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.
This is one of the proposals to fix the shortfall in Social Security. Frankly I think means testing Social Security is a load of BS. Say, I diligently save all my life, foregoing living the good life - instead of buying a Mercedes and going to Lake Como for vacations I save my money in my 401k and build a balance for retirement. Say the balance grows to $2,000,000 when I hit 70. Now I am required to make withdrawals according to the Required Minimum Distribution Rules (currently that would be a requirement to start withdrawing a minimum of $78,000/yr).
The issue is that in the future there is a strong likelihood that they may start means testing Social Security, saying that people who earn more than $55k/yr in retirement will not get any benefits. How is this even fair? I think this is an outrage.
Social Security is not a tax but a benefit that they person has invested their money in. By excluding payment of these benefits the government is in fact stealing it. It's grand theft.
I don't see them eliminating Social Security for people completely. They will likely tweak the formula that already exists to further reduce higher levels of Social Security. They will also likely raise the cap on impacted salary.
remove the cap , push fra out , do away with spousal benefits, everyone gets paid based on what they earned , break off ssdi which has turned in to extended unemployment insurance and is a heavy weight on ss retirement and survivor benefits . problem solved
remove the cap , push fra out , do away with spousal benefits, everyone gets paid based on what they earned , break off ssdi which has turned in to extended unemployment insurance and is a heavy weight on ss retirement and survivor benefits . problem solved
Yes, the whole thing could be made solvent with some combination of changes like this. It's ridiculous how many ways there are to collect a benefit, and that needs to be cleaned up.
There would be throngs of people at the Capitol with pitchforks if SS were cut off for anyone earning $55k. And it would encourage people to do silly things, like stop putting $$ in investments, and instead just stuff cash in the walls of their houses.
And it would encourage people to do silly things, like stop putting $$ in investments, and instead just stuff cash in the walls of their houses.
Yeah. But they'd lose either way....keep it in your floor boards you lose all potential gain or growth to inflation.
When you put it IN the mattress it was worth xx,000.00 amount....pull it out 30 years later and it's worth "less.".....
OR save and invest it for retirement to get that gain, and perhaps get less in benefits due to means testing.
remove the cap , push fra out , do away with spousal benefits, everyone gets paid based on what they earned , break off ssdi which has turned in to extended unemployment insurance and is a heavy weight on ss retirement and survivor benefits . problem solved
67 for FRA is already where it should be. If you bump the FRA, what ends up happening is that people who age out of the ability to work and have no choice but to collect early get slaughtered. It would be better to bump the minimum retirement age up. 62 is pretty young.
Any fix increases the amount of tax rich people pay. If you remove the cap, that's rich people. If you raise the tax rate, the rich people who own the corporations pay the employer half 6.2% so that goes up. The other approach is to start taxing unearned income which is almost entirely the domain of rich people. Since the political system is rigged to allow rich people to avoid paying taxes and instead pile on the national debt, I don't see any kind of Social Security reform coming in the next half-dozen years. Certainly not in the next three. Eventually, the program will be changed so it is cash flow neutral and that means raising taxes.
This is one of the proposals to fix the shortfall in Social Security. Frankly I think means testing Social Security is a load of BS.
Social Security is already means-tested. A single person with income over $25,000 pays a tax on their Social Security Benefits. $37.9 Billion was collected in 2017.
Quote:
Originally Posted by k374
The issue is that in the future there is a strong likelihood that they may start means testing Social Security, saying that people who earn more than $55k/yr in retirement will not get any benefits. How is this even fair? I think this is an outrage.
I'm not familiar with any serious proposals to set means-testing at $55,000.
Quote:
Originally Posted by k374
Social Security is not a tax but a benefit that they person has invested their money in. By excluding payment of these benefits the government is in fact stealing it. It's grand theft.
How likely is this to happen?
Social Security is a tax; it is not an investment; and it's not likely to happen.
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.
