ADVERTISEMENT

Totally off topic - Social Security

Not exactly the same topic, but someone mentioned taxes….
I’ve been working on mine, and with the code changes this year it turns out we overpaid and have a $3K refund coming. I’m not really on board with giving out interest-free loans to anyone, much less the ungrateful bloodsuckers on Capitol Hill, so I looked to reduce my withholding this week.

I discovered that they’ve now (actually in 2020) changed the forms so you don’t claim allowances anymore. It’s a lot like doing taxes, you enter the data and it figures out how much to withhold based on a formula. Except the formula appears to be set up to make sure that you’re short and owe money every year.

Right now I have the benefit of not having filled out a W-4 since 2012, so I’m still shown as single with 2 allowances. Any change I make results in me paying $1,500…which I don’t want to do either.
 
Or raising the age you receive the benefits, which has already begun and will continue to be stretched as medicine advances and people live longer.
As I have said in the past, it is unfortunate that politicians cannot be sued for malpractice like engineers and doctors can. SSI is basically an actuarial exercise dealing with a very large population and the average life span. As the average life span changed from ~65 to ~78-80, the Full Benefit Age needed to be adjusted upwards also. Yes, it has been kicked upwards slightly, but much more needed to be done to keep up with increasing life expectancies. Not necessarily on a year for year basis, but much more than has been done. Doing this was done for me, and I have no problem with it. I WILL have a problem if they cut my benefits after starting to receive them, and I believe most others would also.

Given where we are with SSI, what else should be done to keep the program "solvent". Well, IIRC, Social Security earnings are capped on annual earnings, probably up around $130,000 by now, maybe even a bit more. Why? IMO, all earnings should be subject to the SSI earnings tax, including income from things like earnings from stock options. There ya go-taxing the rich, right? Ha. I got some stock options a couple times at Boeing, but it wasn't that many as I wasn't an executive level. And while I am comfortable, and was then also, I don't think I fit the typical definition of "rich".

So there ya go, a couple good ideas from a mostly conservative/libertarian type dude to keep the SSI system rolling, without doing away with the system like Lyin' Joe claims we want to do.
 
As I have said in the past, it is unfortunate that politicians cannot be sued for malpractice like engineers and doctors can. SSI is basically an actuarial exercise dealing with a very large population and the average life span. As the average life span changed from ~65 to ~78-80, the Full Benefit Age needed to be adjusted upwards also. Yes, it has been kicked upwards slightly, but much more needed to be done to keep up with increasing life expectancies. Not necessarily on a year for year basis, but much more than has been done. Doing this was done for me, and I have no problem with it. I WILL have a problem if they cut my benefits after starting to receive them, and I believe most others would also.

Given where we are with SSI, what else should be done to keep the program "solvent". Well, IIRC, Social Security earnings are capped on annual earnings, probably up around $130,000 by now, maybe even a bit more. Why? IMO, all earnings should be subject to the SSI earnings tax, including income from things like earnings from stock options. There ya go-taxing the rich, right? Ha. I got some stock options a couple times at Boeing, but it wasn't that many as I wasn't an executive level. And while I am comfortable, and was then also, I don't think I fit the typical definition of "rich".

So there ya go, a couple good ideas from a mostly conservative/libertarian type dude to keep the SSI system rolling, without doing away with the system like Lyin' Joe claims we want to do.

I make just enough to have some of my income exempt from social security taxes. I wouldn't care if they took off the earnings cap. The few hundred dollars per year difference would have no impact on my life.

My bigger concern is that I'm going to end up getting screwed out of thousands of dollars per year because Congress lacks the balls to make sure that the system works into the future.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mikalalas
Not exactly the same topic, but someone mentioned taxes….
I’ve been working on mine, and with the code changes this year it turns out we overpaid and have a $3K refund coming. I’m not really on board with giving out interest-free loans to anyone, much less the ungrateful bloodsuckers on Capitol Hill, so I looked to reduce my withholding this week.

I discovered that they’ve now (actually in 2020) changed the forms so you don’t claim allowances anymore. It’s a lot like doing taxes, you enter the data and it figures out how much to withhold based on a formula. Except the formula appears to be set up to make sure that you’re short and owe money every year.

Right now I have the benefit of not having filled out a W-4 since 2012, so I’m still shown as single with 2 allowances. Any change I make results in me paying $1,500…which I don’t want to do either.

The way that they changed the forms has been very annoying to me. For whatever reason, my wife's former employer could never get her withholding right after the change. I make a little over 50% more than my wife but I would have four times as much money withheld from my checks and we'd end up owing money. I finally got her (and her new employer) to get what looks like the right amount of money withheld. The forms and formulas that they are using now are definitely dumber for their changes.
 
Not exactly the same topic, but someone mentioned taxes….
I’ve been working on mine, and with the code changes this year it turns out we overpaid and have a $3K refund coming. I’m not really on board with giving out interest-free loans to anyone, much less the ungrateful bloodsuckers on Capitol Hill, so I looked to reduce my withholding this week.

I discovered that they’ve now (actually in 2020) changed the forms so you don’t claim allowances anymore. It’s a lot like doing taxes, you enter the data and it figures out how much to withhold based on a formula. Except the formula appears to be set up to make sure that you’re short and owe money every year.

Right now I have the benefit of not having filled out a W-4 since 2012, so I’m still shown as single with 2 allowances. Any change I make results in me paying $1,500…which I don’t want to do either.
I refuse to use any Intuit brand (TurboTax) or H&R Block system to do my taxes. They're the reason that this process is complicated and sucks in the first place, and it shouldn't cost any money to file your taxes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KRUSTYtheCOUG
May I opt out of "coverage"?
Well, no, you cannot. Not saying you are saying this, but can't we ALL just contribute to this ONE thing for the benefit of millions of elderly, poor, disabled and children who get survivor benefits WITHOUT worrying about getting "theirs"? Taihtsat
 
Well this thread is more fun than I thought it would be. A good one too. Lots of actually intelligent discourse.

One thing - the talk about investing the SS "fund" is off base. There is no fund. The revenues go into the big Govt pot, likewise the expenses come out of the pot. The "fund" is an accounting thing. Tracking the income and expenses. Kind of like a department at a college. You get your allocation, you spend it, depending on your school you carry over your balance to the next year. But there is no money to specifically invest in anything. It's all in the big pot. In the case of the US, the debt pot.
There actually is a fund. Any surplus that results annually after all benefits and administrative costs are paid is invested in interest-bearing US treasury bonds. As of 2020 there was almost 3 trillion in that fund. A portion of that also goes into funding the Hospital Insurance Trust Fund of Medicare.

This specifically keeps the money separate and out of the big pot! Taihtsat
 
If you really think having that money sit in a fake savings account is the best option... that's your choice.

The same way I should be able to do what I want to with mine. It should be MY choice.
Um, it's not fake. The money is invested and draws REAL interest. For example, one of the best years recently was 2013 where it drew 102.8 billion dollars in interest alone. This money helps to fund the program.

You do not have a choice to pay taxes. You either do or are in violation of the law and risk whatever punishment comes from violating the law. Having a quarrel with THIS particular tax is puzzling to me when the government actually wastes and squanders money in so many other ways that don't seem to rankle folks the same way (pentagon, for one). Taihtsat
 
I refuse to use any Intuit brand (TurboTax) or H&R Block system to do my taxes. They're the reason that this process is complicated and sucks in the first place, and it shouldn't cost any money to file your taxes.
There are free versions that they do not promote and really don't want you to know about. If I'm not mistaken, I think it is required by law that they offer a free version. Taihtsat
 
I have a decent pot in my 401k and unless there is a major market dump, I will likely stop working 3-5 years before full retirement age. Thoughts from the peanut gallery on taking my SS early at a lower amount or drain the 401k while I wait for it to hit maximum monthly payment?
I’ve heard from multiple retired people not to worry about having as much money after age 75 or so.
 
Who said get rid of it?
Social Security is a scam? There are millions of people that disagree with you whose lives would be destroyed without the system. Is it a flawed system? Sure. Is our country a better place because we have it? Absolutely. Trying to equate Social Security and Medicare to Ukraine makes you look like a crazy person. You better go to your doctor and get your rotator cuffs checked....because you reached so hard that you had to rip your shoulders out of their sockets.

For the other comments above about choosing your own investments? God no. People are stupid and emotional. The last thing we need is a bunch of morons screwing things up even worse than our government already does.

I am concerned that the solution to fixing the social security "insolvency" problem will be to punish responsible people who saved significant amounts of money in their 401(k)'s and other investments. I plan on having a significant retirement account but I don't want to see my social security completely stolen from me for people who didn't make the best choices in life. I don't mind taking a small cut to help others, but I do fear that liberals will punish me too much for planning ahead. So, I get the concern but a solution that falls between the two extremes would be better.
I've work as an attorney for SSA for many years. Social Security was part of "social safety net" plan implemented in most western countries to avoid another great depression on the advice of John Maynard Keynes. Prior to that, the world economy had ungone depressions approximately every 30 years since the tulip bubble in 1637. Depressions though history have brought great misery and strife. The panic of 1857 was a precipitating factor of the Civil War. The great depression was the primary reason Hitler was able to come to power. Penniless people en masse cause depressions and desperation, and that leads to very bad things.

In terms of world economic stability, the social safety net has been hugely successful, and because of that, it is here to stay. The only question is how will it be financed in the future. That said, a social safety net, isn't and was never intended to be your retirement plan or defacto pension it has become. It is intended to insure a steady source liquidity in the market to stave off wide spread financial collapse.

The fact is Social Security taxes have been used to prop up the federal government and the American tax payer since its inception, and is still, but the real problem started when we started to pay third world level taxes in the 1980s. Now Americans demand a first world country, while paying third world taxes. Politicals are gutless and are unwilling to have the necessary "come to jesus" moment with the American people because it would be extremely unpopular. You want to "save" Social Security and Medicare, you need to start paying taxes that will adequately fund the government again, and not keep kicking the "national debt" problem down the road. Under Ike the maximum tax rate was 90%, 52% corporate. Under Nixon it was 70%, Reagan it went from 70% to 28%. In fairness to him, the reduction was intended to combat stagflation. It wasn't intended to be the permanent policy it has become.

You want to be liberal, and have wide spread social programs, demand and pay the commensurate tax bill, and the decades of the short fall, accordingly.

You want to be conservative, it isn't toting a gun, it is living fiscal conservatism. It is demanding major cuts in programs, including the biggest three; corporate and farm welfare and the military, combined with paying a hefty tax increase, because trillions in debt needs to be retired. If that is done, Social Security will be just fine, because the trillions it lent to the government, and to you in unsustainable low taxes, it will get back.
 
I have a decent pot in my 401k and unless there is a major market dump, I will likely stop working 3-5 years before full retirement age. Thoughts from the peanut gallery on taking my SS early at a lower amount or drain the 401k while I wait for it to hit maximum monthly payment?
I’ve heard from multiple retired people not to worry about having as much money after age 75 or so.

That must be invested fairly conservatively, the last year has been brutal.
 
Late to this and there already have been a lot of interesting takes. Some points:

- Has felt to me for as long as I can recall that we're being conditioned to accept means testing and a reduction, if not elimination, of benefits for anyone who has any meaningful assets at all. The pressure will keep ramping up on this front. This dovetails with other stuff we may see like UBI. That may accelerate, too, with developments in AI and automation. I don't know if people have checked out ChatGPT, but current innovations go way beyond a lot of the crap called "AI" previously and the noise people long have made about automation and the elimination of jobs. The generative AI models are getting scary good and while a lot of the hype isn't going to pan out, it's real.

- Much depends on whether the petrodollar and general dollar hegemony can be maintained. That's true not just for SS, but a lot of things. Developments abound on that front. That's another thing I've seen people talking about for just about my entire adult life, with the BRIC countries making noise for the past couple decades about trying to establish a rival to the dollar and going outside the petrodollar. Current developments (e.g., Russia / India / China re the Ukraine war) and crypto seem much more substantial than earlier generalized concerns expressed mainly by goldbugs and conspiracy theorists.
 
That must be invested fairly conservatively, the last year has been brutal.


I have a decent pot in my 401k and unless there is a major market dump, I will likely stop working 3-5 years before full retirement age. Thoughts from the peanut gallery on taking my SS early at a lower amount or drain the 401k while I wait for it to hit maximum monthly payment?
I’ve heard from multiple retired people not to worry about having as much money after age 75 or so.
Krusty - no there is not an actual fund. It is all on paper. If they claim interest earnings, it's just a book entry.

On the "new" W-4. Yeah that thing is a nightmare. And I'm still adapting the the new 1040, etc. I mean, who the F came up with both of those?

To COUGin NWC - I did the math. Drawing at 62 vs 67, I get $10,000 less annually. On the flip side, I will accumulate $120,000 over that 5 years. Meaning by waiting I would "breakeven" at 79. (10,000 x 12 years). Not even factoring in earnings on my retirement that I won't need to draw. So yeah, I chose to go for the SS as soon as I could.
 
it’s a necessary evil based on the majority population you are working with. I’d rather not have a chunk taken out of my paycheck and know I’m only going to get a fraction of what I’d get back if I invested that money myself, but I also understand most people aren’t like me and that’s why it’s in place. It’s not about “me” it’s about human nature…and most people can’t help but spend every penny they make and then some.

Question is do you want a program like SS in place so those folks have some money coming in when they are unable to work (and technically it was money they earned while working) or do you want to pay additional taxes to deal with them when they are on the sidewalk. There’s no right answers.
 
I have a decent pot in my 401k and unless there is a major market dump, I will likely stop working 3-5 years before full retirement age. Thoughts from the peanut gallery on taking my SS early at a lower amount or drain the 401k while I wait for it to hit maximum monthly payment?
I’ve heard from multiple retired people not to worry about having as much money after age 75 or so.
This is a damn simplistic answer, but it is true- It all depends on when you will die. Unfortunately, (or maybe it IS fortunately) almost nobody knows when they will die. So we are then forced to make assumptions about that, so as to guide our decision on when to initiate SSI payments. According to various financial advisors and my own calculations, and as confirmed above by LC, right about 79 is the break even point. If you anticipate leaving us before 79, take it early, if you think you will live a long life then delay the payments. Do a realistic evaluation of your health and consider ancestors health and life spans for projecting your own life expectancy. Maybe consider the market situation also, as SSI payments increase 8% for every year you delay taking them.

Personal situation for example. My wife retired at about 58, I retired at 60, my parents lived into 80's, her parents lived into 90's, so a fairly long life could have been predicted for us. Her pension and annuity had COLA's, but my pension was a fixed amount. After retirement we were able to live on our retirement streams primarily, using up some savings as needed. Wife ended up having some medical issues, and so we started her SSI at 63. That ended up being the correct guess for her as she passed away three years ago at age 70, thus getting the benefits for just over 6 years.

My full benefits age 66, or 66+, I think. Since my pension was a fixed amount and would lose purchasing power over the years as inflation happened (thanks for the huge hit the past couple years, Joe), I elected to wait a while before claiming the SSI benefits. I actually started mine at just over 65, am now 71, so hope to cruise on way past 79. At least now I have the COLA benefit of SSI, so some of my retirement benefits will somewhat keep up with inflation.

Finally, there were (probably still are) websites for predicting your life expectancy. You plug in age, sex, some medical history of you, your parents, maybe grandparents and a lot of health and medical concerns. Smoker? Do you Exercise? Drinker? Diabetes? Obese? Height/weight? Illnesses and injuries? Family history of cancer or heart disease? You get the picture. So after doing that you are compared to the histories of those that are already gone and you will be provided with your projected life expectancy. Of course, it is just a projection, not an absolute certainty, so don't freak out over the answer, just use that data help guide your decision about when to start taking your payments.

Now final finally, maybe you will want to second guess the long term future of the program. If you think the program will be terminated, or will have benefits reduced to save costs, or will even have a means testing requirement implemented, then maybe that would guide you to taking benefits earlier rather than later. That way you would maximize your benefits ahead of program changes that could restrict future benefits.

Hope that helps a bit......
 
  • Like
Reactions: PeteTheChop
I've work as an attorney for SSA for many years. Social Security was part of "social safety net" plan implemented in most western countries to avoid another great depression on the advice of John Maynard Keynes. Prior to that, the world economy had ungone depressions approximately every 30 years since the tulip bubble in 1637. Depressions though history have brought great misery and strife. The panic of 1857 was a precipitating factor of the Civil War. The great depression was the primary reason Hitler was able to come to power. Penniless people en masse cause depressions and desperation, and that leads to very bad things.

In terms of world economic stability, the social safety net has been hugely successful, and because of that, it is here to stay. The only question is how will it be financed in the future. That said, a social safety net, isn't and was never intended to be your retirement plan or defacto pension it has become. It is intended to insure a steady source liquidity in the market to stave off wide spread financial collapse.

The fact is Social Security taxes have been used to prop up the federal government and the American tax payer since its inception, and is still, but the real problem started when we started to pay third world level taxes in the 1980s. Now Americans demand a first world country, while paying third world taxes. Politicals are gutless and are unwilling to have the necessary "come to jesus" moment with the American people because it would be extremely unpopular. You want to "save" Social Security and Medicare, you need to start paying taxes that will adequately fund the government again, and not keep kicking the "national debt" problem down the road. Under Ike the maximum tax rate was 90%, 52% corporate. Under Nixon it was 70%, Reagan it went from 70% to 28%. In fairness to him, the reduction was intended to combat stagflation. It wasn't intended to be the permanent policy it has become.

You want to be liberal, and have wide spread social programs, demand and pay the commensurate tax bill, and the decades of the short fall, accordingly.

You want to be conservative, it isn't toting a gun, it is living fiscal conservatism. It is demanding major cuts in programs, including the biggest three; corporate and farm welfare and the military, combined with paying a hefty tax increase, because trillions in debt needs to be retired. If that is done, Social Security will be just fine, because the trillions it lent to the government, and to you in unsustainable low taxes, it will get back.

A problem with what you say is that cutting farm welfare, will make it so that private farmers can't compete with Corporate farms, and government owned, run farms(And for those who say Govt doesn't own run anything, Amtrack is partially owned run by Govt.).

That will at least lead to semi temporary massive food shortfalls, that will spike food prices to US consumers, drive up inflation, torpedo the economy, cause a great depression, etc.

Now granted, after that everything would eventually stabilize as corporate and govt owned, run farms filled the void left by the shut down private farmers.

That does not mean that there is no room for fat trimming, as there are probably SOME farmers that get subsidies they don't need, etc.


Also while the military budget is out of control, have to be extremely careful, cautious, in how you make military budget cuts, so as to not effect military readiness, capability, etc.

I know that some in BOTH parties think the US pokes it's nose into business around the world and that if the US were to MIND ITS OWN BUSINESS, that there would be fewer wars, and that wouldn't need such a large military budget.

But history has shown what happens when Camelot becomes isolationist, minds it's own business: King Arthur, and the Knights of the round table all die, Hitler did what he did, as did Mao, and Polpot, etc. All it takes for evil to prosper, win, conquer is for a few good men, nations to do nothing, etc.

That said the military needs to eliminate the $10,000 nail, etc, figuratively, and could also probably use some careful FAT TRIMMING, but probably not to the tune, level you, others advocate.


Where I do agree with you is doing away with the Corporate Cronyism Welfare.

But even in this area, one should be careful, as if you cut to much, to quickly, then that could theoretically shut down enough businesses and jobs, to also shut down the economy, spike inflation, cause a depression, etc.


The way to save the Social Security, safety net, etc, is a multi way approach.

There is no just do this ONE THING, and it will all be fixed.

1. Treat the Social Security Trust Fund like Sancrosanct, with IRONCLAD lawyer proof protections, preventing it from being used for other things, loaned out, etc.

2. I don't know who needs to run, oversee Social Security, but the RIGHT GROUP of people need to be in charge of Social Security.

3. Ever so extremely slightly and extremely gradually increase the Social Security Insurance Premium tax, and make it so that everyone has SKIN in the game. Even a couple pennies increase per person, can be enough, a lot of money, if enough people are paying those couple pennies more. And by pennies more, that's LITERAL, not figurative.

4. Gradually raise the age, where, when can get social security.

5. Cut PORK BARREL spending like all the various Cricket Research projects. Individually they are only about 1 million to about 1 billion, but COLLECTIVELY it adds up to about 100 billion to half a trillion. That's a lot of money that could go into social security and more important things the PORK WASTE BARREL

6. Wisely have a Wise,Smart person repping the Govt Wisely invest Social Security and have it as a option that people can invest a portion of their Social Security before they reach the age where they can get Social Security.

7. Have the Govt, etc, help people get off Social Security thru incentives, education, counseling, training, helping to start a business and create jobs, etc. The less people are on social security, and the more people are incentivized to get off it, then Social Security will have more money.

8. Have governmental policies that will stimulate, grow the economy, create jobs, businesses, etc. The more money people make means more Social Security Insurance premium taxes people will pay into social security.

9. Control inflation, as if Inflation goes down, then less social security money is needed by social security recipients, which means more Social security in the trust fund.

10. Have a 3% flat Tax system, as that system would pay for everything in Government including Social Security.

11. Crack down on and eliminate Social Security fraud, and stop people from abusing the system, and eliminate the legal loopholes that allow people to legally exploit social security.


I'm sure there are things that can, could, should be added to list.

Saving Social Security is doable and is not a single solution, one size fits all, just throw more money at it, just CUT 1 thing, etc, solution.

What remains to be seen, is IF the Govt, people will do what needs to be done to save social security.

Guess will have to wait and see.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PeteTheChop
I have a decent pot in my 401k and unless there is a major market dump, I will likely stop working 3-5 years before full retirement age. Thoughts from the peanut gallery on taking my SS early at a lower amount or drain the 401k while I wait for it to hit maximum monthly payment?
I’ve heard from multiple retired people not to worry about having as much money after age 75 or so.
I retired at 57 and intend to start drawing at 62. Actuarily, it is supposed to come out the same in the end for everyone but of course, it depends on how long you live. I'm fortunate in that the SS I will receive is really just a bonus as my retirement funds and personal savings are enough for me to do what I want in retirement. Time is the most important thing and I want to be free to do what I want to do and enjoy it while I'm still relatively young and healthy. 5 - 10 years from now, who knows. I may not be able to do much more than sit in my recliner and drool on myself. Life can be cruel. I am just enjoying it to the max for as long as my health allows.
 
Social Security is a scam? There are millions of people that disagree with you whose lives would be destroyed without the system. Is it a flawed system? Sure. Is our country a better place because we have it? Absolutely. Trying to equate Social Security and Medicare to Ukraine makes you look like a crazy person. You better go to your doctor and get your rotator cuffs checked....because you reached so hard that you had to rip your shoulders out of their sockets.

For the other comments above about choosing your own investments? God no. People are stupid and emotional. The last thing we need is a bunch of morons screwing things up even worse than our government already does.

I am concerned that the solution to fixing the social security "insolvency" problem will be to punish responsible people who saved significant amounts of money in their 401(k)'s and other investments. I plan on having a significant retirement account but I don't want to see my social security completely stolen from me for people who didn't make the best choices in life. I don't mind taking a small cut to help others, but I do fear that liberals will punish me too much for planning ahead. So, I get the concern but a solution that falls between the two extremes would be better.

Red Herring alert. I never said Social Security commitments should be broken. Please learn how to read.

Let's have a welfare program for those who don't save for the future. There's nothing wrong with that.

Of course Social Security is a scam. There is no trust fund. You understand this, right? The corrupt government we have and have had for decades (ruling over millions of idiots) used that money to spend like hell and build up the size of the federal government. You understand that these corrupt want you to be scared AND dependent on them? Please tell me you aren't that naive.

We get the government we deserve. Their goal is to justify their existence and to scare you into increasing their power base. They have succeeded in this goal beyond their wildest dreams thanks to sheeple who don't want liberty.
 
Or raising the age you receive the benefits, which has already begun and will continue to be stretched as medicine advances and people live longer.
Yes. It should have been indexed from the beginning to median age on death. But that would take it away as a political tool by our corrupt lying politicians to tease it to cheeple who vote and love government....big government.

We get the government we deserve. We are all corrupt too.
 
Clinton thought about doing that and the market crashed in 2000. Could you imagine being fully invested in 2007? Not an easy problem to solve.
You mean fully vested and then seeing the Fed pump in trillions of fake dollars in the next few years to pump up the market to record highs?

By the way, I agree that the only investment people would be allowed to make with their fake social security fund would be something like savings bonds or maybe 10 year Treasuries. Something that has essentially no risk. It would be a disaster to allow people to buy any other asset. People are greedy and stupid....let's be honest.
 
Red Herring alert. I never said Social Security commitments should be broken. Please learn how to read.

Let's have a welfare program for those who don't save for the future. There's nothing wrong with that.

Of course Social Security is a scam. There is no trust fund. You understand this, right? The corrupt government we have and have had for decades (ruling over millions of idiots) used that money to spend like hell and build up the size of the federal government. You understand that these corrupt want you to be scared AND dependent on them? Please tell me you aren't that naive.

We get the government we deserve. Their goal is to justify their existence and to scare you into increasing their power base. They have succeeded in this goal beyond their wildest dreams thanks to sheeple who don't want liberty.

It's not a welfare program if you've paid for it for most of your life. Go buy yourself some aluminum foil. It's a flawed program that has been mismanaged but it is one of the most beneficial and worthwhile programs that our government is involved in.

I was talking with a friend of mine whose brain is being melted down by the same stupid things that you are obviously buying into. He's lost his sh!t so bad that he thinks that the Koch brothers are liberal elites pulling strings to promote their liberal agenda.

That's deeply delusional and reflective of how stupid the GOP has gotten. FWIW, I've been a registered Republican since 1989 and I don't even recognize the party anymore. Y'all have gotten silly. I'm planning to change my voter registration to independent soon because I don't agree with a lot of the liberal agenda but I can't buy into the paranoid, misogynistic, racist, selfish, gaslighting mess that is the GOP these days.
 
It's not a welfare program if you've paid for it for most of your life. Go buy yourself some aluminum foil. It's a flawed program that has been mismanaged but it is one of the most beneficial and worthwhile programs that our government is involved in.

I was talking with a friend of mine whose brain is being melted down by the same stupid things that you are obviously buying into. He's lost his sh!t so bad that he thinks that the Koch brothers are liberal elites pulling strings to promote their liberal agenda.

That's deeply delusional and reflective of how stupid the GOP has gotten. FWIW, I've been a registered Republican since 1989 and I don't even recognize the party anymore. Y'all have gotten silly. I'm planning to change my voter registration to independent soon because I don't agree with a lot of the liberal agenda but I can't buy into the paranoid, misogynistic, racist, selfish, gaslighting mess that is the GOP these days.

You really have problems with reading comprehension. It is quite shocking. I said they should have made it a welfare program from the beginning to cover for those who can't or won't save for themselves. Get it?

You may have been a (contemptible) Republican. That fits you well. Remember, the only party that hates conservatives more than the Dims is the Republican Party. I have no love lost for either party. And you think the Democrats are smart? Ha!

Of course you love big corrupt government programs. They love people like you in Washington DC.
 
Krusty - no there is not an actual fund. It is all on paper. If they claim interest earnings, it's just a book entry.

On the "new" W-4. Yeah that thing is a nightmare. And I'm still adapting the the new 1040, etc. I mean, who the F came up with both of those?

To COUGin NWC - I did the math. Drawing at 62 vs 67, I get $10,000 less annually. On the flip side, I will accumulate $120,000 over that 5 years. Meaning by waiting I would "breakeven" at 79. (10,000 x 12 years). Not even factoring in earnings on my retirement that I won't need to draw. So yeah, I chose to go for the SS as soon as I could.
So when those payroll taxes are used to purchase US treasury bonds which are then only sold when money is needed to pay out SS benefits and that same set of investments is used in the calculation to forcast the stability and solvency of the fund for the next 75 years....NOT an actual fund??? No - there IS set aside trust. Taihtsat
 
You really have problems with reading comprehension. It is quite shocking. I said they should have made it a welfare program from the beginning to cover for those who can't or won't save for themselves. Get it?

You may have been a (contemptible) Republican. That fits you well. Remember, the only party that hates conservatives more than the Dims is the Republican Party. I have no love lost for either party. And you think the Democrats are smart? Ha!

Of course you love big corrupt government programs. They love people like you in Washington DC.

You talk about reading comprehension and then say that I think that Democrats are smart? That's pretty fuggin' fantastic stupidity on your part.

I do realize that some people get money from social security when they didn't pay in their fair share but what I also know is that the amount of money that they get is laughably small and pathetic. And unlike you, I'm not a selfish a$$hole who begrudges helping others. I think liberals are guilty of going too far, they should acknowledge that there should be guardrails to encourage people to work for themselves and I think the notion of universal basic income is dumb and harmful to our country....but I think selfish fools who would rather see people live in abject poverty and misery just so that they can have a little bit more money on their own are worse than liberals.

There's a balance to be sought in life and I realize that I've been fortunate to be blessed with the intelligence and work ethic to live a great life. I grew up poor and I know a lot of people who never escaped the bottom end of the socio-economic ladder. Unlike you and your jaded world view that they should all just eat a dick and accept that things suck, I don't mind giving those people some help. Maybe some day you'll realize that being a selfish prick who begrudges people less fortunate than yourself isn't the best way to go through life.

I'll finish by saying that the core principle of social security and medicare is that there has always been an expectation that the people getting money from the system have paid in at least 10 years of their life to get that money and the less you pay in, the less you get out. The vast majority of people that draw social security did pay into it and are not pathetic losers who never worked and sucking off the welfare tit.
 
Last edited:
Red Herring alert. I never said Social Security commitments should be broken. Please learn how to read.

Let's have a welfare program for those who don't save for the future. There's nothing wrong with that.

Of course Social Security is a scam. There is no trust fund. You understand this, right? The corrupt government we have and have had for decades (ruling over millions of idiots) used that money to spend like hell and build up the size of the federal government. You understand that these corrupt want you to be scared AND dependent on them? Please tell me you aren't that naive.

We get the government we deserve. Their goal is to justify their existence and to scare you into increasing their power base. They have succeeded in this goal beyond their wildest dreams thanks to sheeple who don't want liberty.

It's not a welfare system if you paid into it your entire life. You throw out Red Herring when your whole argument is a red fuggin' herring.
 
You talk about reading comprehension and then say that I think that Democrats are smart? That's pretty fuggin' fantastic stupidity on your part.

I do realize that some people get money from social security when they didn't pay in their fair share but what I also know is that the amount of money that they get is laughably small and pathetic. And unlike you, I'm not a selfish a$$hole who begrudges helping others. I think liberals are guilty of going too far, they should acknowledge that there should be guardrails to encourage people to work for themselves and I think the notion of universal basic income is dumb and harmful to our country....but I think selfish fools who would rather see people live in abject poverty and misery just so that they can have a little bit more money on their own are worse than liberals.

There's a balance to be sought in life and I realize that I've been fortunate to be blessed with the intelligence and work ethic to live a great life. I grew up poor and I know a lot of people who never escaped the bottom end of the socio-economic ladder. Unlike you and your jaded world view that they should all just eat a dick and accept that things suck, I don't mind giving those people some help. Maybe some day you'll realize that being a selfish prick who begrudges people less fortunate than yourself isn't the best way to go through life.

Oh my God.

I'll go slow for you.

"And you think the Democrats are smart?" That sentence ends in a question mark. Are you familiar with question marks? There are no words to describe your willfull lack of reading comprehension. It's unbelievable.

I'm selfish because I think that Social Security was the wrong approach and the government should have set up a welfare program for those who couldn't or wouldn't save for old age? That's selfish? What is wrong with you?
 
It's not a welfare system if you paid into it your entire life. You throw out Red Herring when your whole argument is a red fuggin' herring.
What in the hell are you talking about? Am I dealing with a moron here?

I said instead of Social Security they should have set up a welfare program for the elderly who couldn't or wouldn't save for retirement. I'm talking about FROM THE BEGINNING. Like back in the 1930s. Obviously if you've paid into the program (Social Security) you should get money back since this program has existed for decades

Why are you so thick on this?
 
What in the hell are you talking about? Am I dealing with a moron here?

I said instead of Social Security they should have set up a welfare program for the elderly who couldn't or wouldn't save for retirement. I'm talking about FROM THE BEGINNING. Like back in the 1930s. Obviously if you've paid into the program (Social Security) you should get money back since this program has existed for decades

Why are you so thick on this?

I did miss your point. So....you're ok with welfare for millions but you don't like as system where people pay into the system so that you can control your own destiny more? Is that your point?

EDIT: What you can't seem to understand is that the reason why nothing else exists is because the system that we have is the best compromise that could be found. The problem with people is that they tend to be selfish and/or stupid. The GOP has spent a decade bitching and moaning about Obamacare but the cowardly motherf#ckers wouldn't kill it when they could have from 2016-2018 because they knew it would have been political suicide for the party.

Social Security exists because it was the best compromise and contrary to what so many think, it really is important to take care of the less fortunate and as flawed as the current system is, there's no way that the GOP would ever buy into a massive welfare system that is potentially even more rewarding to people who don't make as much money as others. FWIW, I prefer a system that forces people to at least part of their share over one that doesn't. That's not particularly liberal of me.
 
Last edited:
I did miss your point. So....you're ok with welfare for millions but you don't like as system where people pay into the system so that you can control your own destiny more? Is that your point?

EDIT: What you can't seem to understand is that the reason why nothing else exists is because the system that we have is the best compromise that could be found. The problem with people is that they tend to be selfish and/or stupid. The GOP has spent a decade bitching and moaning about Obamacare but the cowardly motherf#ckers wouldn't kill it when they could have from 2016-2018 because they knew it would have been political suicide for the party.

Social Security exists because it was the best compromise and contrary to what so many think, it really is important to take care of the less fortunate and as flawed as the current system is, there's no way that the GOP would ever buy into a massive welfare system that is potentially even more rewarding to people who don't make as much money as others. FWIW, I prefer a system that forces people to at least part of their share over one that doesn't. That's not particularly liberal of me.

Yeah...the GOP is full of cowards. Is that a newsflash? By the way, so is the Dim Party. All cowards. The goal of both parties (Dims moreso than Republicans by a smidge) is to frighten people so they vote for more control and power to Washington DC. That is the game. And millions of idiots fall for it. The latest scam was covid.

The GOP has no problem buying into massive welfare programs. You yourself mentioned that they showed their true colors when they didn't vote to turn back Obamacare. So that is proof.

This false narrative that the Dims are for the poor and "underprivileged" and the Republicans are for the wealthy is stupid and idiotic. Since at least 2012, the top 10 wealthiest counties in the US have overwhelmingly voted for the Dims. Look it up. So tell me again who is for the poor and who is for the rich?

Social Security is a big scam. It has value for those who can't or won't save for their last years of life, but it should have been indexed to longevity. Our stupid politicians didn't think of the likelihood that people would live longer in the decades after it was passed into law. It is a scam because I could have done much better with that money than the government. So could many others. But I recognize that many couldn't have. The main scam of Social Security is that the government used it for spending instead of setting it aside in a trust fund. It sounds laughable to suggest our government could keep their grubby hands off of that money, doesn't it? Of course they couldn't. And we are all stupid for letting them do that.

Now the demographics have shifted and there is a net outflow of money from Social Security. This is what happens when you have a big demographic wave (baby boomers) who need/want to retire.
 
There are free versions that they do not promote and really don't want you to know about. If I'm not mistaken, I think it is required by law that they offer a free version. Taihtsat
They do the ol' bait and switch. It's "free" but they prey on people's worry they aren't doing their taxes correctly, so customers end up paying.

The free version covers very little.
 
They do the ol' bait and switch. It's "free" but they prey on people's worry they aren't doing their taxes correctly, so customers end up paying.

The free version covers very little.
And the free version is only available for the simplest of returns - the ones that would have been on the old 1040EZ.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CougSinceBirth
I do enjoy this debate topic. There are morons out there, but there are also quite a few smart/brilliant people who can argue from both sides.

It is okay to disagree.

I don't mean to push the same buttons or restart the current debate...

I just don't think people are willing to accept the following:

1) MOST people need to take care of themselves. If they don't, they become dependent on someone/something else.

2) Trusting the government seems to be more of a no-no than a yes-yes because you can always have bad people in big positions. It's been there forever, but it's been disgustingly sick since the early 90's... getting worse.

3) I believe in donating and helping others. No true Christian can be without doing so. I also understand that not everyone will be like that. So do we need A TYPE of social security and welfare? Absolutely! However... we should teach and go in the direction of making it so fewer people need/rely on it. It seems to me we are going the other way. Again... people expecting it.

If we made an actual list of "no freaking way" of what our government does, doesn't do, allows, and doesn't allow... and then had people check the boxes for OKAY and NOT OKAY... it'd be a stunning change in what we have and we'd get rid of a lot of crap.

In summary... and I will shut up from here...

Get off my lawn.
 
I’m just gonna sit around in retirement with a drool bib and hope my wife comes by every once in a while and wipes off my face.

That shouldn’t gut all my SSI.
 
Yeah...the GOP is full of cowards. Is that a newsflash? By the way, so is the Dim Party. All cowards. The goal of both parties (Dims moreso than Republicans by a smidge) is to frighten people so they vote for more control and power to Washington DC. That is the game. And millions of idiots fall for it. The latest scam was covid.

The GOP has no problem buying into massive welfare programs. You yourself mentioned that they showed their true colors when they didn't vote to turn back Obamacare. So that is proof.

This false narrative that the Dims are for the poor and "underprivileged" and the Republicans are for the wealthy is stupid and idiotic. Since at least 2012, the top 10 wealthiest counties in the US have overwhelmingly voted for the Dims. Look it up. So tell me again who is for the poor and who is for the rich?

Social Security is a big scam. It has value for those who can't or won't save for their last years of life, but it should have been indexed to longevity. Our stupid politicians didn't think of the likelihood that people would live longer in the decades after it was passed into law. It is a scam because I could have done much better with that money than the government. So could many others. But I recognize that many couldn't have. The main scam of Social Security is that the government used it for spending instead of setting it aside in a trust fund. It sounds laughable to suggest our government could keep their grubby hands off of that money, doesn't it? Of course they couldn't. And we are all stupid for letting them do that.

Now the demographics have shifted and there is a net outflow of money from Social Security. This is what happens when you have a big demographic wave (baby boomers) who need/want to retire.

All I can say is that if the amount that you are saving for retirement is being affected by your social security taxes, your either ignorant for arguing against social security or you don't really have a point. I put about 15% of my income into retirement on top of my social security taxes and I save another 30-40% per month now that I've paid off my debts. The 6.2% that I put into social security is irrelevant and a "tax" that I don't mind paying knowing that it makes our country a better place. I could probably get a slightly better return on my investments but not in any way that would dramatically change my future.

You can think it's a scam and that you are being screwed over, but the financial, ethical and safety costs to abandoning a segment of our population far outweigh your perceived losses. It's ok that you don't understand that and it's obvious that you are watching the same propaganda that my friend here in Kansas watches, but you are really fooling yourself if you feel that there is a grand conspiracy that's orchestrating things from behind the scenes. The elite are certainly pulling strings as much as they can, but it's a giant CF where nobody knows what they are doing. Social Security needs to be fixed, but we are far better off just tweaking the existing system instead of people trying to squeeze another percent or two profit out of it.

Going back to your other point, the truth of the matter is that the reason that the 10 wealthiest countries have voted on the liberal side of the equation is because that's how they became the 10 wealthiest countries in the first fuggin' place. Taking care of your citizens, providing good education, and providing a strong foundation for your country creates the situation where your country as a whole does better. I don't want socialism or universal basic income or a lot of the other horsesh!t that you think that I may want....but I do want to live in a society where there are adequate support systems to help the less fortunate so that I can live a comfortable life myself. It doesn't matter if you believe it or not...but it pays off. 7 of the Top 10 states in per capita GDP ranking are liberal states. The bottom 10 states in per capita GDP rankings are Republican states. I don't like a lot of liberal policies....but being a die hard conservative state ends up being a race to the bottom.
 
All I can say is that if the amount that you are saving for retirement is being affected by your social security taxes, your either ignorant for arguing against social security or you don't really have a point. I put about 15% of my income into retirement on top of my social security taxes and I save another 30-40% per month now that I've paid off my debts. The 6.2% that I put into social security is irrelevant and a "tax" that I don't mind paying knowing that it makes our country a better place. I could probably get a slightly better return on my investments but not in any way that would dramatically change my future.

You can think it's a scam and that you are being screwed over, but the financial, ethical and safety costs to abandoning a segment of our population far outweigh your perceived losses. It's ok that you don't understand that and it's obvious that you are watching the same propaganda that my friend here in Kansas watches, but you are really fooling yourself if you feel that there is a grand conspiracy that's orchestrating things from behind the scenes. The elite are certainly pulling strings as much as they can, but it's a giant CF where nobody knows what they are doing. Social Security needs to be fixed, but we are far better off just tweaking the existing system instead of people trying to squeeze another percent or two profit out of it.

Going back to your other point, the truth of the matter is that the reason that the 10 wealthiest countries have voted on the liberal side of the equation is because that's how they became the 10 wealthiest countries in the first fuggin' place. Taking care of your citizens, providing good education, and providing a strong foundation for your country creates the situation where your country as a whole does better. I don't want socialism or universal basic income or a lot of the other horsesh!t that you think that I may want....but I do want to live in a society where there are adequate support systems to help the less fortunate so that I can live a comfortable life myself. It doesn't matter if you believe it or not...but it pays off. 7 of the Top 10 states in per capita GDP ranking are liberal states. The bottom 10 states in per capita GDP rankings are Republican states. I don't like a lot of liberal policies....but being a die hard conservative state ends up being a race to the bottom.
Not sure which one you meant, but he did say 'counties', not countries.

And I am pretty sure that when you look at how things have shifted over the years, you will find that donations/other support from Wall Street and the very rich in the US, that support is overwhelmingly going to the Dems. Their connection to the working man and woman is becoming less and less as they connect more and more with the liberal elites.
 
Not sure which one you meant, but he did say 'counties', not countries.

And I am pretty sure that when you look at how things have shifted over the years, you will find that donations/other support from Wall Street and the very rich in the US, that support is overwhelmingly going to the Dems. Their connection to the working man and woman is becoming less and less as they connect more and more with the liberal elites.

People keep talking about liberal elites but living in Kansas.....the elites that I see trying to use their wealth to promote their agenda are the Koch Brothers. They spend billions to promote their agenda. "Liberal Elites" and "wokeness" and other sh!t like that is just lazy party politics and nothing more than that.

And when even if he meant counties....my point is still the same. Spending money to help society makes your society stronger...not weaker.
 
All I can say is that if the amount that you are saving for retirement is being affected by your social security taxes, your either ignorant for arguing against social security or you don't really have a point. I put about 15% of my income into retirement on top of my social security taxes and I save another 30-40% per month now that I've paid off my debts. The 6.2% that I put into social security is irrelevant and a "tax" that I don't mind paying knowing that it makes our country a better place. I could probably get a slightly better return on my investments but not in any way that would dramatically change my future.

You can think it's a scam and that you are being screwed over, but the financial, ethical and safety costs to abandoning a segment of our population far outweigh your perceived losses. It's ok that you don't understand that and it's obvious that you are watching the same propaganda that my friend here in Kansas watches, but you are really fooling yourself if you feel that there is a grand conspiracy that's orchestrating things from behind the scenes. The elite are certainly pulling strings as much as they can, but it's a giant CF where nobody knows what they are doing. Social Security needs to be fixed, but we are far better off just tweaking the existing system instead of people trying to squeeze another percent or two profit out of it.

Going back to your other point, the truth of the matter is that the reason that the 10 wealthiest countries have voted on the liberal side of the equation is because that's how they became the 10 wealthiest countries in the first fuggin' place. Taking care of your citizens, providing good education, and providing a strong foundation for your country creates the situation where your country as a whole does better. I don't want socialism or universal basic income or a lot of the other horsesh!t that you think that I may want....but I do want to live in a society where there are adequate support systems to help the less fortunate so that I can live a comfortable life myself. It doesn't matter if you believe it or not...but it pays off. 7 of the Top 10 states in per capita GDP ranking are liberal states. The bottom 10 states in per capita GDP rankings are Republican states. I don't like a lot of liberal policies....but being a die hard conservative state ends up being a race to the bottom.
Damn Flatland - I am really starting to like you.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT