Social Security Keeps 20 Million Americans Out of Poverty

Discussion in 'Economy' started by Bfgrn, Aug 15, 2010.

  1. Bfgrn
    Offline

    Bfgrn Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2009
    Messages:
    16,829
    Thanks Received:
    2,480
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +3,060
    [​IMG]

    As Social Security approaches its 75th anniversary on Saturday, the program is playing an especially vital role in reducing poverty across America during the worst economic crisis since the Great Recession.

    If benefits were to be significantly cut, 19.8 million more Americans would be thrust in poverty, according to a recent report by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. In addition to supporting the elderly, Social Security is currently keeping more than 1 million children and more than 5 million adults below the age of 65 above the poverty line.

    Cuts to Social Security would be especially devastating for older women, the report shows. While 11.9 percent of women over the age of 65 are currently below the poverty line, nearly half of them would be poor if they no longer received benefits.

    Veronica Daniels, 62, of Houston, Texas, says a reduction in her Social Security benefits would be calamitous. An engineer with over 37 years of experience, Daniels lost her job in 2007 and has not been able to find steady work since. After blowing through most of her savings on a major surgery and dental emergency without the help of health insurance, she was forced to start collecting Social Security early to stay afloat.

    "I wanted to wait until I was 66 to start collecting it, because I will lose about 25% of my benefits by doing it this way, but I had no choice," Daniels told HuffPost. "If the government cut my benefits right now, it would be horrible for me. I'm making just enough to cover basic expenses and save about a hundred dollars or so a month for medical emergencies. I can't really afford to be squeezed."

    Daniels said she lost her house to foreclosure in 2009, and she now lives in a one-bedroom apartment in Houston with no sofa and only a small folding table to eat on. She worries that once the prices of food and housing and utilities go up, she will no longer be able to pay her modest rent.

    "I'm hoping to live until my 80s, but it's gonna be really tough to make ends meet by myself," she said. "Social Security will cover the basics, but what if something happens and I need more? Will I be homeless? I'm just crossing my fingers and hoping to hell I don't get seriously sick."

    Social Security Keeps 20 Million Americans Out Of Poverty, Report Finds
     
  2. Pepe
    Offline

    Pepe Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2010
    Messages:
    153
    Thanks Received:
    36
    Trophy Points:
    46
    Location:
    Tennessee
    Ratings:
    +36
    Even that great Liberal Icon, FDR, stated that Social Security was meant to keep you from starving.

    It was not meant to be your "Retirement" Nest Egg.

    You were still supposed to put that Fiver back each week for your old age.

    On top of that, the average lifespan at the inception of SS was NOT 65.
     
  3. Bfgrn
    Offline

    Bfgrn Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2009
    Messages:
    16,829
    Thanks Received:
    2,480
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +3,060
    For many people, that 'Fiver' was wiped out by the Wall Street Casino scam.
     
  4. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,617
    Most working people have never made enough money to plan for retirement.

    And bear in mind that even if they had, the working generation would still have to be productive enough to make the good and services they'd need to get through retirement.

    No matter how its financed, that is the case and that will always be the case.

    The working generation must create the wealth that the non working generations (the young and the aged) will consume.

    There's no free lunch in MACROeconomics, folks.
     

Share This Page