hotfoot,I believe you understand the problem. here is my thoughts. anyone 62 years young and older that has an annual income of $100,000 does not need ss. when they reach the age to draw ss, return the money to them that they have put into the system. I believe this would be fair and would put ss back to what it was intended for.I may agree if a retiree has $100K in income, he does not need SS. But, if he does not need it, why give it back to him?To take his money over a period of 35 to 40 years and then return the lump sum at retirement, is close to what we do now with SS. In other words, why don't we just dole it out to him over a period of time instead of handing him a lump sum?The point is if we return the contributions to him in any form, SS is not necessarily helped.H.
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. Market data provided by Interactive Data.
Company fundamental data provided by Morningstar. Earnings Estimates, Analyst Ra