|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
We believe that Social Security is the cornerstone of income security for retirees, survivors, disabled workers and their families in this nation and we are committed to ensuring its future. Social Security is not in crisis. With modest adjustments, Social Security will continue to provide our children and grandchildren with the same secure, life-long, inflation-protected foundation of retirement security.
Social Security's projected shortfall after 2042 is manageable and can be corrected with responsible changes in revenue sources and/or benefits. Drastic changes, however, particularly the division of payroll taxes to personal retirement investment accounts,would worsen solvency, reduce Social Security benefits, expose beneficiaries to unnecessary risk and would erode the qualities that mark Social Security's success. These include the systems' universality, efficiency, progressive benefits, equity and the promise of benefits as an earned right.
|
| |
|
| |
| Comments |
| |
| When originally introduced by Kaiser Wilhelm, government retirement pensions were offered at age 65. The average life expectancy was 58. Since then, the retirement age hasn't risen, but life expectancy has risen significantly.
Social Security would have no problems at all if the benefits were delayed until age 70 - a much more reasonable age given how long people are likely to live. Those who are disabled before that age should still be able to access Social Security Disability payments.
Social Security was intended as a safety net, not an entire pension. It is every individual's responsibility to plan for their future, just as they take care of themselves on a day to day basis now. I believe that, if one has a good living in retirement, then the safety net of Social Security is unnecessary and should not be collected. Let those benefits go to those who were not given the advantages of support, birth, education, etc. that fell to those who were able to retire with a very good income. To say that we deserve Social Security because we paid into it overlooks the fact that nearly everyone draws far more out of the system than they ever paid in.
Instead of an entitlement, Social Security should be seen more as an insurance against misfortune late in life.
That's my opinion. |
| |
|
| |
| |
| It is true that people are living longer and some increase in the retirement age seems reasonable. However, I strongly oppose eliminating Social Security payments for the well-off. Once Social Security becomes limited to lower income groups, the influential members of our society will no longer have a stake in keeping Social Security, and there eventually be a move to abolish it as an unfair entitlement.
I much prefer the idea of raising the maximum taxable income level. A fairly small adjustment to the maximum income taxed would easily take care of Social Security's future problems and would be a fairer way of sharing the wealth.
What do you think? |
| |
|
| |
| |
| The Bush administration has sytematically manged to tear apart our public school system and have encouraged School Vouchers to blossm . We have to be very careful they don't get their way to privatize Social Security at no time for anyone. Once that door is ever opened than it won't take long for it to take over completely and drain our resources. Republican or Democrat Please make sure your elected representative is going to guarantee he or she will honor Social Security as it is and Keep it that way OR don't vote for them.
NO to Privitized Social Security!! |
| |
|
| |
| |
| You have good intentions Sharon King, but in reality it's not good. I don't where you live or how you manage, but many, 100s of thousands of seniors are living at poverty level and that's just here in California. I think you need to take a good look around you.
Yes it was ment for a safety net, but those Americans I just spoke of are iving on that safety net and so many of them are disabled, some having to still work just to pay rent and medications. Also Kaiser Wilhelm may have introduced it BUT it was FDR who put into action! As his idea was a heck of a lot better than Wilhelm.
Also I don't how much you get BUT I sure as heck don't get more than what I paid in and the same goes for a lot more than me. Every raise I get for the cost of living I get I pay a healthy fee for Medicare and I'm still paying extra out of pocket for my Cancer meds and Dr. visits and if weren't for my pension from the company I retired from I'd be living on the streets. |
| |
|
| |
| |
| I agree with the comments by D.J. DiNoto, I am 60 and have been paying into Social Security all of my working life.A recent letter from the S.S. Admin told me that I would be receiving a grand total of $600.00 per month at retirement age. If I were to count on only that amount I would also have to wear a vest covered with silly badges and stand at the front door of my local K Mart-Walmart etc.I have a 401K that continued to lose money until we finally moved it . These government sponsored retirement plans are a safety net only, Our parents lived in a different time and world, "Go to School and get a Good Job",worked for them, but we are living in a much faster and more expensive world,Financial Education is our only hope for ourselves as "Boomers" we need it now and quickly, and we need to pass this information on to our children and grandchildren. If we are to survive our retirement years without being dependent on our government and social services we need to learn how and why money works and what to do with what we have. The information is out there we have the time, finally, and we need to do the research and educate ourselves.If I can't help myself Today, who will I have to Blame Tomorrow?
|
| |
|
| |
| |
|
