Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old Yesterday, 02:12 PM
 
Location: Prepperland
19,020 posts, read 14,193,756 times
Reputation: 16745

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by leadfoot4 View Post
NONSENSE!!! (I'm being polite!)

SS began to take deductions from my pay checks, when I started working full time, at the age of 19. At that point in time, I had no way of knowing the future, and how my financial life would turn out. (none of us do!!) As it turned out, I spent the next 37 years working, at many points in time, in excess of 40 hours a week, which racked up the overtime pay, which was also subject to SS deductions. I was totally self-sufficient financially, for all those years.

I'm currently 72 years of age, been retired for a fair amount of time, and began drawing the SS that I EARNED, at 62. I managed my finances wisely, and am in good shape (so far). WTH should I have to support someone else, who chose not to consider their future situation, in their earlier life??? Or WTH should I have my SS means tested, today, when 2 years from now, I, or my wife, could develop some sort of serious medical situation that requires us to dip into our savings, in a big way. We planned for this, and allocated our funds accordingly....
Though it is a common belief that we're "owed" our "benefits," the law says otherwise.
In Helvering v. Davis and Flemming v. Nestor, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Social Security taxes are simply taxes and convey no property or contractual rights to Social Security benefits. Congress is under no obligation to pay benefits - they are entirely at the government's discretion. So FICA is not insurance - for YOU.
. . . .
Is that clear? There is no “Trust Fund”. There is no “right” to benefits. You didn’t “pay into” Social Security. You volunteered to pay a tax and you surrendered your endowment from your Creator, in exchange for charity from the PUBLIC TREASURY.
- - -
From its inception, it was a giant *scam* to enact a new tax in the midst of the Great Depression (to satisfy the creditors). And the retirement age of 65 was chosen to insure that the majority of workers who paid the tax would die before ever receiving one dime in benefits. (In 1930s, the actuarial tables listed the male lifespan to be 54-58). Women were courted with the "Survivor's benefit" for the wife, who could collect yet not ever pay one dime in taxes. Thus America was chivvied into "voluntary" socialist servitude to Big Brother, with the matriarchy firmly pushing from behind.

The irony is that not only did the male lifespan increase, but the ever higher socialist taxes drove the women out of the home and into the workplace. And we all can see how that affected birthrates. If you exclude the immigrants, America's population is on the decline, as are other "socialist paradises." (1.64 births per woman (2020); 2.2 is required to maintain population)
The ever growing population of aged and infirm will burden the ever shrinking population of young tax payers.
The demographic inverted pyramid is unstable.
This will not end well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Yesterday, 02:57 PM
 
Location: Florida
14,967 posts, read 9,797,636 times
Reputation: 12063
Quote:
Originally Posted by Submariner View Post
In nearly every one of these 'retirement' threads, I am amazed by how much people think that they will need in retirement.

It makes sense, I guess.

People in their 40s and 50s, are in the mindset of buying a first time home, raising children, maybe stepping up into their second home and wanting to get it paid off. They are producing money and consuming at a high rate. Without any real experience of what retirement is like.

So they project that they will continue to need a high income.
Correct.

Seems like the idea of down sizing a living within your means is taboo.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 03:43 PM
 
1,781 posts, read 1,204,879 times
Reputation: 4059
I *definitely* spend more in retirement because I have more hours to fill up. Gas is more than double since I was WFH before.


I have not yet but I will likely move in the future as well which could be $$.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 08:09 PM
 
Location: moved
13,646 posts, read 9,704,293 times
Reputation: 23467
Quote:
Originally Posted by Submariner View Post
In nearly every one of these 'retirement' threads, I am amazed by how much people think that they will need in retirement.

It makes sense, I guess.

People in their 40s and 50s, are in the mindset of buying a first time home, raising children, maybe stepping up into their second home and wanting to get it paid off. They are producing money and consuming at a high rate. Without any real experience of what retirement is like.

So they project that they will continue to need a high income.
Most people aren't particularly self-sufficient. This is the result of professionalization and specialization, where we're taught to excel in one particular thing, be it medicine or aeronautical engineering or corporate law, to the exclusion of everything else, such as plumbing or carpentry or brewing beer. Especially among higher-earning professionals, it is normal and broadly-accepted to outsource the many quotidian chores of life. One example is food and cooking. Some people grow their own food. Others shop at the grocery store. Still others, go to restaurants. You see the progression from most-frugal to least? The same holds for all sorts of DIY tasks, be it repairs around the house, or tax preparation. Just to get a minimal window into alternative life, consider a retiree who is helpless around the kitchen, who dines-out say 12-15 times a week. Even if the dining-out is in local no-frills diners, fast-food or $8.99 call-you-can-eat Chinese buffet lunch, the costs add up. And that's just food!

To generate money, one has to... earn it. Then save and invest. Said generation is costly, because one simply lacks time or energy for the DIY things. Some inestimable heroes can do it all, but most can't.

The most frugal retirees are the self-sufficient type, who require minimal lucre because they attend to most of their needs without needing a claim on the labor of others. That's fantastic... but how does one switch from being a high-earner who outsources everything, to a non-earner who does everything himself?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 08:53 PM
 
17,357 posts, read 16,498,076 times
Reputation: 28964
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetgraphics View Post
Though it is a common belief that we're "owed" our "benefits," the law says otherwise.
In Helvering v. Davis and Flemming v. Nestor, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Social Security taxes are simply taxes and convey no property or contractual rights to Social Security benefits. Congress is under no obligation to pay benefits - they are entirely at the government's discretion. So FICA is not insurance - for YOU.
. . . .
Is that clear? There is no “Trust Fund”. There is no “right” to benefits. You didn’t “pay into” Social Security. You volunteered to pay a tax and you surrendered your endowment from your Creator, in exchange for charity from the PUBLIC TREASURY.
- - -
From its inception, it was a giant *scam* to enact a new tax in the midst of the Great Depression (to satisfy the creditors). And the retirement age of 65 was chosen to insure that the majority of workers who paid the tax would die before ever receiving one dime in benefits. (In 1930s, the actuarial tables listed the male lifespan to be 54-58). Women were courted with the "Survivor's benefit" for the wife, who could collect yet not ever pay one dime in taxes. Thus America was chivvied into "voluntary" socialist servitude to Big Brother, with the matriarchy firmly pushing from behind.

The irony is that not only did the male lifespan increase, but the ever higher socialist taxes drove the women out of the home and into the workplace. And we all can see how that affected birthrates. If you exclude the immigrants, America's population is on the decline, as are other "socialist paradises." (1.64 births per woman (2020); 2.2 is required to maintain population)
The ever growing population of aged and infirm will burden the ever shrinking population of young tax payers.
The demographic inverted pyramid is unstable.
This will not end well.
Blah, blah, blah. No one "volunteered" to pay FICA. Most likely most of us would have absolutely not agreed to pay for FICA had not paying for it been an option.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 08:59 PM
 
7,754 posts, read 3,791,421 times
Reputation: 14662
Quote:
Originally Posted by Submariner View Post

Once your home is paid for [no debt], and you quit working many of your expenses drop way down. Commuting is less, wardrobe expenses are less, and eating a meal while in mid-workshift stops completely.
We found our expenses went up - way up - as we had time to do things that cost money.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 09:13 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia (Center City)
949 posts, read 787,620 times
Reputation: 1351
A lot of people get by on SS. They just don't spend time reading financial forums, so you won't see their opinions here.

My SS will be nearly triple my annual nondiscretionary expenses of $20K. I'm counting the months until I can tap that jackpot at age 70. 29 months to go!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 09:15 PM
 
7,754 posts, read 3,791,421 times
Reputation: 14662
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohio_peasant View Post
Most people aren't particularly self-sufficient. This is the result of professionalization and specialization, where we're taught to excel in one particular thing, be it medicine or aeronautical engineering or corporate law, to the exclusion of everything else, such as plumbing or carpentry or brewing beer.
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects." -- Robert A. Heinlein
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 10:12 PM
 
Location: Forests of Maine
37,453 posts, read 61,366,570 times
Reputation: 30397
Quote:
Originally Posted by springfieldva View Post
Blah, blah, blah. No one "volunteered" to pay FICA. Most likely most of us would have absolutely not agreed to pay for FICA had not paying for it been an option.
And to prove this would you kindly share with us the Law that states having a SS policy is mandatory?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 11:07 PM
 
Location: Prepperland
19,020 posts, read 14,193,756 times
Reputation: 16745
Quote:
Originally Posted by springfieldva View Post
Blah, blah, blah. No one "volunteered" to pay FICA. Most likely most of us would have absolutely not agreed to pay for FICA had not paying for it been an option.
There is no law compelling participation or punishing non-participants. It was always 100% voluntary.
“The Social Security Act does not require an individual to have a Social Security Number (SSN) to live and work within the United States, nor does it require an SSN simply for the purpose of having one...”
- - - The Social Security Administration
http://home.hiwaay.net/~becraft/ScottSSNLetter.pdf
Get your own personalized letter from the SocSecAdmin . . .

Read the law for yourself . . .
SOCIAL SECURITY ACT OF 1935 FULL TEXT
https://www.ssa.gov/history/pdf/Down...%20Vol%201.pdf
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top