High earners/savers: How do you feel about social security?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I assume it will be totally zeroed out by the time I retire. That’s been my base case since starting work at 25

The tweaks to make it solvent aren’t that dramatic in the grand scheme. It makes no sense that it would be zeroed out unless the overall deficit causes interest rates to spike to like 10%.

However, in that instance, every program is on the chopping block.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At this point we’ve been paying in so long we definitely expect to be paid out. People who made high incomes should not be punished for doing so.

It probably shouldn’t be an entitlement. We all pay into various government programs without always personally benefiting. Greed is a common problem in America.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would like to benefit from SS in a few years. I spent many years scraping by as a journalist, always paying into the system. Spouse and I are now pretty well set financially, but the thousands each month to which we will be entitled is not just chump change--it will pay for groceries, gas, home repairs, etc. It may even allow our investments to grow untouched, which is important because at least one of us will likely need assisted living.

And you like everyone who has paid in should be entitled to what they earned for sS. It's a program everyone pays into.
Just because you manage to save for retirement doesn't change that.

You paid in to support current retirees. Future workers will pay in to support you as a retiree.

How many times does this need to be repeated.

I get that. But just because we were high earners and saved does not mean we shouldn't get our "SS support payout" for our retirement. Fact is everyone is entitled to their SS even if they were a higher earner

I agree with this. I think the math should be straightforward. You put in x/you get y without any other commentary.

Maybe there should be an option for those who wish to forgo their SS and a plan for how it could be used for the most needy. But that would be ripe for trouble and a hot mess.

The math on your federal income, property and state tax (if applicable) isn’t straightforward in terms of how it is spent. Why should it be for this?

I think what needs to be reiterated is that SS exists primarily to keep elderly people out of poverty, which is what the plan was designed for.

There is a calculator on the SS website. It should be the same for all. There are other programs that are poverty based.

Don’t even know what you are saying. SS is by far the largest income contributor for poor elderly people.

Are you saying everyone should receive the same amount of SS? Thats one idea put forth.

SS is based on an algorithm. We contribute, our employers contribute, and we receive the contributions based on math. Everyone is entitled to their SS.

For those who can’t survive on SS as calculated, there is SSI.

It’s not that easy. My Dad’s SS is about $1500/month. His housing alone is 1000. He does not qualify for SSI. He doesn’t even qualify for heating assistance etc. because he has some equity in a cheap house (not here) that would be dumb to sell because rent on a 1br apartment would cost more than his mortgage.

That’s really hard. But it also should not have been a surprise. We are repeatedly told what our benefits will be. I hope that isn’t his only source of income.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At this point we’ve been paying in so long we definitely expect to be paid out. People who made high incomes should not be punished for doing so.

It probably shouldn’t be an entitlement. We all pay into various government programs without always personally benefiting. Greed is a common problem in America.

It’s not greed to expect what we were told. We are punished for our success.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would like to benefit from SS in a few years. I spent many years scraping by as a journalist, always paying into the system. Spouse and I are now pretty well set financially, but the thousands each month to which we will be entitled is not just chump change--it will pay for groceries, gas, home repairs, etc. It may even allow our investments to grow untouched, which is important because at least one of us will likely need assisted living.

And you like everyone who has paid in should be entitled to what they earned for sS. It's a program everyone pays into.
Just because you manage to save for retirement doesn't change that.

You paid in to support current retirees. Future workers will pay in to support you as a retiree.

How many times does this need to be repeated.

I get that. But just because we were high earners and saved does not mean we shouldn't get our "SS support payout" for our retirement. Fact is everyone is entitled to their SS even if they were a higher earner

Who is this “we”? The target group has an average net worth of $65 million. Anyone who has $65 million in assets and complains about social security has some mental health issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would like to benefit from SS in a few years. I spent many years scraping by as a journalist, always paying into the system. Spouse and I are now pretty well set financially, but the thousands each month to which we will be entitled is not just chump change--it will pay for groceries, gas, home repairs, etc. It may even allow our investments to grow untouched, which is important because at least one of us will likely need assisted living.

And you like everyone who has paid in should be entitled to what they earned for sS. It's a program everyone pays into.
Just because you manage to save for retirement doesn't change that.

You paid in to support current retirees. Future workers will pay in to support you as a retiree.

How many times does this need to be repeated.

I get that. But just because we were high earners and saved does not mean we shouldn't get our "SS support payout" for our retirement. Fact is everyone is entitled to their SS even if they were a higher earner

I agree with this. I think the math should be straightforward. You put in x/you get y without any other commentary.

Maybe there should be an option for those who wish to forgo their SS and a plan for how it could be used for the most needy. But that would be ripe for trouble and a hot mess.

The math on your federal income, property and state tax (if applicable) isn’t straightforward in terms of how it is spent. Why should it be for this?

I think what needs to be reiterated is that SS exists primarily to keep elderly people out of poverty, which is what the plan was designed for.

There is a calculator on the SS website. It should be the same for all. There are other programs that are poverty based.

Don’t even know what you are saying. SS is by far the largest income contributor for poor elderly people.

Are you saying everyone should receive the same amount of SS? Thats one idea put forth.

SS is based on an algorithm. We contribute, our employers contribute, and we receive the contributions based on math. Everyone is entitled to their SS.

For those who can’t survive on SS as calculated, there is SSI.

It’s not that easy. My Dad’s SS is about $1500/month. His housing alone is 1000. He does not qualify for SSI. He doesn’t even qualify for heating assistance etc. because he has some equity in a cheap house (not here) that would be dumb to sell because rent on a 1br apartment would cost more than his mortgage.

That’s really hard. But it also should not have been a surprise. We are repeatedly told what our benefits will be. I hope that isn’t his only source of income.

He gets a couple hundred from renting a room/bath in his house but that’s it. He expected to have my mom’s (even lower) SS too but she passed away from cancer before collecting a dime. Neither finished college or were taught any financial literacy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At this point we’ve been paying in so long we definitely expect to be paid out. People who made high incomes should not be punished for doing so.

It probably shouldn’t be an entitlement. We all pay into various government programs without always personally benefiting. Greed is a common problem in America.

Congress can change the law. Where they draw the line will be interesting. I’ll get the popcorn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would like to benefit from SS in a few years. I spent many years scraping by as a journalist, always paying into the system. Spouse and I are now pretty well set financially, but the thousands each month to which we will be entitled is not just chump change--it will pay for groceries, gas, home repairs, etc. It may even allow our investments to grow untouched, which is important because at least one of us will likely need assisted living.

And you like everyone who has paid in should be entitled to what they earned for sS. It's a program everyone pays into.
Just because you manage to save for retirement doesn't change that.

You paid in to support current retirees. Future workers will pay in to support you as a retiree.

How many times does this need to be repeated.

I get that. But just because we were high earners and saved does not mean we shouldn't get our "SS support payout" for our retirement. Fact is everyone is entitled to their SS even if they were a higher earner

Who is this “we”? The target group has an average net worth of $65 million. Anyone who has $65 million in assets and complains about social security has some mental health issues.

Source?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would like to benefit from SS in a few years. I spent many years scraping by as a journalist, always paying into the system. Spouse and I are now pretty well set financially, but the thousands each month to which we will be entitled is not just chump change--it will pay for groceries, gas, home repairs, etc. It may even allow our investments to grow untouched, which is important because at least one of us will likely need assisted living.

And you like everyone who has paid in should be entitled to what they earned for sS. It's a program everyone pays into.
Just because you manage to save for retirement doesn't change that.

You paid in to support current retirees. Future workers will pay in to support you as a retiree.

How many times does this need to be repeated.

I get that. But just because we were high earners and saved does not mean we shouldn't get our "SS support payout" for our retirement. Fact is everyone is entitled to their SS even if they were a higher earner

Who is this “we”? The target group has an average net worth of $65 million. Anyone who has $65 million in assets and complains about social security has some mental health issues.

The post is for high earners/savers. Where is the $65 million coming from?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would like to benefit from SS in a few years. I spent many years scraping by as a journalist, always paying into the system. Spouse and I are now pretty well set financially, but the thousands each month to which we will be entitled is not just chump change--it will pay for groceries, gas, home repairs, etc. It may even allow our investments to grow untouched, which is important because at least one of us will likely need assisted living.

And you like everyone who has paid in should be entitled to what they earned for sS. It's a program everyone pays into.
Just because you manage to save for retirement doesn't change that.

You paid in to support current retirees. Future workers will pay in to support you as a retiree.

How many times does this need to be repeated.

I get that. But just because we were high earners and saved does not mean we shouldn't get our "SS support payout" for our retirement. Fact is everyone is entitled to their SS even if they were a higher earner

I agree with this. I think the math should be straightforward. You put in x/you get y without any other commentary.

Maybe there should be an option for those who wish to forgo their SS and a plan for how it could be used for the most needy. But that would be ripe for trouble and a hot mess.

The math on your federal income, property and state tax (if applicable) isn’t straightforward in terms of how it is spent. Why should it be for this?

I think what needs to be reiterated is that SS exists primarily to keep elderly people out of poverty, which is what the plan was designed for.

Then needs to be rolled into a more generalized government revenue source. The way it is currently a line-item payroll deduction is never going to sit well with people if you try to tell them it’s not for them.

Exactly! Paying 7% up to first $184K during all of your working years and then being told "nope that is for people who didn't bother to plan for retirement, not you" will definitely not sit well (nor should it sit well)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would like to benefit from SS in a few years. I spent many years scraping by as a journalist, always paying into the system. Spouse and I are now pretty well set financially, but the thousands each month to which we will be entitled is not just chump change--it will pay for groceries, gas, home repairs, etc. It may even allow our investments to grow untouched, which is important because at least one of us will likely need assisted living.

And you like everyone who has paid in should be entitled to what they earned for sS. It's a program everyone pays into.
Just because you manage to save for retirement doesn't change that.

You paid in to support current retirees. Future workers will pay in to support you as a retiree.

How many times does this need to be repeated.

I get that. But just because we were high earners and saved does not mean we shouldn't get our "SS support payout" for our retirement. Fact is everyone is entitled to their SS even if they were a higher earner

I agree with this. I think the math should be straightforward. You put in x/you get y without any other commentary.

Maybe there should be an option for those who wish to forgo their SS and a plan for how it could be used for the most needy. But that would be ripe for trouble and a hot mess.

The math on your federal income, property and state tax (if applicable) isn’t straightforward in terms of how it is spent. Why should it be for this?

I think what needs to be reiterated is that SS exists primarily to keep elderly people out of poverty, which is what the plan was designed for.

Then needs to be rolled into a more generalized government revenue source. The way it is currently a line-item payroll deduction is never going to sit well with people if you try to tell them it’s not for them.

It is for you. But you need to think of it for you in the same way that unemployment benefits are you. You pay into the system for those, also. And if you are fortunate, you never get that money back. But if you get laid off, it's there.

SS is even better because you will definitely get some of that money back no matter what. But you will only *need* it if you are either unlucky or dumb (and being dumb with money is a form of bad luck -- some people just have no common sense, who knows why). If you reach retirement and your SS is just a nice to have, great, you win at life. But if you reach retirement age and it's a necessity, well thank goodness it's there. Just like unemployment benefits -- you don't want to be in the position of needing them, but if you are in that position, thank goodness you can get them.

Do you get it?

But I don't personally pay into unemployment---my employer does. So it doesn't reduce my income every 2 weeks

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would like to benefit from SS in a few years. I spent many years scraping by as a journalist, always paying into the system. Spouse and I are now pretty well set financially, but the thousands each month to which we will be entitled is not just chump change--it will pay for groceries, gas, home repairs, etc. It may even allow our investments to grow untouched, which is important because at least one of us will likely need assisted living.

And you like everyone who has paid in should be entitled to what they earned for sS. It's a program everyone pays into.
Just because you manage to save for retirement doesn't change that.

You paid in to support current retirees. Future workers will pay in to support you as a retiree.

How many times does this need to be repeated.

I get that. But just because we were high earners and saved does not mean we shouldn't get our "SS support payout" for our retirement. Fact is everyone is entitled to their SS even if they were a higher earner

I agree with this. I think the math should be straightforward. You put in x/you get y without any other commentary.

Maybe there should be an option for those who wish to forgo their SS and a plan for how it could be used for the most needy. But that would be ripe for trouble and a hot mess.

The math on your federal income, property and state tax (if applicable) isn’t straightforward in terms of how it is spent. Why should it be for this?

I think what needs to be reiterated is that SS exists primarily to keep elderly people out of poverty, which is what the plan was designed for.

There is a calculator on the SS website. It should be the same for all. There are other programs that are poverty based.

Don’t even know what you are saying. SS is by far the largest income contributor for poor elderly people.

Are you saying everyone should receive the same amount of SS? Thats one idea put forth.

SS is based on an algorithm. We contribute, our employers contribute, and we receive the contributions based on math. Everyone is entitled to their SS.

For those who can’t survive on SS as calculated, there is SSI.

It’s not that easy. My Dad’s SS is about $1500/month. His housing alone is 1000. He does not qualify for SSI. He doesn’t even qualify for heating assistance etc. because he has some equity in a cheap house (not here) that would be dumb to sell because rent on a 1br apartment would cost more than his mortgage.

But that is why you shouldn't retire until you have a place to live. Stop taking loans against your home to fund other things. Work your ass off to pay off the house before you hit 60.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would like to benefit from SS in a few years. I spent many years scraping by as a journalist, always paying into the system. Spouse and I are now pretty well set financially, but the thousands each month to which we will be entitled is not just chump change--it will pay for groceries, gas, home repairs, etc. It may even allow our investments to grow untouched, which is important because at least one of us will likely need assisted living.

And you like everyone who has paid in should be entitled to what they earned for sS. It's a program everyone pays into.
Just because you manage to save for retirement doesn't change that.

You paid in to support current retirees. Future workers will pay in to support you as a retiree.

How many times does this need to be repeated.

I get that. But just because we were high earners and saved does not mean we shouldn't get our "SS support payout" for our retirement. Fact is everyone is entitled to their SS even if they were a higher earner

I agree with this. I think the math should be straightforward. You put in x/you get y without any other commentary.

Maybe there should be an option for those who wish to forgo their SS and a plan for how it could be used for the most needy. But that would be ripe for trouble and a hot mess.

The math on your federal income, property and state tax (if applicable) isn’t straightforward in terms of how it is spent. Why should it be for this?

I think what needs to be reiterated is that SS exists primarily to keep elderly people out of poverty, which is what the plan was designed for.

There is a calculator on the SS website. It should be the same for all. There are other programs that are poverty based.

Don’t even know what you are saying. SS is by far the largest income contributor for poor elderly people.

Are you saying everyone should receive the same amount of SS? Thats one idea put forth.

SS is based on an algorithm. We contribute, our employers contribute, and we receive the contributions based on math. Everyone is entitled to their SS.

For those who can’t survive on SS as calculated, there is SSI.

It’s not that easy. My Dad’s SS is about $1500/month. His housing alone is 1000. He does not qualify for SSI. He doesn’t even qualify for heating assistance etc. because he has some equity in a cheap house (not here) that would be dumb to sell because rent on a 1br apartment would cost more than his mortgage.

That’s really hard. But it also should not have been a surprise. We are repeatedly told what our benefits will be. I hope that isn’t his only source of income.

DP. Some people worked to the maximum their health and abilities allowed and saved the max they could and ended up relying on SS.. It doesn't mean they were lazy or made poor financial decisions. Divorces, health issues, disabilities and other misfortunes often derail plans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would like to benefit from SS in a few years. I spent many years scraping by as a journalist, always paying into the system. Spouse and I are now pretty well set financially, but the thousands each month to which we will be entitled is not just chump change--it will pay for groceries, gas, home repairs, etc. It may even allow our investments to grow untouched, which is important because at least one of us will likely need assisted living.

And you like everyone who has paid in should be entitled to what they earned for sS. It's a program everyone pays into.
Just because you manage to save for retirement doesn't change that.

You paid in to support current retirees. Future workers will pay in to support you as a retiree.

How many times does this need to be repeated.

I get that. But just because we were high earners and saved does not mean we shouldn't get our "SS support payout" for our retirement. Fact is everyone is entitled to their SS even if they were a higher earner

I agree with this. I think the math should be straightforward. You put in x/you get y without any other commentary.

Maybe there should be an option for those who wish to forgo their SS and a plan for how it could be used for the most needy. But that would be ripe for trouble and a hot mess.

The math on your federal income, property and state tax (if applicable) isn’t straightforward in terms of how it is spent. Why should it be for this?

I think what needs to be reiterated is that SS exists primarily to keep elderly people out of poverty, which is what the plan was designed for.

There is a calculator on the SS website. It should be the same for all. There are other programs that are poverty based.

Don’t even know what you are saying. SS is by far the largest income contributor for poor elderly people.

Are you saying everyone should receive the same amount of SS? Thats one idea put forth.

SS is based on an algorithm. We contribute, our employers contribute, and we receive the contributions based on math. Everyone is entitled to their SS.

For those who can’t survive on SS as calculated, there is SSI.

It’s not that easy. My Dad’s SS is about $1500/month. His housing alone is 1000. He does not qualify for SSI. He doesn’t even qualify for heating assistance etc. because he has some equity in a cheap house (not here) that would be dumb to sell because rent on a 1br apartment would cost more than his mortgage.

But that is why you shouldn't retire until you have a place to live. Stop taking loans against your home to fund other things. Work your ass off to pay off the house before you hit 60.

Do you not get not everyone consciously chooses when they retire?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would like to benefit from SS in a few years. I spent many years scraping by as a journalist, always paying into the system. Spouse and I are now pretty well set financially, but the thousands each month to which we will be entitled is not just chump change--it will pay for groceries, gas, home repairs, etc. It may even allow our investments to grow untouched, which is important because at least one of us will likely need assisted living.

And you like everyone who has paid in should be entitled to what they earned for sS. It's a program everyone pays into.
Just because you manage to save for retirement doesn't change that.

You paid in to support current retirees. Future workers will pay in to support you as a retiree.

How many times does this need to be repeated.

I get that. But just because we were high earners and saved does not mean we shouldn't get our "SS support payout" for our retirement. Fact is everyone is entitled to their SS even if they were a higher earner

I agree with this. I think the math should be straightforward. You put in x/you get y without any other commentary.

Maybe there should be an option for those who wish to forgo their SS and a plan for how it could be used for the most needy. But that would be ripe for trouble and a hot mess.

The math on your federal income, property and state tax (if applicable) isn’t straightforward in terms of how it is spent. Why should it be for this?

I think what needs to be reiterated is that SS exists primarily to keep elderly people out of poverty, which is what the plan was designed for.

There is a calculator on the SS website. It should be the same for all. There are other programs that are poverty based.

Don’t even know what you are saying. SS is by far the largest income contributor for poor elderly people.

Are you saying everyone should receive the same amount of SS? Thats one idea put forth.

SS is based on an algorithm. We contribute, our employers contribute, and we receive the contributions based on math. Everyone is entitled to their SS.

For those who can’t survive on SS as calculated, there is SSI.

It’s not that easy. My Dad’s SS is about $1500/month. His housing alone is 1000. He does not qualify for SSI. He doesn’t even qualify for heating assistance etc. because he has some equity in a cheap house (not here) that would be dumb to sell because rent on a 1br apartment would cost more than his mortgage.

That’s really hard. But it also should not have been a surprise. We are repeatedly told what our benefits will be. I hope that isn’t his only source of income.

DP. Some people worked to the maximum their health and abilities allowed and saved the max they could and ended up relying on SS.. It doesn't mean they were lazy or made poor financial decisions. Divorces, health issues, disabilities and other misfortunes often derail plans.

I didn’t allude to any of those things. I didn’t even intend to convey by subtext. Sh$t happens. I said it shouldn’t have been a surprise. But the adult child of this elder said they weren’t financially literate and didn’t finish high school.