"The absent are never without fault. Nor the present without excuse." Benjamin Franklin
Now for the discussion of Social Security that always gets me in trouble with my father. That is the privatization of the system. I know everyone looks at that and says that it makes no sense for us to be able to invest our monies as we see fit, keep our own money and to leave what is left to our children (being facetious), but does it?
Let us keep the 6.25% Social Security tax and the 1.45% Medicare's Hospital Insurance (HI) and invest it in a 401K type fund, which can be used as a retire find. Increase the maximum income to $250,000 which we are required to contribute to the Social Security fund.
Take the matching funds which are required from businesses and provide those funds to the public funding of the Social Security act. All income should be taxed under Social Security, and any income which is over the $250,000 maximum be placed also into the public monies.
There is too much temptation for politicians when all of the Social Security tax pours into the general fund. Unfortunately for Presidential hopeful Al Gore, there is no lock box, but maybe there aught to be. Instead of placing the monies into the general funds, any unused monies should be placed into Savings Bonds.
Showing posts with label Social Security. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Social Security. Show all posts
Monday, February 18, 2008
Thursday, February 14, 2008
Social Security for everyone: by everyone
"Most of the time, stuff doesn’t just happen to us—we make it happen by what we do and the way we are." Tony Jeary
Everyone knows that Social Security will run out of money, the only question is when. There are band aid approaches, for example increasing the age, from 65 to 67, which people can start collecting 100% of their Social Security. If the age of eligibility were to be the same as in 1935 when Social Security was enacted, the age for full eligibility would be 78 years old.
With the number of workers per person collecting Social Security decreasing these measures do not even qualify as stop gap actions. Basically this means that unless you want to increase the age for collecting Social Security checks dramatically you need to find more people who contribute to the program. So where do you find the additional people?
Remove the limit on income to which the Social Security tax applies, which would mean ending the $102,000 limit. Those who make more money than the $102,000 limit actually get a 6.2% raise in the pay periods following their reaching the limit. Does it make sense that people who make twenty million ($20,000,000) or more a year to contribute for only 2 days or less for the economic welfare of the country?
Social Security is designed for the economic welfare of those who retire, so why is it that everyone, even those who have enormously high incomes are not required to contribute to the fund?
Everyone knows that Social Security will run out of money, the only question is when. There are band aid approaches, for example increasing the age, from 65 to 67, which people can start collecting 100% of their Social Security. If the age of eligibility were to be the same as in 1935 when Social Security was enacted, the age for full eligibility would be 78 years old.
With the number of workers per person collecting Social Security decreasing these measures do not even qualify as stop gap actions. Basically this means that unless you want to increase the age for collecting Social Security checks dramatically you need to find more people who contribute to the program. So where do you find the additional people?
Remove the limit on income to which the Social Security tax applies, which would mean ending the $102,000 limit. Those who make more money than the $102,000 limit actually get a 6.2% raise in the pay periods following their reaching the limit. Does it make sense that people who make twenty million ($20,000,000) or more a year to contribute for only 2 days or less for the economic welfare of the country?
Social Security is designed for the economic welfare of those who retire, so why is it that everyone, even those who have enormously high incomes are not required to contribute to the fund?
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Social Security in need of repair
"And in the end, it's not the years in your life that count. It's the life in your years." Abraham Lincoln
Depending on the type of discussion you want to start you can either talk about saving Social Security or reforming Social Security. I have tried talking to my father and father-in-law about what is happening with this entitlement and always have to make a hasty retreat.
But before you can talk about either saving or reforming Social Securityyou need to understand the history of this government program. What you have is a program started by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1935 to provide retires, and the disabled. Sounds great, at a time when this country was caught up in a worldwide depression. With 25% of the work force out of work at its height there needed to be hope.
In 1935 you could collect your retirement payments from Social Security at age 65, but the life expectancy was approximately 62 years old. In 1950, I could not find the numbers for the 30’s, there were 16 workers supporting each person on Social Security. Today there are 3.3 people working to support each person collecting Social Security.
Call to Action
First, read up no the history of Social Security.
Second, determine what needs to be changed in Social Security to maintain the program in the future.
Third, look at your own retirement plans and conclude what effects there will be on your ability to retire if there is no Social Security.
Depending on the type of discussion you want to start you can either talk about saving Social Security or reforming Social Security. I have tried talking to my father and father-in-law about what is happening with this entitlement and always have to make a hasty retreat.
But before you can talk about either saving or reforming Social Securityyou need to understand the history of this government program. What you have is a program started by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1935 to provide retires, and the disabled. Sounds great, at a time when this country was caught up in a worldwide depression. With 25% of the work force out of work at its height there needed to be hope.
In 1935 you could collect your retirement payments from Social Security at age 65, but the life expectancy was approximately 62 years old. In 1950, I could not find the numbers for the 30’s, there were 16 workers supporting each person on Social Security. Today there are 3.3 people working to support each person collecting Social Security.
Call to Action
First, read up no the history of Social Security.
Second, determine what needs to be changed in Social Security to maintain the program in the future.
Third, look at your own retirement plans and conclude what effects there will be on your ability to retire if there is no Social Security.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
