Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
No. of Recommendations: 0
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.

Print the post  


When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and Glassdoor #1 Company to Work For 2015! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.