Working well into your 70s because you can’t afford to retire.

[Anonymous]

Why haven’t people in their 70s saved more? Younger Americans are already drowning in debt if they had the gall to go to college or get a professional degree, homes cost more than ever especially in major cities, and it’s unlikely Social Security will even be around for them given insolvency projections.

Old people lived through a tremendous economy and have had many good years. Perhaps it’s time they downsized radically or look to their family. As a last resort, they have social security.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have been assuming that SS will be means tested or otherwise not available by the time I retire.

There's an easy fix: Eliminate or raise the $127,200 cap on SS contributions, and implement means testing, since folks like Warren Buffett do not need SS. Those two things alone would make SS solvent for the next couple of generations.

They should definitely raise the SS contribution cap. We are done with that by March. It's ridiculous. I wouldn't want to means test. These programs work best when there is skin in the game for everyone.

Agree with this (and it would mean a substantial tax increase for our family). I don't like the means testing, either. I think everyone should have skin in the game and yeah, if you've paid into the system, you deserve to get something back, whether or not you "need" it.

A large proportion of what we make above the cap is contributed to our retirement savings. Thanks to the "Trump bump" in the market over the last year, our planner told us last week we can retire 2 years sooner than we expected. We were elated. I would rather manager my own money for retirement rather than giving it to the government.

Your financial planner is an idiot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yet immigrants bring their elderly relatives who didn’t work a day here but get Medicare, Medicaid,subsidized housing and whatnot.
Fwiw I am an immigrant.

Correct - it’s scandalous what chain migration has done and this is one of many ill effects.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have been assuming that SS will be means tested or otherwise not available by the time I retire.

There's an easy fix: Eliminate or raise the $127,200 cap on SS contributions, and implement means testing, since folks like Warren Buffett do not need SS. Those two things alone would make SS solvent for the next couple of generations.

They should definitely raise the SS contribution cap. We are done with that by March. It's ridiculous. I wouldn't want to means test. These programs work best when there is skin in the game for everyone.

Agree with this (and it would mean a substantial tax increase for our family). I don't like the means testing, either. I think everyone should have skin in the game and yeah, if you've paid into the system, you deserve to get something back, whether or not you "need" it.

A large proportion of what we make above the cap is contributed to our retirement savings. Thanks to the "Trump bump" in the market over the last year, our planner told us last week we can retire 2 years sooner than we expected. We were elated. I would rather manager my own money for retirement rather than giving it to the government.

pft. I retired at 50 because the Clinton economy made me rich at 30. It got boring and I started a new business. Only so much traveling , sailing and partying a person can take.

[Anonymous]

I plan to stroke out at my desk. It’s the American way!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have been assuming that SS will be means tested or otherwise not available by the time I retire.

There's an easy fix: Eliminate or raise the $127,200 cap on SS contributions, and implement means testing, since folks like Warren Buffett do not need SS. Those two things alone would make SS solvent for the next couple of generations.

They should definitely raise the SS contribution cap. We are done with that by March. It's ridiculous. I wouldn't want to means test. These programs work best when there is skin in the game for everyone.

Agree with this (and it would mean a substantial tax increase for our family). I don't like the means testing, either. I think everyone should have skin in the game and yeah, if you've paid into the system, you deserve to get something back, whether or not you "need" it.

A large proportion of what we make above the cap is contributed to our retirement savings. Thanks to the "Trump bump" in the market over the last year, our planner told us last week we can retire 2 years sooner than we expected. We were elated. I would rather manager my own money for retirement rather than giving it to the government.

pft. I retired at 50 because the Clinton economy made me rich at 30. It got boring and I started a new business. Only so much traveling , sailing and partying a person can take.

Agree. Work provides a purpose. I don’t need to work for money but do so to have a reason to get out of bed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yet immigrants bring their elderly relatives who didn’t work a day here but get Medicare, Medicaid,subsidized housing and whatnot.
Fwiw I am an immigrant.

Out of curiosity, does your country of origin do the same for immigrants?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s not country’s job to fix. They should have saved more when they were young.

You're an ass.

I hope you work until you're in your 90s.

[Anonymous]

It depends on the situation. Some seniors simply refuse to downsize. Of course, when earning a high salary, one can afford to live in a 5 bedroom house and pay the upkeep and properly taxes. But if you're 75 and just refuse to downsize and feel it's your birthright to spend the rest of your life in a large, expensive to maintain house, then that's your choice to run out of savings within a few years. Many seniors want to continue paying for too much house then whine about the high utility bills and property taxes when all they need is a one bedroom apartment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have been assuming that SS will be means tested or otherwise not available by the time I retire.

There's an easy fix: Eliminate or raise the $127,200 cap on SS contributions, and implement means testing, since folks like Warren Buffett do not need SS. Those two things alone would make SS solvent for the next couple of generations.

The upper-middle class liberals here would scream holy terror.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have been assuming that SS will be means tested or otherwise not available by the time I retire.

There's an easy fix: Eliminate or raise the $127,200 cap on SS contributions, and implement means testing, since folks like Warren Buffett do not need SS. Those two things alone would make SS solvent for the next couple of generations.

The upper-middle class liberals here would scream holy terror.

I am an upper-middle class liberal and I think the cap being as low as it is is ridiculous. I think means testing would turn public perception of it towards being a welfare program, though, rather than an orange benefit.

[Anonymous]

^^^ EARNED benefit, not orange.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have been assuming that SS will be means tested or otherwise not available by the time I retire.

There's an easy fix: Eliminate or raise the $127,200 cap on SS contributions, and implement means testing, since folks like Warren Buffett do not need SS. Those two things alone would make SS solvent for the next couple of generations.

The upper-middle class liberals here would scream holy terror.

UMC liberal here, and I've been saying they need to eliminate the cap for years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why haven’t people in their 70s saved more? Younger Americans are already drowning in debt if they had the gall to go to college or get a professional degree, homes cost more than ever especially in major cities, and it’s unlikely Social Security will even be around for them given insolvency projections.

Old people lived through a tremendous economy and have had many good years. Perhaps it’s time they downsized radically or look to their family. As a last resort, they have social security.

My dad died in his 90s. As a black man, he just didn't make much and his SS was tiny. He saved as much as he could. God you are an asshole. Not everyone is able to go to college and get a professional degree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have been assuming that SS will be means tested or otherwise not available by the time I retire.

There's an easy fix: Eliminate or raise the $127,200 cap on SS contributions, and implement means testing, since folks like Warren Buffett do not need SS. Those two things alone would make SS solvent for the next couple of generations.

They should definitely raise the SS contribution cap. We are done with that by March. It's ridiculous. I wouldn't want to means test. These programs work best when there is skin in the game for everyone.

Agree with this (and it would mean a substantial tax increase for our family). I don't like the means testing, either. I think everyone should have skin in the game and yeah, if you've paid into the system, you deserve to get something back, whether or not you "need" it.

A large proportion of what we make above the cap is contributed to our retirement savings. Thanks to the "Trump bump" in the market over the last year, our planner told us last week we can retire 2 years sooner than we expected. We were elated. I would rather manager my own money for retirement rather than giving it to the government.

The extra money would be going to help seniors across the country but I guess that's not your jam.