‘No one in the US should be retiring at 65’: Ben Shapiro said Social Security was not designed to provide retirement benefits for 20+ years

[Rambunctious]

The Boomers are getting all the money and the rest of us are probably fucked.

Ponzi scheme.

If we allow them to make the program even more insufficient than it already is... it truly will be gone in record time....

 

[iamwhatiseem]

The Boomers are getting all the money and the rest of us are probably fucked.

Ponzi scheme.

No
If you get screwed, as explained to you quite clearly, but you don't listen - is because for over 40 years there were large surpluses in the system when boomers were paying into it. Those surpluses would have continued well past boomers dying off.
YOUR GOVERNMENT SPENT THE SURPLUSES.
In the 1990s, surpluses would have funded SS into the 2100s... basic math.
By the 2010s... the surplus was gone. SPENT on other social programs - mostly Democrats.

 

[WorldWatcher]

When I enlisted, the retirement was paid out after twenty years--in my case, I would have been 37. Somewhere in the mid 70s, that changed and you could retire from the military at 37, but you couldn't collect until age 55. I'm not sure what the law is anymore.

It was never the way you describe.

I joined the Navy in the 70's, retired in the late 90's at 38 and have drawn my retainer/pension since retirement.

You may be confusing, and it's easy to do, the retirement programs for active duty and reservists.

WW

Retirement

Concerned American,

Since you labeled my post, someone who is actually a retired military member who both joined the service and retired from the service during the time frame you describe.

Would you mind looking at the link above and identifying exactly how it was - as you flagged it - "Fake News".

Which program for active duty service persons allowed them to retire at 37 (after assuming a 20 year career) but not receive their retirement pay until age 55.

Thank you.

WW

 

[LeroyDumonde]

Yeah... no.
If SS worked that way, then the original people who put money in would have all been $billionaires.
A Ponzi Scheme is designed to provide large profits for very small investment, because as more people invest - they keep getting more and more.
Every single Ponzi scheme - ever... resulted in large sums of money for the very first founders, all at the expense of everyone else.

Where do the benefits come from to pay the people who are on SS?

 

[Concerned American]

Would you mind looking at the link above and identifying exactly how it was - as you flagged it - "Fake News".

The same way you labeled my entire post as fake news in your post #202. The first sentence in the post you said "was never that way." was exactly the way it was when I enlisted. I made it very clear that it was changed in the 70s. I also made it very clear that was the way I understood it. Your posts have made it clear you are looking to argue. If that is your intention, look somewhere else. When I enlisted in 1968, the policy was after 20 years you could retire and collect. Where in my post did I say anything different and how was it "never that way." If you want to discuss, take the chip off of your shoulder and discuss. Otherwise, don't bother to reply.

 

[WorldWatcher]

The same way you labeled my entire post as fake news in your post #202. The first sentence in the post you said "was never that way." was exactly the way it was when I enlisted. I made it very clear that it was changed in the 70s. I also made it very clear that was the way I understood it. Your posts have made it clear you are looking to argue. If that is your intention, look somewhere else. When I enlisted in 1968, the policy was after 20 years you could retire and collect. Where in my post did I say anything different and how was it "never that way." If you want to discuss, take the chip off of your shoulder and discuss. Otherwise, don't bother to reply.

Post #202 was my post and I didn't label your post "Fake News".

I stated that your description was incorrect and that military retirement did not work the way you claimed. That isn't a "Fake News" label, that is a fact.

I even gave you an out noting that you may have confused active duty retirement with reservist retirement.

Now, if you think your description was accurate and that my post was in error. Please use the link below from DOD that describes the various changes in military retirements and point out to us which one comports with your description for active duty personnel.

Retirement

.
.
.
Or maybe...

..... ..... ..... Just maybe...

..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... You were not correct.

WW

 

[Concerned American]

Post #202 was my post and I didn't label your post "Fake News".

I stated that your description was incorrect and that military retirement did not work the way you claimed. That isn't a "Fake News" label, that is a fact.

I even gave you an out noting that you may have confused active duty retirement with reservist retirement.

Now, if you think your description was accurate and that my post was in error. Please use the link below from DOD that describes the various changes in military retirements and point out to us which one comports with your description for active duty personnel.

Retirement

.
.
.
Or maybe...

..... ..... ..... Just maybe...

..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... You were not correct.

WW

From my post that you said "WAS NEVER THAT WAY" (fake news)
When I enlisted, the retirement was paid out after twenty years--in my case, I would have been 37.
If you are saying that the military retirement system was never that way--
YOU---
ARE---
WRONG!
Next time don't paint with such a broad brush.
Now run your contrary, argumentative posterior on down the road, junior. I don't have the time or patience to deal with you.

 

[WorldWatcher]

From my post that you said "WAS NEVER THAT WAY" (fake news)
When I enlisted, the retirement was paid out after twenty years--in my case, I would have been 37.
If you are saying that the military retirement system was never that way--
YOU---
ARE---
WRONG!
Next time don't paint with such a broad brush.
Now run your contrary, argumentative posterior on down the road, junior. I don't have the time or patience to deal with you.

Funny you left off this part of that post: "Somewhere in the mid 70s, that changed and you could retire from the military at 37, but you couldn't collect until age 55. I'm not sure what the law is anymore."

That was in fact incorrect, it was never that way for active duty military.

Here is a breakdown of all the military retirement changes. So which one comports with the statement that people could retire at 37 but not collect pay until 55?

Retirement

WW

 

[Harpy Eagle]

From my post that you said "WAS NEVER THAT WAY" (fake news)
When I enlisted, the retirement was paid out after twenty years--in my case, I would have been 37.
If you are saying that the military retirement system was never that way--
YOU---
ARE---
WRONG!
Next time don't paint with such a broad brush.
Now run your contrary, argumentative posterior on down the road, junior. I don't have the time or patience to deal with you.

You also said that "you couldn't collect until age 55".

That was never the law, you were mistaken.

Just admit you made a mistake and move on

 

[Concerned American]

Funny you left off this part of that post:

Listen Einstein, you painted with the broad brush stating that the entire post was fake news. If you're going to take issue with a post, be clear as to what portion you are taking issue with. Run along.

 

[initforme]

If we make people work u til 65 as a nation we will have taken away their lives.

 

[leftwinger]

I tried researching it a bit. Makes me so angry. It appears they try to hide it by calling it Supplemental Social Security Insurance or other BS. Looks like if they have a sponsor with 40 quarters (10 years) they can use that as income to Qualify. So complicated i got tired of it. We need 35 years? We don’t need it but it ups your monthly.

 

[Concerned American]

You also said that "you couldn't collect until age 55".

That was never the law, you were mistaken.

Just admit you made a mistake and move on

I am moving on Gulping Gator, you and your buddy seem to want to parse bits and pieces of a post and label the entire post as false--which like most everything you post, is disingenuous at best and intentionally argumentative at worst. So run your contrary posterior down the road. Did you not read the sentence "I don't know what the law is now."

 

[initforme]

Just imagine the positives if 7 million workers retired all at once. Simply quit. Retired. The economy improves gangbusters.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I am moving on Gulping Gator, you and your buddy seem to want to parse bits and pieces of a post and label the entire post as false--which like most everything you post, is disingenuous at best and intentionally argumentative at worst. So run your contrary posterior down the road. Did you not read the sentence "I don't know what the law is now."

It was not the law then, it it not the law now, it has never been the law.

Your post was false, just admit you made a mistake and move on. Why is it so hard to you go "whoops, my bad"?

 

[para bellum]

I would gradually phase in retirement from 67 up to 70
If you are 55 or above no change
Everyone else gets 6 months extra for every 5 years under 55

Those are sensible changes, I would add leave the rates alone, but increase the cap to 200K per individual, and include pass-thru income and dividends to reach the cap.

SS is relatively easy to fix, it's medicare that is the big deficit driver...

 

[initforme]

Those are sensible changes, I would add leave the rates alone, but increase the cap to 200K per individual, and include pass-thru income and dividends to reach the cap.

SS is relatively easy to fix, it's medicare that is the big deficit driver...

Medicare is the only thing retired folk have...go ahead and take it away and watch the catastrophic events.

 

[leftwinger]

Those are sensible changes, I would add leave the rates alone, but increase the cap to 200K per individual, and include pass-thru income and dividends to reach the cap.

SS is relatively easy to fix, it's medicare that is the big deficit driver...

What am i missing? If you pay in more your payout will go up (without changes). Or is this strictly another rich tax added on? No hire payouts from additional $40K income sourced? No change to SS max payout? WTH? Sounds like a penalty on high earners. Call it what it is.

 

[Marener]

Like it or not, he's right.
It obviously is a huge political football, but going forward this country will be forced to make adjustments to the age for full benefits.
Right now, I would change it from 67 to 69, and every three years going forward, I would increase it by one year until the age of 75. Then, reevaluate every two years and make adjustments if necessary.

‘No one in the US should be retiring at 65’: Ben Shapiro said Social Security was not designed to provide retirement benefits for 20+ years — and those who expect that are ‘crazy’​

MSN

Sounds like this guy doesn’t ever hang around people who actually work hard.

Bodies wear out. I wouldn’t expect a pampered little boy to understand that.

 

[para bellum]

What am i missing? If you pay in more your payout will go up (without changes). Or is this strictly another rich tax added on? No hire payouts from additional $40K income sourced? No change to SS max payout? WTH? Sounds like a penalty on high earners. Call it what it is.

The payout is based on a points system, and how many quarters a person pays in during their working years.

Doing a gradual increase in retirement age, coupled with some additional revenues from higher earners would put the program back in actuarial balance- the same thing that Reagan did in 1983.

So yeah, no increase in benefits- just make the program solvent again with those two changes.

In 2017 Biden made ~$11 Million. He and Jill paid FICA taxes on ~$243K combined. The rest was taken as dividends and no FICA taxes. Upping the cap to $200K ea., they would have paid FICA taxes on $400K of their income...