Quote:
Originally Posted by goober
Social security is one of the most successful government programs ever.
It's goal was to eliminate senior poverty, when it began 90% of senior citizens in the US lived in poverty, today that number is reversed.
It had to start somewhere, and the first people who qualified did very well.
But just because you can come up with an anecdote, it doesn't change the fact that Social Security has spared hundreds of millions of Americans the horror of living out their last days in abject misery.
And what about countries that have privatized their retirement plans?
Chile rethinks its privatized pension system - International Herald Tribune
|
The very first retirees of social security, paid no more than $25.00 per year for it. It then gradually increased to where it is today. However, the first lucky ones to draw upon social security, amounted to billions & billions of payout on very little investment into the fund.
This is the problem. Today, employer/employee contributions into social security are 12.4% for social security & medicare .124% or a total of 15.3% of GROSS wages.
That means for every $100.00 an employee earns, $15.30 is deposited for social security & medicare taxes. For average income of $45000.00 per year, that means the employee/employer contribution is $6885.00 per year. That's along way from $25.00 per year.
The problem is: The largest generation in U.S. history--(baby boomers) are now starting to retire. They will not enjoy the same benefits that their parents did, even though they paid in significantly more.
While at the same time, we have to be concerned about younger workers, who get to flip the bill for all of these baby boomers.
They will either have to raise taxes on social security & medicare benefits to the younger generation, or they will have to dramatically cut benefits to those who are nearing their retirement years. The benefit cutting is already going on, & the age for retirement has moved it's dock. "The ship is not coming in."
To ignore the problem is just absurd. I feel the best way to handle the situation, in order to secure a decent retirement for younger workers, is to establish a program where they will be able to put just 2% into a "managed" safe financial instrument. A place they can't get too it, just like social security. The difference just in 1%-or 2% difference in return over a lifetime of work is
enormous.