No. of Recommendations: 1
Really? Sounds like a communist country to me - Confiscate the 'wealth' and distribute it to the 'poor'. Punish those who are frugal and save, and reward those who made the same income, but spent it all along the way? Doesn't make sense to me.

Please note, my initials are W - H - D, not F - D - R. I didn't create this socialistic program we call SS, I just pay for it.

So far in my life I've been able to support myself or rely on my family, and therefore have not made use of any government assistant programs. But my tax money stills goes towards them. Does that make sense to you? How does SS really differ from any other Welfare program.

...while spendthrift who saved nothing out of a lifetime earnings of millions, now gets to sit back and collect $20,000/yr? Hardly seems 'fair' to me.

This point could be made against any social program. When I went to the Voc-Tech, I couldn't even get a government backed loan, but the single mothers were getting free daycare and tuition. Essentially the government says: "If you play by the rules you're on your own. When you screw up, we'll give you assistance."

How about more like EVERYONE gets back their fair share based upon what they paid in.

That's funny. If everyone gets back what they pay in, why does anyone pay into the system in the first place? Obviously the only reason people are forced to pay into SS is because statistically some of them won't be around to collect their "fair share."

Otherwise, suddenly, lots of 'assets' are going to be 'missing' when it comes time to account for 'net worth'.....or people will hire accountants to 'hide' the net worth, or it will be in uscrutable forms (ie, private stock, offshore investements, charitable remainder trusts, whatever).

Yeah, but for the money to be of any use, they have to spend it. Audits would find these cheats pretty easily. If this hypothetical senior was getting SS payments of $20K/year discrepancies in their spending would be pretty easy to catch.

Let's see....that would raise it up to about 70 for men, and about 75 for womem. Do you think you could really sell that? And in 10-15 years, when boomers retire, it might be 73 for men, 78 for women. Do you want to tell the boomers that?

And how about people 1,2,3,4 years from retirement? They have been planning for 10 or 15 years to retire at 62 or 65, now you tell them they have to work another 5 years (if their employer will let them!).

Could I sell it? Hell no! I'm an engineer, not a salesman. Does that mean it's not the right thing to do? Tell me what happened to the first people to claim for SS. After all, they weren't expecting SS payments. If you are relying solely on SS for your retirement, you are at the government's mercy (another horrible thing about SS).

All of your arguments point out how bad the system is today. Look, if SS is such a great program, why not extend it to other part of our lives? Not only could we have Old Age Insurance, we could have Old Car Insurance. Rather than making monthly payments to the bank, send the government x% of your paycheck every week, and when the government decides your car is old enough, they'll issue you a small check for a new car.
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.