ALL the risk due to market fluctuation.    How much money did your lose in 2009 with the crash?    I lost a bundle.. but fortunately made it back... whose to say we won't have another crash?   That's what I mean about 401Ks being better for the employer than the employee.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pensions are certainly a good thing.  One of the primary reasons why I took an early retirement was because the company was going to do away with Defined Pension plans...so I retired early enough to lock mine in.  On their last annual report, they have 75 billion set aside to meet the obligations of those of us who got out in time.  If I remember correctly, the company matched up to 6% of our gross in our 401K's...which was enough to build a nice "cushion".
> The markets certainly go Up and Down....that is Why it is important for the individual to Pay Attention.  When the banks were loaning billions to anyone with a pulse, during the housing bubble, it became pretty obvious that this could not continue.  I got out of the Dow/S&P/NASDAQ in early 2007, and sat in the money markets for about 18 months....until the Bust was pretty much over.  As a consequence, my losses were minimal, and today, after pulling monthly checks out for over 13 years, I have about the same as when I started....basically nearly $300K of "free money" during that time.
> 
> the one's that amaze me are those who held good jobs during their working careers, and outside of the equity in their houses, their net worth is only $75K, or less.  Those people obviously failed to think about their futures.
> 
> Here's a good article and chart that shows why so many people absolutely need Social Security in order to live.  Those in "Green" are living on the edge.
> 
> http://www.fool.com/investing/gener...e-americans-net-worth-by-age-heres-where.aspx
Click to expand...


----------



## AZ Jim

*"the one's that amaze me are those who held good jobs during their  working careers, and outside of the equity in their houses, their net  worth is only $75K, or less.  Those people obviously failed to think  about their futures."
*
At the least presumptuous.


----------



## Lon

QuickSilver said:


> See... now I think 401Ks were another giveaway to Banks and Wall Street.   Before that Corporations used pensions as a benefit for employees.  Then regular pensions were eliminated and replaced with 401Ks with minimal fund matching on the part of the employer.   This took all the risk of market fluctuation from the employer and placed it squarely on the retiree.   So they really didn't do their employees any big favors by doing away with pensions and using 401ks instead.



Minimal funding by the employer my arse. My own 401K was matched by my employer to $10,000 a year and I took full advantage of that. Plus---I had a Defined Benefit Pension with this same employer. I worked as well as an Independent Contractor and took full advantage of the old IRA (Individual Retirement Account).


----------



## AZ Jim

Lon said:


> Minimal funding by the employer my arse. My own 401K was matched by my employer to $10,000 a year and I took full advantage of that.



Ahhhhhh Life is good in Lonville.


----------



## Lon

Underock1 said:


> With all due respect, Lon, the reason you believe in personal responsibility and good habits is because you were raised that way. Be thankful for the circumstances you were born into. Others have been born into slightly different ones.



And with equal due respect you have no idea of the circumstances into which I was raised or born into, but let me just say that whatever your assumptions, you are dead wrong.


----------



## Lon

Jim said: "Ahhhhhh Life is good in Lonville

You betcha sweetheart, and I feel absolutely no guilt or make any apologies.


----------



## AZ Jim

Lon said:


> Jim said: "Ahhhhhh Life is good in Lonville
> 
> You betcha sweetheart, and I feel absolutely no guilt or make any apologies.



THAT is obvious.  PS I would make a bad sweetheart, back to Matchmakers for you Amigo.


----------



## Don M.

AZ Jim said:


> *"the one's that amaze me are those who held good jobs during their  working careers, and outside of the equity in their houses, their net  worth is only $75K, or less.  Those people obviously failed to think  about their futures."
> *
> At the least presumptuous.



Not "presumptuous"...rather an unfortunate fact that seems to be coming back to haunt a lot of people.  There certainly are some who made good wages for decades who met with some sort of health issue, etc., that sapped their funds.  However, there are a bunch who had to have the big houses, drive the fancy cars, and take lavish cruises, etc., and now, are sweating out their retirements.  Believe me...I know a few like that.


----------



## AZ Jim

Don M. said:


> Not "presumptuous"...rather an unfortunate fact that seems to be coming back to haunt a lot of people.  There certainly are some who made good wages for decades who met with some sort of health issue, etc., that sapped their funds.  However, there are a bunch who had to have the big houses, drive the fancy cars, and take lavish cruises, etc., and now, are sweating out their retirements.  Believe me...I know a few like that.



There are many reasons for "sweating out" retirement Don.  That is why your suggestion that _all could_ have done it "you way" (credit Frank Sinatra) is presumptuous.


----------



## QuickSilver

This is what's wrong with our society.....That  "I did it, so there must be something wrong with you if you didn't"  attitude..   No one knows the circumstances people are faced with during their working and earning years..   Many times life deals some pretty unfair hands..  To make blanket statements about people's characters based on their retirement savings is just plain presumptuous and yes.... arrogant.


----------



## Underock1

Lon said:


> And with equal due respect you have no idea of the circumstances into which I was raised or born into, but let me just say that whatever your assumptions, you are dead wrong.



You are correct. I do not know your circumstances. You say that "_Whatever" _my assumptions, I am "dead wrong".
 So then even if my assumption is right, its wrong. I therefore apologize for my "dead wrong" assumption. I can't help wondering, though, where you obtained your admirable traits of "personal responsibility and good habits".


----------



## Don M.

I'm sure that I will be PO'ing some when I talk about the pitiful state some retirees find themselves in...but the majority who are barely scrimping by are doing so as a result of poor decisions they made earlier in their lives.  For some, it is Divorce, for others it is trying to "outdo the Joneses", etc, etc.  Over the past half century, most people with a decent steady job probably made the better part of 2 million dollars during their working careers.  If all they have to show for all those years is a house and a few thousand in the bank, they obviously did not think they would ever grow old, and need to retire.  

I wasn't born with a silver spoon in my mouth, and I certainly didn't ever make 6 figures, or more a year....BUT, I was raised to believe that it is MY responsibility to make the most of life, and to live such as to not be a burden to others. 
Now, if that leaves a sour taste in some people's mouths, so be it.  What's the old saying????...Something about You Reap What You Sow?????


----------



## AZ Jim

Don M. said:


> I'm sure that I will be PO'ing some when I talk about the pitiful state some retirees find themselves in...but the majority who are barely scrimping by are doing so as a result of poor decisions they made earlier in their lives.  For some, it is Divorce, for others it is trying to "outdo the Joneses", etc, etc.  Over the past half century, most people with a decent steady job probably made the better part of 2 million dollars during their working careers.  If all they have to show for all those years is a house and a few thousand in the bank, they obviously did not think they would ever grow old, and need to retire.
> 
> I wasn't born with a silver spoon in my mouth, and I certainly didn't ever make 6 figures, or more a year....BUT, I was raised to believe that it is MY responsibility to make the most of life, and to live such as to not be a burden to others.
> Now, if that leaves a sour taste in some people's mouths, so be it.  What's the old saying????...Something about You Reap What You Sow?????





Don, you are so intent to show us how right you are and what great decisions you made you are overlooking the simple fact that many, many of the rest of us had different experiences in life.  Give us some slack, be thankful your moves weren't wiped out by some major event or whatever put so many on the other side of the equation.  Slack....just slack....


----------



## Lon

Underock1 said:


> You are correct. I do not know your circumstances. You say that "_Whatever" _my assumptions, I am "dead wrong".
> So then even if my assumption is right, its wrong. I therefore apologize for my "dead wrong" assumption. I can't help wondering, though, where you obtained your admirable traits of "personal responsibility and good habits".



I was a avid reader as a kid.


----------



## AZ Jim

Hey Gang Lon and Don are having a huge party, it 100% hosted by them and we're all invited!!!  Bring a friend!!


----------



## Underock1

Lon said:


> I was a avid reader as a kid.



Mom and Dad get no credit, or was that in the orphanage?  You are fond of saying how none of us "have a clue" about you. Perhaps if you gave us a few it would clear things up. I think, generally speaking, we all get along on here pretty good.
Let's just say that I completely disagree with your views on this topic, and let's keep the peace.


----------



## Don M.

AZ Jim said:


> Don, you are so intent to show us how right you are and what great decisions you made you are overlooking the simple fact that many, many of the rest of us had different experiences in life.  Give us some slack, be thankful your moves weren't wiped out by some major event or whatever put so many on the other side of the equation.  Slack....just slack....



OK...I Fully acknowledge that some people have an event that totally upsets their lives...health problems, etc.  BUT...let me Clarify the type of people who I have little sympathy for.

When we settled down in Kansas City, we bought a house in a new typical Middle Class subdivision.  All the houses were nice 3 bedroom, 2 bath houses, and virtually all who moved in were in our 30's, good steady jobs, a couple of kids, etc.  We all drove Fords and Chevies, with an occasional Buick or Mercury.  We became good friends, and every Sunday night we rotated a get together at each others houses...the guys played poker in the rec room and the wives
gathered in the living room for a chat.  It was an ideal text book Middle Class.  Then, when the kids grew up and went out on their own, the neighborhood underwent a major transformation.  People began to move out to bigger houses, Fords were traded for BMW's, family vacations became cruises to the Mediterranean.  Within 5 or 6 years, we were one of the few original residents left.  By then, we were more involved in our future plans, so we didn't change our lifestyles much.  

Every now and then, I run into one of the old neighbors up in the city.  Often, the conversation drifts to what a Bitch retirement is, and how rising prices are cramping their lifestyles, and how they may have to keep driving their present car for a few more years....which is now a Ford, instead of a Lexus.  Half of them have gotten divorced, and alimony is eating their lunch.  These people had Every opportunity to enjoy their retirements, but they Blew it.  I listen to them, wish them good luck, and then count my blessings that the wife and I didn't fall into the same trap.


----------



## AZ Jim

Good for you Don.  Glad you are doing so well.


----------



## Underock1

Don M. said:


> OK...I Fully acknowledge that some people have an event that totally upsets their lives...health problems, etc.  BUT...let me Clarify the type of people who I have little sympathy for.
> 
> When we settled down in Kansas City, we bought a house in a new typical Middle Class subdivision.  All the houses were nice 3 bedroom, 2 bath houses, and virtually all who moved in were in our 30's, good steady jobs, a couple of kids, etc.  We all drove Fords and Chevies, with an occasional Buick or Mercury.  We became good friends, and every Sunday night we rotated a get together at each others houses...the guys played poker in the rec room and the wives
> gathered in the living room for a chat.  It was an ideal text book Middle Class.  Then, when the kids grew up and went out on their own, the neighborhood underwent a major transformation.  People began to move out to bigger houses, Fords were traded for BMW's, family vacations became cruises to the Mediterranean.  Within 5 or 6 years, we were one of the few original residents left.  By then, we were more involved in our future plans, so we didn't change our lifestyles much.
> 
> Every now and then, I run into one of the old neighbors up in the city.  Often, the conversation drifts to what a Bitch retirement is, and how rising prices are cramping their lifestyles, and how they may have to keep driving their present car for a few more years....which is now a Ford, instead of a Lexus.  Half of them have gotten divorced, and alimony is eating their lunch.  These people had Every opportunity to enjoy their retirements, but they Blew it.  I listen to them, wish them good luck, and then count my blessings that the wife and I didn't fall into the same trap.



I get that, Don. I agree with you. People who have never had to struggle for _survival, _often chase the wrong things and pay the price. There is a difference though, between trading down from a Lexus to a Ford, and giving up your blood pressure pills for a can of dog food. Social Security is their very life.


----------



## Lon

AZ Jim said:


> Hey Gang Lon and Don are having a huge party, it 100% hosted by them and we're all invited!!!  Bring a friend!!


 Great idea!! Maybe we can get the government to subsidize the transportation costs of attending the party for the truly needy.


----------



## Lon

Underock1 said:


> Mom and Dad get no credit, or was that in the orphanage?  You are fond of saying how none of us "have a clue" about you. Perhaps if you gave us a few it would clear things up. I think, generally speaking, we all get along on here pretty good.
> Let's just say that I completely disagree with your views on this topic, and let's keep the peace.



Let's just say that I lived from age 10 to 17 with just a mother who worked most of her adult life as a waitress & cashier where her tips were counted every night when she came home from work. We lived in a studio apartment with no phone or TV and the old ice box instead of a refrigerator in the galley kitchen.
I slept on a Army cot with a extra mattress. l earned every bit of my spending money for clothes etc. from age 11 to the time I joined the Air Force after graduating from High School at age 17 If there was one thing that gave me a boost it was the Korean G I Bill. It enabled me to get a degree and get my first home at 3% 20 year loan. Any good traits that I may have acquired to reach my present status I picked up by reading or observation. BTW I  am a excellent tipper because of my mother.


----------



## Underock1

Lon said:


> Let's just say that I lived from age 10 to 17 with just a mother who worked most of her adult life as a waitress & cashier where her tips were counted every night when she came home from work. We lived in a studio apartment with no phone or TV and the old ice box instead of a refrigerator in the galley kitchen.
> I slept on a Army cot with a extra mattress. l earned every bit of my spending money for clothes etc. from age 11 to the time I joined the Air Force after graduating from High School at age 17 If there was one thing that gave me a boost it was the Korean G I Bill. It enabled me to get a degree and get my first home at 3% 20 year loan. Any good traits that I may have acquired to reach my present status I picked up by reading or observation. BTW I  am a excellent tipper because of my mother.



Thank you for sharing that, Lon. Not that it matters to you one wit, but I applaud you for rising out of difficult circumstances. Much of my own character was formed through self directed reading as well. I can understand now your "if I can do it, anyone can" philosophy. I still disagree with that. There are many who find themselves in circumstances that make it impossible for them to duplicate your accomplishment. I apologize for my former misconceptions. My former daughter-in-law was a waitress. One of the most difficult and under rated jobs around. I make sure to tip well as well.


----------



## Glinda

QuickSilver said:


> Prior to SS 35% of seniors lived in poverty.  That is down to under 10%..  Medicare has eliminated the concern that one major illness will wipe out a life savings and drive someone into poverty after working and saving all their lives..  and SOME think it's a fine idea to eliminate it or privatize it?



I'd like to lead this conversation away from Lon now and point out that at least one of the republican candidates for president has explicitly stated that he wants to privatize Social Security.  He thinks that would be a good thing for the USA.  His friends at the Country Club call him Jebby.


----------



## Underock1

Glinda said:


> I'd like to lead this conversation away from Lon now and point out that at least one of the republican candidates for president has explicitly stated that he wants to privatize Social Security.  He thinks that would be a good thing for the USA.  His friends at the Country Club call him Jebby.



I'm not worried about Jeb. They're going to nominate Trump. :saywhat:


----------



## QuickSilver

Glinda said:


> I'd like to lead this conversation away from Lon now and point out that at least one of the republican candidates for president has explicitly stated that he wants to privatize Social Security.  He thinks that would be a good thing for the USA.  His friends at the Country Club call him Jebby.



I believe they all want to Privatize SS and voucherize Medicare.  That's been the Holy Grail of the GOP since those programs were established.  Part is because they want to gift their wealthy donors with another pot of cream to skim off the top, but the other part is they simply don't believe that as a society, government should be helping people.  Period.


----------



## Glinda

QuickSilver said:


> I believe they all want to Privatize SS and voucherize Medicare.  That's been the Holy Grail of the GOP since those programs were established.  Part is because they want to gift their wealthy donors with another pot of cream to skim off the top, but the other part is they simply don't believe that as a society, government should be helping people.  Period.



But have they all been stupid enough to say so?  Usually they try to downplay that during the campaign.  Not Jebby.


----------



## Don M.

Glinda said:


> I'd like to lead this conversation away from Lon now and point out that at least one of the republican candidates for president has explicitly stated that he wants to privatize Social Security.  He thinks that would be a good thing for the USA.  His friends at the Country Club call him Jebby.



Privatizing Social Security MIGHT have been a workable option 60 years ago, when there were a dozen people paying in for every one drawing out, and the stock market was recovering from the Great Depression.  Over that time, the markets have risen by about 2000%, and Social Security would probably have trillions in its trust fund.  However, that option is No Longer viable.  Now, there are less than 3 workers paying in for every person receiving benefits, and there is No Wiggle Room for the trust fund to take on the risks of the markets.  Today, the most sensible solution for the long term viability of SS would probably be to Raise the caps.


----------



## QuickSilver

Here's what they are saying

http://www.ontheissues.org/Social_Security.htm


----------



## Jackie22

QuickSilver said:


> Here's what they are saying
> 
> http://www.ontheissues.org/Social_Security.htm



Good site, QS, thanks for posting, I will bookmark this one.


----------



## 911

I'm probably full of it on this issue, but I have always thought that Social Security, abortions, now the ACA, civil rights, gay and lesbian rights and so many other issues that have now become legal are all issues that politicians use to scare voters at election time because we seldom hear about them at any other time. SS will not go away. How it's funded may need to change. As for privatizing SS, I have heard both sides and it's a tossup as to which would be better, but in the long run it would cost taxpayers billions to set it up and to administrate it, so it's best to just leave it be.


----------



## AZ Jim

Had Bush been successful in privatizing SS it would have done two things immediately.  (1) Given Wall Street Billions to gamble with and (2) his effort came just before the biggest stock crash since the great depression.  SS recipients would have been in deep trouble.  Threats are one thing, actions another as you know in your former line of work.  There have been concerted efforts by republicans for years to whittle away at social programs including (especially) SS and Medicare.  I am almost 79 and have a pension and SS if either fail me, I am in the street.  Many are in worse shape than me but social security is NOT a luxury, it is what we signed up for and expect.


----------



## Butterfly

AZ Jim said:


> Had Bush been successful in privatizing SS it would have done two things immediately.  (1) Given Wall Street Billions to gamble with and (2) his effort came just before the biggest stock crash since the great depression.  SS recipients would have been in deep trouble.  Threats are one thing, actions another as you know in your former line of work.  There have been concerted efforts by republicans for years to whittle away at social programs including (especially) SS and Medicare.  I am almost 79 and have a pension and SS if either fail me, I am in the street.  Many are in worse shape than me but social security is NOT a luxury, it is what we signed up for and expect.



Absolutely agree.  Privatization is a prescription for disaster.  The Robber Barons of Wall Street and banking would suck it dry, one way or the other.  Doesn't do you any good to work hard and save and invest all your life if Bernie Madoff or his ilk get their  hands on it.


----------



## QuickSilver

I simply do NOT understand why Republicans think the answer to everything is privatization...  When has it every been good for anything except to move money up to the top 1%??   Look at our prison system.. our schools..  phone system and some utilities...   Now they want to privatize roads and infrastructure.. and they are fighting tooth and nail to destroy our Postal System and make it private..  imaging paying a few dollars to mail a letter rather than 50 cents?      We simply cannot let them get their filthy hands on our Social Security and Medicare..


----------



## Harold

I agree that the cap should be raised on s.s. deductions from payroll taxes!  That is not such a big deal!  Harold


----------



## jimthesailor

Hi I'm the guy who started this discussion and all I asked was that you feel SS is an important part of your and your spouses (if applies) future that you write and tell your elected officials that you want this "leg of the stool" propped up, and now, not at the dramatic 11th hour. A simple yes  I will support this effort or no I won't  was a sufficient answer. Instead the whole conversation turned into sarcastic comments and very little substance. No wonder we can't accomplish anything because we can't take a simple action that would benefit a great many people rather then "me". The internet can be a place to rally or it can be a very "dark" place because people on keyboards aren't looking into each others eyes.


----------



## Meanderer

Hi, Jim!  Sorry that I missed this thread until now.  You opened the door for discussion, and ended with "Tell me what you think".   Now, you are not happy with what people think.  You get to write your own posts, but not the posts of others. Maybe you need to hold this discussion in front of a mirror.  For a newbie, you come across as rather rude.


----------



## AZ Jim

Meanderer said:


> Hi, Jim!  Sorry that I missed this thread until now.  You opened the door for discussion, and ended with "Tell me what you think".   Now, you are not happy with what people think.  You get to write your own posts, but not the posts of others. Maybe you need to hold this discussion in front of a mirror.  For a newbie, you come across as rather rude.


I agree about Jims attitude Jim, signed Jim


----------



## RandyRI

I agree with you, Jim.


----------

