Beating Social Security

[rightwinger]

Still waiting for a viable proposal to replace Social Security....Remember, you have to "Beat" what we have

You still have over 200 million Americans you have to pay benefits to. You don't get to tear it up and start over. So your plan will have to provide a means to transition to a new program

"Remember, you have to "Beat" what we have."
Psst....I'm not the one having troubling remembering stuff.
Have you tried B12 shots?

And my posts will do exactly what you've asked.

Still looking for a viable plan

Guess over the last two hours you still can't find what you want to cut and paste. Hundreds of millions of lives hang in the balance

Calm down, old timer.

I plan the entire thread before the first post.
You didn't know that?

Did you want to explain the vapid 'cut and paste' comment?
You object to facts posted by that method?

Or are you grasping at straws because you have no adequate response to said facts.
You can be honest....just between us.

Good god sweetheart
We will all be retired by the time you cut and paste "your" idea

OK...I'll help you along

You have $180,000 lifetime investment. How are you going to pay the 200 million people who are now in the Social Security system and then pay an annual allotment (adjusted for inflation) that will support a worker for 30 years?

Dazzle us with your math skills

Did I frighten with this?

"Did you want to explain the vapid 'cut and paste' comment?
You object to facts posted by that method?"

Or did it slip that failing memory of yours?

Maybe post #39 will give your answer

Are you incapable of original thought?
<No need to give an answer, the question was rhetorical>

 

[PoliticalChic]

"Remember, you have to "Beat" what we have."
Psst....I'm not the one having troubling remembering stuff.
Have you tried B12 shots?

And my posts will do exactly what you've asked.

Still looking for a viable plan

Guess over the last two hours you still can't find what you want to cut and paste. Hundreds of millions of lives hang in the balance

Calm down, old timer.

I plan the entire thread before the first post.
You didn't know that?

Did you want to explain the vapid 'cut and paste' comment?
You object to facts posted by that method?

Or are you grasping at straws because you have no adequate response to said facts.
You can be honest....just between us.

Good god sweetheart
We will all be retired by the time you cut and paste "your" idea

OK...I'll help you along

You have $180,000 lifetime investment. How are you going to pay the 200 million people who are now in the Social Security system and then pay an annual allotment (adjusted for inflation) that will support a worker for 30 years?

Dazzle us with your math skills

Did I frighten with this?

"Did you want to explain the vapid 'cut and paste' comment?
You object to facts posted by that method?"

Or did it slip that failing memory of yours?

Maybe post #39 will give your answer

Are you incapable of original thought?
<No need to give an answer, the question was rhetorical>

"Did you want to explain the vapid 'cut and paste' comment?
You object to facts posted by that method?"

I made you eat your words, huh?


Bon appetit.

 

[nuhuh]

The first thing wrong with your numbers is that the FICA deductions include both Social Security AND Medicare taxes. This puts your numbers somewhere past Mars.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The first thing wrong with your numbers is that the FICA deductions include both Social Security AND Medicare taxes. This puts your numbers somewhere past Mars.

. " The CBO puts the 75-year imbalance in Social Security at 1.2% of GDP—about $200 billion in 2014, and rising steadily as GDP increases. If we do nothing, the Social Security actuaries estimated last year, all Social Security reserves will be exhausted by 2033,after which revenues could cover only three-quarters of currently scheduled benefits." The Hard Numbers on Social Security

a. Social Security Liability ....$14.4 trillion (into the future)
U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

 

[Arianrhod]

(A) Congress has been pilfering from SS since the Reagan era; make them give the money back, problem solved
(B) How many people here will be taking Grandma in to live with them after they take away her SS payments (yes, I know, all of your grandparents are millionaires and they don't need SS). Will you be paying her medical bills, too, after you destroy Medicare?
(C) Income above 118K is not subject to FICA withdrawals...another instance where the middle class is carrying the wealthy, but you don't mind that, right?

 

[nuhuh]

The first thing wrong with your numbers is that the FICA deductions include both Social Security AND Medicare taxes. This puts your numbers somewhere past Mars.

. " The CBO puts the 75-year imbalance in Social Security at 1.2% of GDP—about $200 billion in 2014, and rising steadily as GDP increases. If we do nothing, the Social Security actuaries estimated last year, all Social Security reserves will be exhausted by 2033,after which revenues could cover only three-quarters of currently scheduled benefits." The Hard Numbers on Social Security

a. Social Security Liability ....$14.4 trillion (into the future)
U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

That doesn't answer the imbalance that I posted. You can't arrive at your numbers with half the money.

 

[NYcarbineer]

6. The email goes on:

" If you calculate the future value of your monthly investment in social security ($375/month, including both you and your employers contributions) at a meager 1% interest rate compounded monthly, after 40 years of working you'd have more than $1.3+ million dollars saved!"


Is that possible???
Is it accurate?


a. I found this:

"...look at the $375 monthly payment invested at a "meager 1% interest rate compounded monthly". First, compounding an investment at 1% compounded monthly becomes 12.7% annual growth rate (1.01 raised to the 12th power). I would not consider this "meager". Also, if you used this 1% compounded monthly, your $375 monthly payment becomes $4.4 million over this 40 year work career which is very different than the $1.3 million stated in the email."
Understanding Data in the News: Social Security Myths Set Straight



b. Do banks compound monthly?
Yup.
" Interest on savings accounts is usually compounded daily and paid monthly. " How do savings accounts work?



c. And this:
· One pays a rate of 10%, compounded annually.

· One pays a rate of 9.6%, compounded monthly.

· One pays a rate of 9.5%, compounded continuously.
All of these accounts pay interest at the same rate (up to one decimal place, anyway). https://www.quora.com/Are-there-any-banks-that-actually-offer-continuous-compound-interest




Let's go with the lower accrued total of $1.3 million, rather that the generous $4.4 million.
Does the Roosevelt plan pay off commensurate with those figures?


Judging by who posted this thread....wadda you think?
I'll prove it.

5. The question is, is there a better plan than the one Roosevelt saddled America with?
Sure is.
Probably a number of 'em.



I received the following, an un-authored email, and took a look at the numbers provided....
...and they seem accurate.




Perhaps those receiving Social Security would compare them to the benefits they currently receive.
Let's start.....


" The government is now referring to our Social Security checks as a "Federal Benefit Payment." This isn't a benefit. It is our money paid out of our earned income! Not only did we all contribute to Social Security but our employers did too.
It totaled 15% of our income before taxes.

If you averaged $30K per year over your working life, that's close to $180,000 invested in Social Security."




The inept policies of Barack Obama have proven detrimental to American pocketbooks ["Incomes Have Dropped Twice as Much During the 'Recovery' as During the Recession" http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs...during-recovery-during-recession_750068.html],
the current ].......median household income is $51,939 Household income in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


" President Obama took office in the first quarter of 2009, when median household income was $54,797.63."
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/23/fact-check-income-losses-under-obama/?_r=0



Democrat policies are as good vis-a-vis Democrat Roosevelt's Social Security as Democrat Obama's have proven to be for the economy.....a failure.



Now...let's inspect the data in that email:
If the average salary over 40 years of a worker's career averaged the $30K noted, @15% Social Security tax (worker plus employer), then it does come to $180,000 kicked in.

Hmmmm......Accurate so far.

Still waiting for a viable proposal to replace Social Security....Remember, you have to "Beat" what we have

You still have over 200 million Americans you have to pay benefits to. You don't get to tear it up and start over. So your plan will have to provide a means to transition to a new program

"Remember, you have to "Beat" what we have."
Psst....I'm not the one having troubling remembering stuff.
Have you tried B12 shots?

And my posts will do exactly what you've asked.

Still looking for a viable plan

Guess over the last two hours you still can't find what you want to cut and paste. Hundreds of millions of lives hang in the balance

Calm down, old timer.

I plan the entire thread before the first post.
You didn't know that?

Did you want to explain the vapid 'cut and paste' comment?
You object to facts posted by that method?

Or are you grasping at straws because you have no adequate response to said facts.
You can be honest....just between us.

Why are denying that Reagan fixed social security for 50 years?

 

[NYcarbineer]

(A) Congress has been pilfering from SS since the Reagan era; make them give the money back, problem solved
(B) How many people here will be taking Grandma in to live with them after they take away her SS payments (yes, I know, all of your grandparents are millionaires and they don't need SS). Will you be paying her medical bills, too, after you destroy Medicare?
(C) Income above 118K is not subject to FICA withdrawals...another instance where the middle class is carrying the wealthy, but you don't mind that, right?

The federal government sells bonds to SS. The interest the government pays on those securities is over 100 billion a year.

You want the government to 'give back' about 2.5 trillion dollars to Social Security? Why?

That 2.5 trillion has to come out of your taxes btw.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The first thing wrong with your numbers is that the FICA deductions include both Social Security AND Medicare taxes. This puts your numbers somewhere past Mars.

. " The CBO puts the 75-year imbalance in Social Security at 1.2% of GDP—about $200 billion in 2014, and rising steadily as GDP increases. If we do nothing, the Social Security actuaries estimated last year, all Social Security reserves will be exhausted by 2033,after which revenues could cover only three-quarters of currently scheduled benefits." The Hard Numbers on Social Security

a. Social Security Liability ....$14.4 trillion (into the future)
U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

That doesn't answer the imbalance that I posted. You can't arrive at your numbers with half the money.

"In addition, our research shows that when all Social Security and Medicare liabilities are included, our national debt is over $80 trillion. The federal government’s most recent financials from 2014 excluded $27.9 trillion of Social Security benefits from the national debt because government officials believe no benefits are owed beyond the checks that are currently written. This unreported debt is crippling the Social Security program and leaving those who are paying taxes today with a small chance of receiving any benefits in the future.

Unfortunately, this unreported $27.9 trillion debt is not the only issue with Social Security. There is a large decrease in the number of workers who are paying taxes to support each person on Social Security."
Social Security adding trillions to our national debt

 

[PoliticalChic]

6. The email goes on:

" If you calculate the future value of your monthly investment in social security ($375/month, including both you and your employers contributions) at a meager 1% interest rate compounded monthly, after 40 years of working you'd have more than $1.3+ million dollars saved!"


Is that possible???
Is it accurate?


a. I found this:

"...look at the $375 monthly payment invested at a "meager 1% interest rate compounded monthly". First, compounding an investment at 1% compounded monthly becomes 12.7% annual growth rate (1.01 raised to the 12th power). I would not consider this "meager". Also, if you used this 1% compounded monthly, your $375 monthly payment becomes $4.4 million over this 40 year work career which is very different than the $1.3 million stated in the email."
Understanding Data in the News: Social Security Myths Set Straight



b. Do banks compound monthly?
Yup.
" Interest on savings accounts is usually compounded daily and paid monthly. " How do savings accounts work?



c. And this:
· One pays a rate of 10%, compounded annually.

· One pays a rate of 9.6%, compounded monthly.

· One pays a rate of 9.5%, compounded continuously.
All of these accounts pay interest at the same rate (up to one decimal place, anyway). https://www.quora.com/Are-there-any-banks-that-actually-offer-continuous-compound-interest




Let's go with the lower accrued total of $1.3 million, rather that the generous $4.4 million.
Does the Roosevelt plan pay off commensurate with those figures?


Judging by who posted this thread....wadda you think?
I'll prove it.

5. The question is, is there a better plan than the one Roosevelt saddled America with?
Sure is.
Probably a number of 'em.



I received the following, an un-authored email, and took a look at the numbers provided....
...and they seem accurate.




Perhaps those receiving Social Security would compare them to the benefits they currently receive.
Let's start.....


" The government is now referring to our Social Security checks as a "Federal Benefit Payment." This isn't a benefit. It is our money paid out of our earned income! Not only did we all contribute to Social Security but our employers did too.
It totaled 15% of our income before taxes.

If you averaged $30K per year over your working life, that's close to $180,000 invested in Social Security."




The inept policies of Barack Obama have proven detrimental to American pocketbooks ["Incomes Have Dropped Twice as Much During the 'Recovery' as During the Recession" http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs...during-recovery-during-recession_750068.html],
the current ].......median household income is $51,939 Household income in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


" President Obama took office in the first quarter of 2009, when median household income was $54,797.63."
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/23/fact-check-income-losses-under-obama/?_r=0



Democrat policies are as good vis-a-vis Democrat Roosevelt's Social Security as Democrat Obama's have proven to be for the economy.....a failure.



Now...let's inspect the data in that email:
If the average salary over 40 years of a worker's career averaged the $30K noted, @15% Social Security tax (worker plus employer), then it does come to $180,000 kicked in.

Hmmmm......Accurate so far.

Still waiting for a viable proposal to replace Social Security....Remember, you have to "Beat" what we have

You still have over 200 million Americans you have to pay benefits to. You don't get to tear it up and start over. So your plan will have to provide a means to transition to a new program

"Remember, you have to "Beat" what we have."
Psst....I'm not the one having troubling remembering stuff.
Have you tried B12 shots?

And my posts will do exactly what you've asked.

Still looking for a viable plan

Guess over the last two hours you still can't find what you want to cut and paste. Hundreds of millions of lives hang in the balance

Calm down, old timer.

I plan the entire thread before the first post.
You didn't know that?

Did you want to explain the vapid 'cut and paste' comment?
You object to facts posted by that method?

Or are you grasping at straws because you have no adequate response to said facts.
You can be honest....just between us.

Why are denying that Reagan fixed social security for 50 years?

Gee....another lie from the NYLiar!

Shocker.

 

[nuhuh]

The first thing wrong with your numbers is that the FICA deductions include both Social Security AND Medicare taxes. This puts your numbers somewhere past Mars.

. " The CBO puts the 75-year imbalance in Social Security at 1.2% of GDP—about $200 billion in 2014, and rising steadily as GDP increases. If we do nothing, the Social Security actuaries estimated last year, all Social Security reserves will be exhausted by 2033,after which revenues could cover only three-quarters of currently scheduled benefits." The Hard Numbers on Social Security

a. Social Security Liability ....$14.4 trillion (into the future)
U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

That doesn't answer the imbalance that I posted. You can't arrive at your numbers with half the money.

"In addition, our research shows that when all Social Security and Medicare liabilities are included, our national debt is over $80 trillion. The federal government’s most recent financials from 2014 excluded $27.9 trillion of Social Security benefits from the national debt because government officials believe no benefits are owed beyond the checks that are currently written. This unreported debt is crippling the Social Security program and leaving those who are paying taxes today with a small chance of receiving any benefits in the future.

Unfortunately, this unreported $27.9 trillion debt is not the only issue with Social Security. There is a large decrease in the number of workers who are paying taxes to support each person on Social Security."
Social Security adding trillions to our national debt

You're cutting and pasting now and avoiding the question. Are you even aware that the median income in the U.S. didn't exceed $30,000 a year until 1993? We would have twenty more years to go before we could even prove your theory.

 

[SwimExpert]

Per the title of this thread, the term "Beating" means doing better than.....
And today, another lesson in "The Mythology of Big Government Solutions."
Social security.

Another of the cosmic gaffes of the 32nd President, Social Security.....well, OK...the idea was good....but not the planning nor the insight necessary to go with it.

Is there a far, far better iteration of Social Security than the one with which Franklin Roosevelt insisted on saddling America?
A free-market version, more consistent with the vision of our Founders?
You betcha;!
Unveiled in this thread.



First....Roosevelt's 'gift:'

1. " The CBO puts the 75-year imbalance in Social Security at 1.2% of GDP—about $200 billion in 2014, and rising steadily as GDP increases. If we do nothing, the Social Security actuaries estimated last year, all Social Security reserves will be exhausted by 2033, after which revenues could cover only three-quarters of currently scheduled benefits." The Hard Numbers on Social Security

a. Social Security Liability ....$14.4 trillion (into the future)
U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time





2. The Social Security plan was that workers would pay for retirees, and, based on actuarial tables, those who died earlier than expected would add to the fund.

3. "The question here is not whether or not the intention of the SSA is beneficent, but whether or not its inception was properly vetted. The concept of a marketplace of ideas is based on the assumption that information is not buried or distorted, and all aspects of same are given access prior to acceptance of the plan."
Beck and Balfe, “Broke.”


No one considered that life expectancy would increase?

No one considered that the balance of workers and retirees might change?

No one calculated the long-term costs?


a. Like this:
Ida May Fuller, the first person to begin receiving benefits, in January, 1940, when she was 65- she lived to be 100. “…worked for three years under the Social Security program. The accumulated taxes on her salary during those three years was a total of $24.75. Her initial monthly check was $22.54. During her lifetime she collected a total of $22,888.92 in Social Security benefits.” Social Security History




As conservatives have always banged the drum for free market solutions, plans thwarted by Liberals, socialists, Democrats, Progressives, communists, .....big government devotees of every stripe.....

....this thread will show that, once again....
...the Right is right.

Beating Social Security:

Step 1 - Politicalchic shuts the fuck up.

As long as morons like Politicalchic are posting plagiarized stupidity, the right and good goal of eliminating Social Security will remain fatally tainted with her taint.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The first thing wrong with your numbers is that the FICA deductions include both Social Security AND Medicare taxes. This puts your numbers somewhere past Mars.

. " The CBO puts the 75-year imbalance in Social Security at 1.2% of GDP—about $200 billion in 2014, and rising steadily as GDP increases. If we do nothing, the Social Security actuaries estimated last year, all Social Security reserves will be exhausted by 2033,after which revenues could cover only three-quarters of currently scheduled benefits." The Hard Numbers on Social Security

a. Social Security Liability ....$14.4 trillion (into the future)
U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

That doesn't answer the imbalance that I posted. You can't arrive at your numbers with half the money.

"In addition, our research shows that when all Social Security and Medicare liabilities are included, our national debt is over $80 trillion. The federal government’s most recent financials from 2014 excluded $27.9 trillion of Social Security benefits from the national debt because government officials believe no benefits are owed beyond the checks that are currently written. This unreported debt is crippling the Social Security program and leaving those who are paying taxes today with a small chance of receiving any benefits in the future.

Unfortunately, this unreported $27.9 trillion debt is not the only issue with Social Security. There is a large decrease in the number of workers who are paying taxes to support each person on Social Security."
Social Security adding trillions to our national debt

You're cutting and pasting now and avoiding the question. Are you even aware that the median income in the U.S. didn't exceed $30,000 a year until 1993? We would have twenty more years to go before we could even prove your theory.

"You're cutting and pasting now blah blah blah"

What's your objection to cutting and pasting as a method of providing facts?

Is it because it sinks you?


It's been 21 years since 1993...
...so what is the overall average?

 

[rightwinger]

The first thing wrong with your numbers is that the FICA deductions include both Social Security AND Medicare taxes. This puts your numbers somewhere past Mars.

. " The CBO puts the 75-year imbalance in Social Security at 1.2% of GDP—about $200 billion in 2014, and rising steadily as GDP increases. If we do nothing, the Social Security actuaries estimated last year, all Social Security reserves will be exhausted by 2033,after which revenues could cover only three-quarters of currently scheduled benefits." The Hard Numbers on Social Security

a. Social Security Liability ....$14.4 trillion (into the future)
U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

That doesn't answer the imbalance that I posted. You can't arrive at your numbers with half the money.

"In addition, our research shows that when all Social Security and Medicare liabilities are included, our national debt is over $80 trillion. The federal government’s most recent financials from 2014 excluded $27.9 trillion of Social Security benefits from the national debt because government officials believe no benefits are owed beyond the checks that are currently written. This unreported debt is crippling the Social Security program and leaving those who are paying taxes today with a small chance of receiving any benefits in the future.

Unfortunately, this unreported $27.9 trillion debt is not the only issue with Social Security. There is a large decrease in the number of workers who are paying taxes to support each person on Social Security."
Social Security adding trillions to our national debt

Good god....

Almost four hours in and the child still has not come up with a viable replacement that "beats" Social Security

 

[Lakhota]

Since Social Security is self-funded by those who paid into it during their working years - how is it somehow a "government liability"? Social Security isn't like food stamps and/or welfare - because the recipients paid for it. As in the past, Social Security simply needs continued tuning and tweaking.

 

[Arianrhod]

(A) Congress has been pilfering from SS since the Reagan era; make them give the money back, problem solved
(B) How many people here will be taking Grandma in to live with them after they take away her SS payments (yes, I know, all of your grandparents are millionaires and they don't need SS). Will you be paying her medical bills, too, after you destroy Medicare?
(C) Income above 118K is not subject to FICA withdrawals...another instance where the middle class is carrying the wealthy, but you don't mind that, right?

The federal government sells bonds to SS. The interest the government pays on those securities is over 100 billion a year.

You want the government to 'give back' about 2.5 trillion dollars to Social Security? Why?

That 2.5 trillion has to come out of your taxes btw.

The amount you cite almost gibes with this:

What Happened to the $2.6 Trillion Social Security Trust Fund?

But Forbes seems to have a different set of facts.

And why does the shortfall have to come from taxes? Can't we figure out what those funds were "borrowed" for and cut that budget to make up the difference?

Still doesn't answer who here is willing to take Grandma in.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Per the title of this thread, the term "Beating" means doing better than.....
And today, another lesson in "The Mythology of Big Government Solutions."
Social security.

Another of the cosmic gaffes of the 32nd President, Social Security.....well, OK...the idea was good....but not the planning nor the insight necessary to go with it.

Is there a far, far better iteration of Social Security than the one with which Franklin Roosevelt insisted on saddling America?
A free-market version, more consistent with the vision of our Founders?
You betcha;!
Unveiled in this thread.



First....Roosevelt's 'gift:'

1. " The CBO puts the 75-year imbalance in Social Security at 1.2% of GDP—about $200 billion in 2014, and rising steadily as GDP increases. If we do nothing, the Social Security actuaries estimated last year, all Social Security reserves will be exhausted by 2033, after which revenues could cover only three-quarters of currently scheduled benefits." The Hard Numbers on Social Security

a. Social Security Liability ....$14.4 trillion (into the future)
U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time





2. The Social Security plan was that workers would pay for retirees, and, based on actuarial tables, those who died earlier than expected would add to the fund.

3. "The question here is not whether or not the intention of the SSA is beneficent, but whether or not its inception was properly vetted. The concept of a marketplace of ideas is based on the assumption that information is not buried or distorted, and all aspects of same are given access prior to acceptance of the plan."
Beck and Balfe, “Broke.”


No one considered that life expectancy would increase?

No one considered that the balance of workers and retirees might change?

No one calculated the long-term costs?


a. Like this:
Ida May Fuller, the first person to begin receiving benefits, in January, 1940, when she was 65- she lived to be 100. “…worked for three years under the Social Security program. The accumulated taxes on her salary during those three years was a total of $24.75. Her initial monthly check was $22.54. During her lifetime she collected a total of $22,888.92 in Social Security benefits.” Social Security History




As conservatives have always banged the drum for free market solutions, plans thwarted by Liberals, socialists, Democrats, Progressives, communists, .....big government devotees of every stripe.....

....this thread will show that, once again....
...the Right is right.

Beating Social Security:

Step 1 - Politicalchic shuts the fuck up.

As long as morons like Politicalchic are posting plagiarized stupidity, the right and good goal of eliminating Social Security will remain fatally tainted with her taint.

One more typical Liberal post.

1. You are vulgar...i.e., a Liberal

2. Try to stick to words you can define: nothing is plagiarized.

3. Where do any posts say 'eliminate Social Security.'

As usual, your post reeks of the same skills that ended the career of Milli Vanilli.

 

[regent]

[QUOTE
Certainly the Republicans had ample opportunity to introduce an old age plan of some type, even Bismarck had one going in Germany in the 1900's. With the prosperity of the Harding and Coolidge period the Republicans could have brought out the perfect plan. We had to wait for the biggest depression and a Democratic president to come up with the idea. Even then Republicans fought SS as evil. Now Republicans, after fighting SS for all these years, wonder why a perfect plan was not introduced.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Since Social Security is self-funded by those who paid into it during their working years - how is it somehow a "government liability"? Social Security isn't like food stamps and/or welfare - because the recipients paid for it. As in the past, Social Security simply needs continued tuning and tweaking.

"...how is it somehow a "government liability"?"

Gads, are you dumb.

" The CBO puts the 75-year imbalance in Social Security at 1.2% of GDP—about $200 billion in 2014, and rising steadily as GDP increases. If we do nothing, the Social Security actuaries estimated last year, all Social Security reserves will be exhausted by 2033,after which revenues could cover only three-quarters of currently scheduled benefits." The Hard Numbers on Social Security

a. Social Security Liability ....$14.4 trillion (into the future)
U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

 

[PoliticalChic]

[QUOTE
Certainly the Republicans had ample opportunity to introduce an old age plan of some type, even Bismarck had one going in Germany in the 1900's. With the prosperity of the Harding and Coolidge period the Republicans could have brought out the perfect plan. We had to wait for the biggest depression and a Democratic president to come up with the idea. Even then Republicans fought SS as evil. Now Republicans, after fighting SS for all these years, wonder why a perfect plan was not introduced.

"Another of the cosmic gaffes of the 32nd President, Social Security.....well, OK...the idea was good....but not the planning nor the insight necessary to go with it.

Is there a far, far better iteration of Social Security than the one with which Franklin Roosevelt insisted on saddling America?
A free-market version, more consistent with the vision of our Founders?
You betcha;!
Unveiled in this thread."