It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Social Security's battle over values

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 11 2005 @ 09:03 PM
link   
I think we are not being told the truth about Social Security. I think the government is, at least, mishandling our monies.
Bush has promised to reform SS in his new term. I really have mixed feeling over this. I'm too old to start my own nest egg and must rely on what social security will provide. When I hit retirement age, I do have some others monies I can count on, but not enough without the additional check from SS.


The economics of retirement security will be a major factor in the debate, of course, as will the usual Democratic-Republican partisan divide. The overall outlook for the federal budget (lots of red ink) could prove crucial in lawmakers' consideration.

But opponents of private retirement accounts generally see them as a threat to the collective protection offered by a big government program. Proponents judge them as an encouragement to individualism, and a reduction in Washington's power.


And, aren't these numbers they keep changing on us (from the same link):

Current official estimates hold that Social Security will begin paying out more in benefits than it collects in revenue in 2018. As currently designed, the system will be able to pay full benefits until 2042, according to a middle-ground Social Security Administration estimate.


www.csmonitor.com...


[edit on 11-1-2005 by DontTreadOnMe]




posted on Jan, 11 2005 @ 09:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by DontTreadOnMe
I think we are not being told the truth about Social Security. I think the government is, at least, mishandling our monies.
Bush has promised to reform SS in his new term. I really have mixed feeling over this. I'm too old to start my own nest egg and must rely on what social security will provide. When I hit retirement age, I do have some others monies I can count on, but not enough without the additional check from SS.


The economics of retirement security will be a major factor in the debate, of course, as will the usual Democratic-Republican partisan divide. The overall outlook for the federal budget (lots of red ink) could prove crucial in lawmakers' consideration.

But opponents of private retirement accounts generally see them as a threat to the collective protection offered by a big government program. Proponents judge them as an encouragement to individualism, and a reduction in Washington's power.


And, aren't these numbers they keep changing on us (from the same link):

Current official estimates hold that Social Security will begin paying out more in benefits than it collects in revenue in 2018. As currently designed, the system will be able to pay full benefits until 2042, according to a middle-ground Social Security Administration estimate.


www.csmonitor.com...


[edit on 11-1-2005 by DontTreadOnMe]


Well thank the guy who started the mess of Social Security....I think it was FDR, see i am on the opposite side you are. I would like to see Social Security be optional and if you want the government to save your money for you, then you can let them take it out of you check every pay period.



posted on Jan, 11 2005 @ 09:30 PM
link   
I think that is more to the SS that the government is telling.

I think we should not let the government do anything until we know in writting what is as stake here.

I also trust the elderly group to be on guard as the changes on the SS.

I am in the vulnerable group that will be affected the most with any changes now.



posted on Jan, 11 2005 @ 09:52 PM
link   
You know, i hate to be so darned negative all the time, but nothing being done presently seems to benefit Americans. It seems to benefit the government



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 08:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempe
It seems to benefit the government

Maybe so, but millions of Americans would be S.O.L. if social security was not available. As it is, many retirees need to find work just to maintain--their SS benefits aren't enough to keep a roof over many.

How would the new program be phased in? It's all well and good for future workers, 20s, and 30 somethings to put aside for their private nest eggs, but then who provides $$$ for those in their 40s +?
And, what if somebody invest unwisely and the $$ isn't there for them when they need it? YOu just gotta know some folks will try to make the most they can, regardless of risk.
Way too many variables. Way too little concern for the citizens.



new topics

top topics
 
0

log in

join