By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Social Security could be dead as soon as 2016.

TheRealMafoo on 12 May 2009

New projections have us spending more on Social Security in 2016 then we collect. This wouldn’t be so bad if the surplus of funds we have been collecting over the years had stayed in the fund, but the people you trust with your money decided to take it with a promise to pay it back.

So, 2016 will be the first year that they have to do that. 2016, and every year after. Even if for some reason they do pay it back (I am sure they will do this by raising taxes), it will be completely exhausted in 2037.

This means anyone under the age of 42, can expect Social Security to be nothing other than an expense from the government that you gain nothing from.

Got to love entitlement programs.

http://money.cnn.com/2009/05/12/news/economy/SocSec_Medicare_trustees_report/index.htm?postversion=2009051216

 



Around the Network
akuma587 on 12 May 2009

Yes, Social Security is so evil. Has kept millions of people off the streets, prevented them from resorting to crime, and prevented mass revolts like you saw in the Great Depression. Social Security saves us from having to spend on all kinds of other things and makes society as a whole safer and more secure.  And it typically runs a profit.  Man, what a horrible mistake!

Its very simple, Social Security needs an overhaul. Some combination of the following:

1) Less money paid out to those on SS
2) Higher minimum age for coverage
3) Less or no money paid out to higher income earners on SS
4) Better management of the money in SS
5) Higher payroll taxes

Its really not complicated, it simply requires political willpower.



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

TheRealMafoo on 12 May 2009
akuma587 said:


3) Less or no money paid out to higher income earners on SS

 

That my friend, is a fucked up idea. It's now the responsibility of the rich not only to pay for the management of this country, but for everyones retirement as well.

wow.



Esmoreit on 12 May 2009

Social Security killed Western Europe!!

Oh, wait...



The Doctor will see you now  Promoting Lesbianism -->

                              

nordlead on 12 May 2009

I have an idea. Screw the government and let me save my own money for retirement as I'm more than capable of earning more on my investment then they are obviously.




If you drop a PS3 right on top of a Wii, it would definitely defeat it. Not so sure about the Xbox360. - mancandy
In the past we played games. In the future we watch games. - Forest-Spirit
11/03/09 Desposit: Mod Bribery (RolStoppable)  vg$ 500.00
06/03/09 Purchase: Moderator Privilege  vg$ -50,000.00

Nordlead Jr. Photo/Video Gallery!!! (Video Added 4/19/10)

Around the Network
akuma587 on 12 May 2009

Because obviously there was no reason to create Social Security. The government was just addressing a need that didn't even exist, at all.



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

Xxain on 12 May 2009

Everything should be dead in 2016...



akuma587 on 12 May 2009
TheRealMafoo said:
akuma587 said:


3) Less or no money paid out to higher income earners on SS

 

That my friend, is a fucked up idea. It's now the responsibility of the rich not only to pay for the management of this country, but for everyones retirement as well.

wow.

Yes...because the rich have nothing to gain from people having their basic needs taken care of when they are no longer able to work.  People who don't have the resources to survive and cannot provide for themselves will typically commit crimes to get money/property.  Rich people's property would be in danger if a large segment of the population had a greater need to commit crime.  They would in the end have to pay more for police to arrest these people, prosecute them, put them in jail, and feed them while they are in jail. 

Nobody comes out ahead when a large segment of the population is simply indigent.  Poor people who don't have the resources to survive will steal and even kill to get what they need.  And the people covered by Social Security are typically those who CANNOT work and have no source of income.

 



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

elprincipe on 12 May 2009

SS won't "die" in 2016, we'll just start printing enough more money to cover the shortfalls in SS too. Perhaps some of the "stimulus" money should have gone for more printing presses at Treasury, they sure need them.



In Memoriam RVW Jr.

SSBB Friend Code = 5455-9050-8670 (PM me if you add so I can add you!) 

Tetris Party Friend Code = 116129046416 (ditto)

TheRealMafoo on 13 May 2009
akuma587 said:
TheRealMafoo said:
akuma587 said:


3) Less or no money paid out to higher income earners on SS

 

That my friend, is a fucked up idea. It's now the responsibility of the rich not only to pay for the management of this country, but for everyones retirement as well.

wow.

Yes...because the rich have nothing to gain from people having their basic needs taken care of when they are no longer able to work.  People who don't have the resources to survive and cannot provide for themselves will typically commit crimes to get money/property.  Rich people's property would be in danger if a large segment of the population had a greater need to commit crime.  They would in the end have to pay more for police to arrest these people, prosecute them, put them in jail, and feed them while they are in jail. 

Nobody comes out ahead when a large segment of the population is simply indigent.  Poor people who don't have the resources to survive will steal and even kill to get what they need.  And the people covered by Social Security are typically those who CANNOT work and have no source of income.

 

Wow, utter bullshit.

So in your mind, the Government is stealing form the rich for there own good. It's nice to know that in your world, there is no bounds to what the government is responsible for. In your government, will they come wipe my ass if I forget?

There is a reason countries like what you describe are are called "The Mother Land" and "The Father Land". Those types of governments feel it's there job to take care of you, not just protect you.

There is also a reason why our forefathers said every government needs to be overthrown every once in a while. They knew people who think like you will one day rule this county.

I was born 200 years to late it seems. (or 100 years too soon )