Social Security and US Debt

Discussion in '401k, IRA and Retirement' started by Gomer, Jan 5, 2015.

  1. Gomer

    Gomer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2014
    Posts:
    49
    Likes Received:
    1
    Could it be beneficial/possible to recognize unnecessary Social Security expenditures and end them. There are people who relied on their Social Security benefits and who actually need them. I don't want these people to lose their benefits. However, wherever Social Security spending is deemed unnecessary (I recognize this is a relative) I think it should be cut. Currently, 20% of our budget is spent on Social Security with another 23% on Medicare and Medicaid. How are we ever supposed to get out of debt with such a high percentage of our spending there?

    I read a quote by an economist the other day that said: "Social Security has been a pyramid scheme from the beginning. Those who paid in first received money from those who paid in second--and so on, generation after generation. This was great so long as the small generation when Social Security began was being supported by larger generations resulting from the baby boom. But, like all pyramid schemes, the whole thing is in big trouble once the pyramid stops growing. When the baby boomers retire, that will be the moment of truth--or of more artful lies. Just like Enron." -Thomas Sowell

    This quote really made sense to me, and with so much of the US budget going to social security, specifically social security that I pay for but will never benefit from, I have to wonder if there is a better way to spend some of that money. Am I being unreasonable?
     
  2. SteakTartare

    SteakTartare Senior Investor

    Joined:
    Mar 2014
    Posts:
    857
    Likes Received:
    11
    Social(ist) Security is another one of those good ideas in theory, but is a disaster in practice. It has bumped along for a long time now and expanded in the decades after FDR signed it into law. The question is can it be be sustained as all the boomers are getting out of the labor force, the debt is a smoldering crater, and the job market remains sluggish. I think the answer is no, not very well.

    I remember Bush (the younger) proposed allowing younger workers to opt out part of their social security funds and park it in private accounts. I supported that initiative, but, alas, it never saw the light of day.
     
  3. Gelsemium

    Gelsemium Senior Investor

    Joined:
    Apr 2014
    Posts:
    937
    Likes Received:
    2
    Yep, that would be a good idea considering that social security might never pay us we should be allowed to direct that money to private accounts, that would be the fair measure.
     
  4. crimsonghost747

    crimsonghost747 Senior Investor

    Joined:
    Mar 2014
    Posts:
    1,722
    Likes Received:
    6
    Couldn't have put it better myself! In theory it's great to allow people to live a normal life even when they don't have a job, it helps people to continue life as it is while they are momentarily unemployed. Where it goes wrong is when people realize that they don't have to work. Why on earth would anyone accept a minimum wage job when you can earn the same by doing nothing? Not only will you have more time for yourself, a complete freedom to spend your days as you want to, but many people on social security also do small time work (off the books) or earn a little online. So in the end they end up earning more for doing less... it's almost stupid not to jump into the bandwagon.

    A way to fix social security for good? Make it last a maximum of 4 months and add in a rule in which, after a period of social security, one cannot apply again until 4 months have passed from the last payment date. Gives you 4 months to find work, which is definitely enough if you actually want to work. And stops people from accepting jobs and then not showing up just to get thrown back into the benefits system.

    But of course no politician will ever say this since we all know that a big part of the voters claim some sort of social security benefits.
     
  5. Peninha

    Peninha Senior Investor

    Joined:
    Apr 2014
    Posts:
    602
    Likes Received:
    1
    A disaster because people are living longer being born less and so the contributions and retirement age are pretty much inadequate. The transition to a private system seems complex as well...
     
  6. crimsonghost747

    crimsonghost747 Senior Investor

    Joined:
    Mar 2014
    Posts:
    1,722
    Likes Received:
    6
    That transition is the problem. Can't really go switch over to a private system since the whole retirement system is one big pyramid scheme. If there are no more people being added to the bottom... then the whole thing stagnates and dries up. If a country was doing great economically, it could just keep paying the pensions from it's budget.. but at the moment I don't think there are many western countries with this capability.
     
  7. Gelsemium

    Gelsemium Senior Investor

    Joined:
    Apr 2014
    Posts:
    937
    Likes Received:
    2
    Yep, if people started contributing to a private system who would support the current system? Who would pay the current pensions? Our society is sinking, I don't see how this can be turned around.
     

Share This Page