The Motley Fool Discussion Boards

Previous Page

Investing/Strategies / Retirement Investing


Subject:  Re: Attitude Question - SS Date:  3/15/2016  4:31 PM
Author:  Hawkwin Number:  79364 of 97361

I am ok, but we are back where we started, and as I noted then, not all benefits are lost.

ya and you are picking a nit.

If an adult single male age 60 dies and has no minor children but perhaps a couple of adult children, all that contributed wealth is lost. And yes, I know about the $255 lump sum death benefit.

I am also concerned because this feels like a "nose under the the tent stategy" to abolish or significantly revise or abolish SS.

Take your slippery slope fallacy someplace else.

Those that die young are not the only ones who collect less than the amount paid in taxes

So now you are supporting my position that SS has a negative rate of return for many people? Welcome aboard!

I have no idea what your suggested change would mean for those who would receive less.

Nor I but I would love to see it studied. Specifically as it pertains to early death and those with immediate family members. My assumption is that it would not be a huge number and I would think it would be easy for SSA to determine what that number is annual since they would have to know which people have died and are no longer eligible for full retirement benefits.

The ultimate insistence upon a guaranteed return of premium will almost inalterably change SS in significant ways, and likely force it into a "defined contribution" plan and not a "defined benefit" plan

Right now it is a mix of both defined contribution and defined benefit with neither of the benefits commonly associated with either.
Copyright 1996-2020 trademark and the "Fool" logo is a trademark of The Motley Fool, Inc. Contact Us