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.
if we are going to keep it solvent, given that the baby boomers (of which I am one) and the next generation had zero opportunity to opt out and most also have corporate pensions which have disappeared over the last 20 years.
remove the cap. means test. and yes, raise FRA to 70. the last FRA age raise was when? <---this is a test to see if anyone is reading even the most basic of information.
and yes, means test makes it more 'socialistic' well duh. what do you think the whole program is in the first place. but dont do it half ass, which they did. a move from SS to personal driven finance will take at LEAST 30 years.
I'm a boomer but I don't have a corporate pension and none of my contemporaries that I know of have a corporate pension, please stop painting with a broad brush.
So, you are in favor of changing Social Security from a semi-welfare and semi-retirement type program to a full welfare type program in which the people who contribute the most get nothing while at the same time incentivizing the low-income worker to be even more dependent on Uncle Sugar in their later years instead of less dependent.
Sorry, but that's not how I think it should be done. I do, however, think that the retirement age for full benefits should be raised to account for the greater life expectancy now as compared to when SS was first implemented in (about) 1939.
If I am in favor of paying out the promises that were made to the largest 2 generations of americans who had exactly zero opportunity to do otherwise, then yes. I think that that we should not have SS even to the point that we should not have a means tested basic income because history shows that incentivizes the true slackers to aim the lowest.
however, you cannot just sit there and yank the rug out of the people who bargained in good faith and obeyed, EVEN if they didnt agree. I got $5 right here that sez MOST of the people reading this are ONLY going to collect SS. however, in my case, SS is going to be a non-insignificant portion of my retirement and a mandated 30% drop is going to change something.
In short, if you have any ability to collect ANY check, then all of the income should be taxed. I pay into each 'welfare fund' and get nothing back. I pay into the highway fund for oh, california, but dont drive on those roads. Thats actually not socialism. The socialism part is means testing such that the retired millionaires dont get a check. If I were a millionaire and retired, I would think the same, simply because I am rational. The whole shooting match was put in place to protect the working poor, and for decades most of the working retirees had pensions, which corporate america phased out of existence in the mid 90s.
I'm a boomer but I don't have a corporate pension and none of my contemporaries that I know of have a corporate pension, please stop painting with a broad brush.
hold on a second here, you are using a sample size of 1. I am EXACTLY the LAST year and darn near the last month of the boomer generation. The 'boomer' generation is the largest one - by far in year span and about 1/3ish of us are already dead. corporate non govt pensions for the most part disappeared by the end of 2000. so if you entered the workforce or a job that had one, by 1990 to 1995, your vesting window may not have been hit.
I was lucky, I have 2 IBM pensions, vested in both. had I stayed at IBM I would have none as the company strongly coerced those to dump into the company 401. but since I was 'active retired' I was allowed to keep it, and every year I dutifully get a letter telling me how much less it will be as it switched into underfunded and circles the PBGC drain. meaning far far more IBM pensioners are now dead, than alive and no one is paying into it.
anyone my age who worked during then, has the same experiences.
you did. EVERYONE in the US gets a letter at 10 years out. SSA pulls the mailing address from the IRS in a data pull of your last filing address.
but 99.9% of the people throw it out without even opening it and do not create their account.
you are 1 year younger than me it seems. If you have not started, you are late.
10 years out from when? I would never just casually toss a letter like that.
I have viewed my SS statement and I've had an account for years. I'm not sure what I'm supposed to have started. I can't do anything with it until it's time to start collecting, which at 58 is still years off.
We have not received any letters recently from SS and SS has our address on file.
hold on a second here, you are using a sample size of 1. I am EXACTLY the LAST year and darn near the last month of the boomer generation. The 'boomer' generation is the largest one - by far in year span and about 1/3ish of us are already dead. corporate non govt pensions for the most part disappeared by the end of 2000. so if you entered the workforce or a job that had one, by 1990 to 1995, your vesting window may not have been hit.
I was lucky, I have 2 IBM pensions, vested in both. had I stayed at IBM I would have none as the company strongly coerced those to dump into the company 401. but since I was 'active retired' I was allowed to keep it, and every year I dutifully get a letter telling me how much less it will be as it switched into underfunded and circles the PBGC drain. meaning far far more IBM pensioners are now dead, than alive and no one is paying into it.
anyone my age who worked during then, has the same experiences.
No, I'm using a sample size of about 100 plus everyone who worked in my profession, since the wage and benefit structure was fairly similar throughout. I am the second to last year of the generation and entered the workforce in 1986 and there was zero pension opportunity in my profession.
I'm younger than a boomer and I have a corp pension (non govt). It isn't great but I do have it.
Same.
I'm an older Gen X and I have a pension and I was a stay at home mom for 20+ years. It's not going to amount to much but I'll be glad to have it.
I took a practical job with less pay but it had decent benefits when I was in my 20's. I know plenty who went for the bigger paycheck in lieu of benefits because they were young and healthy and felt that they needed the money then and there.
10 years out from when? I would never just casually toss a letter like that.
''at present? age 56/57, its when I got mine a few years back, its when my bro got his last summer
I do know that at work as each of my peers in varying years got it, we had 'I got my letter' parties in the cafe and IIRC the ages held. half my friends are retired or will within the next 24 months.
No, I'm using a sample size of about 100 plus everyone who worked in my profession, since the wage and benefit structure was fairly similar throughout. I am the second to last year of the generation and entered the workforce in 1986 and there was zero pension opportunity in my profession.
IDK why you keep blabbing about that.
I started working in 90 and have a pension. What difference does it make? My pension has no relevance to SS and I was paid less salary all along in part due to having the pension. . . I'd have had better hourly pay without it and thus more opportunity to save and more SS.
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.
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.
