Zone1 Let's fix retirement, and incentivize the workforce by doing so.

[beagle9]

What about this folks !

Time to fix Social security retirement in this country, and incentivize the workforce in doing so.

Let me explain :

Instead of doing it by maturity dates and/or by one's age, why not just do it by (year's worked in total only), otherwise regardless of the overall ending age and working dates that are set in some sort of weird way (where as the current set up appears to work more for the government in hopes that it won't have to pay out to the retiree their money, and maybe it's all in hopes that the retiree expires before the money is paid out in full) ?????

So let's use 40 year's as the maturity date, and the time set to pay after that 40 year's has been accomplished.

Example: if start work at 16, and work paying into one's social security for 40 year's total, then that person should be able to retire with full benefits at 56 years old. If start @ 20 years old then you retire at 60 years old with full benefits. If start at 25 years old, then you could retire at 65 year's old, but not before then unless take a big cut in those benefit's.

65 will remain the maturity date for anyone joining the workforce after 25 years old, and working for 40 year's paying into social security.

This gives the incentive for the young crowd to do the math, and then get to work on their 40 year time period regardless of their age starting in the workforce (the sooner the better).

Age 65 is required to retire at full retirement benefits through Social security, otherwise if started in the workforce at 25 year's young, and then worked to 65.

Age 65 would remain the ideal date that gives retirement to all worker's regardless of when they enter the work force after 25 year's of age, and attempt to work for 40 years, but a minimum of 15 years must be worked in order to draw anything, and it can't be drawn on until the 65 year's of age requirement is met.

Where am I wrong on this sort of stuff ?

We need to incentivize the young folk's with a long term strategy that makes them see a reward coming if they work hard and do the right thing in life.

 

[sparky]

Where am I wrong on this sort of stuff ?

not sure you are beagle

~S~

 

[progressive hunter]

What about this folks !

Time to fix Social security retirement in this country, and incentivize the workforce in doing so.

Let me explain :

Instead of doing it by maturity dates and/or by one's age, why not just do it by (year's worked in total only), otherwise regardless of the overall ending age and working dates that are set in some sort of weird way (where as the current set up appears to work more for the government in hopes that it won't have to pay out to the retiree their money, and maybe it's all in hopes that the retiree expires before the money is paid out in full) ?????

So let's use 40 year's as the maturity date, and the time set to pay after that 40 year's has been accomplished.

Example: if start work at 16, and work paying into one's social security for 40 year's total, then that person should be able to retire with full benefits at 56 years old. If start @ 20 years old then you retire at 60 years old with full benefits. If start at 25 years old, then you could retire at 65 year's old, but not before then unless take a big cut in those benefit's.

65 will remain the maturity date for anyone joining the workforce after 25 years old, and working for 40 year's paying into social security.

This gives the incentive for the young crowd to do the math, and then get to work on their 40 year time period regardless of their age starting in the workforce (the sooner the better).

Age 65 is required to retire at full retirement benefits through Social security, otherwise if started in the workforce at 25 year's young, and then worked to 65.

Age 65 would remain the ideal date that gives retirement to all worker's regardless of when they enter the work force after 25 year's of age, and attempt to work for 40 years, but a minimum of 15 years must be worked in order to draw anything, and it can't be drawn on until the 65 year's of age requirement is met.

Where am I wrong on this sort of stuff ?

We need to incentivize the young folk's with a long term strategy that makes them see a reward coming if they work hard and do the right thing in life.

only way to fix a flawed system is to shut it down and let people to be responsible for themselves,,,

 

[White 6]

What about this folks !

Time to fix Social security retirement in this country, and incentivize the workforce in doing so.

Let me explain :

Instead of doing it by maturity dates and/or by one's age, why not just do it by (year's worked in total only), otherwise regardless of the overall ending age and working dates that are set in some sort of weird way (where as the current set up appears to work more for the government in hopes that it won't have to pay out to the retiree their money, and maybe it's all in hopes that the retiree expires before the money is paid out in full) ?????

So let's use 40 year's as the maturity date, and the time set to pay after that 40 year's has been accomplished.

Example: if start work at 16, and work paying into one's social security for 40 year's total, then that person should be able to retire with full benefits at 56 years old. If start @ 20 years old then you retire at 60 years old with full benefits. If start at 25 years old, then you could retire at 65 year's old, but not before then unless take a big cut in those benefit's.

65 will remain the maturity date for anyone joining the workforce after 25 years old, and working for 40 year's paying into social security.

This gives the incentive for the young crowd to do the math, and then get to work on their 40 year time period regardless of their age starting in the workforce (the sooner the better).

Age 65 is required to retire at full retirement benefits through Social security, otherwise if started in the workforce at 25 year's young, and then worked to 65.

Age 65 would remain the ideal date that gives retirement to all worker's regardless of when they enter the work force after 25 year's of age, and attempt to work for 40 years, but a minimum of 15 years must be worked in order to draw anything, and it can't be drawn on until the 65 year's of age requirement is met.

Where am I wrong on this sort of stuff ?

We need to incentivize the young folk's with a long term strategy that makes them see a reward coming if they work hard and do the right thing in life.

Nope. Leave it alone or the Republicans will try to slip in a poison pill or kill it outright and we would be down to nothing but the Democrat Party to run the country, as the Republican would all be voted out of national office and probably run out of their own hometowns, where they would be too easy to spot, so they wouldn't be safe on the streets.

 

[Moonglow]

I didn't like retirement.

 

[alang1216]

only way to fix a flawed system is to shut it down and let people to be responsible for themselves,,,

Learn some history. That was the system we had that completely and horrifically failed in the Great Depression. England had that system and it failed there too. Something about millions of Irishmen starving or fleeing the country. Bad optics.

 

[progressive hunter]

Learn some history. That was the system we had that completely and horrifically failed in the Great Depression. England had that system and it failed there too. Something about millions of Irishmen starving or fleeing the country. Bad optics.

how does personal responsibility fail in so it effects me when I am responsible and dont expect or need others help??

 

[alang1216]

how does personal responsibility fail in so it effects me when I am responsible and dont expect or need others help??

Very charitable. I guess your parents weren't poor or victims of discrimination or crime, you don't live in a place where they have earthquakes, floods, etc, and you didn't work in a factory that closed. With all that good fortune you'd think you'd be more appreciative and charitable to people who are not so lucky.

 

[progressive hunter]

Very charitable. I guess your parents weren't poor or victims of discrimination or crime, you don't live in a place where they have earthquakes, floods, etc, and you didn't work in a factory that closed. With all that good fortune you'd think you'd be more appreciative and charitable to people who are not so lucky.

sure why not,,,

 

[WorldWatcher]

65 will remain the maturity date for anyone joining the workforce after 25 years old, and working for 40 year's paying into social security.

Please explain, how do you join the workforce after 25 years, work 40 years, and still meet 65 years sold as the age of eligibility?

If you start at 28 + 40 years = 68 years old for eligibility.

WW

 

[beagle9]

only way to fix a flawed system is to shut it down and let people to be responsible for themselves,,,

Nothing wrong with having a system, but just as long as it is being run right. No different than life insurance policies, IRA's, 401ks, HCSA for health care, and all things run by companies with the incentives to make some profit, while alao managing these things in our favors IOW when we need them.

I don't mind companies helping us, and making a little bit in the process, and I got nothing against government plans if they are run right, and just as long as such plans benefit both of us correctly and rightfully so.

The problem is that we have what seems to be a corrupt system that is taking us for a ride, and delaying us for as long as it can after we had served this country for years and year's. It's shameful what is going on in regards to Senior citizen's in this country, and especially when Biden and his merry band of knucklehead's are ignoring the cries of the people, while it helps itself to the Treasury in order to buy more votes for loyalty in the coming election's.

Billion's to help kill human beings instead of peace warriors who are willing to negotiate a peace some how. Billion's, but the constant cries of Social Security is going broke, and yadda yadaa yadaa. Pffft...

Slight of hand, yep slight of hand is all we see anymore.

 

[beagle9]

Please explain, how do you join the workforce after 25 years, work 40 years, and still meet 65 years sold as the age of eligibility?

If you start at 28 + 40 years = 68 years old for eligibility.

WW

You are 25 years old entering ok, then you end up working 40 year's afterwards... This should meet the 65 year's maturity requirement date. Entering at younger dates, gets you to retirement faster. That is the incentive to get our workforce back up and running.

Any age entrance in to the workforce after 25 years can still qualify at 65 year's old to draw max benefit's, but a minimum of 20 years must be applied by the worker in order to qualify. Example if enter at 40 years old, and work 20 years minimum, you would qualify for full retirement at 65. Now your money may not be as good as the employee that started at 20 years young, completed 40 year's in the workforce (met the maximum requirement of 40), and retired at 60.

The 20 year old retiring at 60 will be rewarded better than the 40 year old that entered later, because the maximum work requirement would have been fulfilled. The minimum work requirement of 15 year's will come with a minimum but living wage package still yet, but it won't be the same package as the one who worked the maximum of 40 year's requirement that gets that person the early retiring date, and the maximum living wage package.

All healthcare such as Medicare part B & part A would be equal pay out to all retirees, and this would be regardless of retirement status, because healthcare should be a right, and not something that toy's with profits over human beings lives.

Also it should be that anyone that wants to remain a viable part of the workforce after retirement, and this being regardless of their retirement dates, years and what not, then they shouldn't be penalized what so ever after they retire if want to continue working at what ever job they wish to work at.

They earned their retirement, and it should never be threatened by some ridiculous rule that makes absolutely no sense if they want to continue contributing as a working class citizen who is retired but wants to continue working. What part of earned their retirement doesn't anyone in our government understand ??

 

[progressive hunter]

Nothing wrong with having a system, but just as long as it is being run right. No different than life insurance policies, IRA's, 401ks, HCSA for health care, and all things run by companies with the incentives to make some profit, while alao managing these things in our favors IOW when we need them.

I don't mind companies helping us, and making a little bit in the process, and I got nothing against government plans if they are run right, and just as long as such plans benefit both of us correctly and rightfully so.

The problem is that we have what seems to be a corrupt system that is taking us for a ride, and delaying us for as long as it can after we had served this country for years and year's. It's shameful what is going on in regards to Senior citizen's in this country, and especially when Biden and his merry band of knucklehead's are ignoring the cries of the people, while it helps itself to the Treasury in order to buy more votes for loyalty in the coming election's.

Billion's to help kill human beings instead of peace warriors who are willing to negotiate a peace some how. Billion's, but the constant cries of Social Security is going broke, and yadda yadaa yadaa. Pffft...

Slight of hand, yep slight of hand is all we see anymore.

our government has proven they cant run anything right,,

if we started teaching kids at a young age the importance of saving for the future we wouldnt need a government ran system,,

 

[beagle9]

Nope. Leave it alone or the Republicans will try to slip in a poison pill or kill it outright and we would be down to nothing but the Democrat Party to run the country, as the Republican would all be voted out of national office and probably run out of their own hometowns, where they would be too easy to spot, so they wouldn't be safe on the streets.

A little dramatic don't ya think ? lol

 

[beagle9]

our government has proven they cant run anything right,,

if we started teaching kids at a young age the importance of saving for the future we wouldnt need a government ran system,,

Agree with that too.

 

[beagle9]

Very charitable. I guess your parents weren't poor or victims of discrimination or crime, you don't live in a place where they have earthquakes, floods, etc, and you didn't work in a factory that closed. With all that good fortune you'd think you'd be more appreciative and charitable to people who are not so lucky.

We have many charitable programs that usually cover all the cracks that people slip through, but we've seen a lot of abuse on the citizen's and the government's side.

 

[sparky]

They earned their retirement, and it should never be threatened by some ridiculous rule that makes absolutely no sense if they want to continue contributing as a working class citizen who is retired but wants to continue working. What part of earned their retirement doesn't anyone in our government understand ??

~S~

 

[candycorn]

Better idea is to eliminate the cap on SS contributions. If you make less than (I think it's $131,000 a year) you pay a SS tax on every dollar you make. If you Make more than $131,000 a year, you stop paying on dollar $131,001. Simply not fair.

We shouldn't have seniors and others living in squalor because they were not as fortunate as some. And, yes, there will be some who were simply irresponsible with their earnings through their lifetimes.

Usually the first people to reject this fairness principle are the right wing loons--the "let them die" crowd. Unimaginably cruel...but that is their thing. They get some joy out of causing as much misery as possible for people whom they never met. What is bizarre about their stance is that they are also the first to swear that seniors are being screwed because of inflation. In one voice they are saying "Inflation is gutting the seniors" and in the next breath they state, "Well, gramps, you should have planned for this."

 

[alang1216]

We have many charitable programs that usually cover all the cracks that people slip through, but we've seen a lot of abuse on the citizen's and the government's side.

When you mix money and people there will ALWAYS be abuse, no matter what people they are. As for the cracks, think back to Dickens and you'll see what a Western society with only charitable programs but an enormous number of people falling through cracks. The West has done much better since then but eliminating social programs will only bring back the sufferings of the past.

 

[Pellinore]

It seems to me as if this plan is very much geared toward consistent 40-hour-week workers, and would have a hard time applying to others.

For example, the system seems to mean that the self-employed would never reach retirement age. Same with those with long-term disabilities, stay-at-home parents, personal caregivers and, presumably, anyone who spends part of their life in another country. The end result would be a lot of people over the current retirement age who aren't eligible for any assistance, which would create an entire class of the aged poor, which is what we had before Medicare, Social Security, and so on.

On the other hand, every industry would lose a lot of workers age 58-65, especially if you allowed double time to count for double years, or something. For many places, that would be their most experienced workers.

It's always a best practice to stretch your imagination and come up with new ideas, even if they don't work out, but I think this one would have piles of unintended consequences that would do more harm than good.