i think everyone should start having craploads of kids, so when we're of retirement age, they'll all be working and can pay into the social security pot.
um, why don't you get in touch with an insurance agency to discuss your retirement.
2006-12-05 06:36:39
·
answer #1
·
answered by practicalwizard 6
·
0⤊
2⤋
Social Security was never meant to be a survival mechanism for retired people. Unfortunately it's become so in-grained in American life it's a political issue rather than an one we can deal with logically. The methodology of SS is so outdated, imagine if someone offered you the ability to pay into a fund, say 120,000 grand over the next 35 years, and said they would give some of it back when you retire, in monthly payments!!! No interest, no control over where the money goes over the years, and you won't get it if you die early. What a joke. Scrap it now.
2006-12-05 07:01:36
·
answer #2
·
answered by The Scorpion 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
The same way they did before Social security began. They retire from work.
Unfortunately, the democrat's set us up for failure with the creation of social security. The government work program of the twenties was genius, but it was built by both partisans in a time of great need.
I am afraid the time of working together is over. When the Democrats take office, social security will be bolstered along with welfare and various other programs that teach Americans not to work...
Wish it was different, but it isnt.
2006-12-05 06:33:27
·
answer #3
·
answered by Q-burt 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
It's not a given that the payments will run out. One problem is the government is currently "borrowing" money from the system, to the tune of $2 TRILLION, to run the government. The administration has no plans to repay it. http://www.house.gov/reform/min/features/social_security/index.htm
As the late Robert Eisner put it, "to bolster Social Security, the best way is to increase economic growth rates and increase the wages that finance Social Security."
Here's a very informative site:
http://www.njfac.org/us21.htm
2006-12-05 06:38:23
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Hate to say it but it looks like beg and steal like another person said. Both political parties have robbed what they call the SS Surplus. All we have are nice certificates in a big file cabinet that are IOU's to pay the money back they have been using to make the national debt look lower.
Sure glad I will be dead by then. finally the rich will have what they want, a way to starve the poor.
2006-12-05 06:47:38
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
We saw a financial advisor recently and my husband made a comment like, "It's not like we'll have SS to help us out." The advisor told us that SS won't be "running out," but that we should not even factor it into our retirement plan. Probably doesn't answer your question, but this guy - who's very good at what he does - doesn't believe the payments will stop completely.
2006-12-05 06:43:20
·
answer #6
·
answered by tagi_65 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Talaro needs an education. It will run out, as the baby boomers retire, more will be collecting than paying. This problem has been forseen for much longer than Bush has been in office.
To answer the question, people will have to be proactive, and save for their own retirements. Those who depend on it now will not be cut off, but I gurantee that I will never see a dime. Fine with me though, its called self-reliance.
2006-12-05 06:34:42
·
answer #7
·
answered by Time to Shrug, Atlas 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
Social security won't run out if Bush would leave it alone. If everyone is paying in, there will always be money. That is a lie Bush is spouting just to get more money for himself.
2006-12-05 06:31:16
·
answer #8
·
answered by talarlo 3
·
1⤊
3⤋
They wont run out. Some bright spark politician might try to change the legislation but wont succeed.
2006-12-05 06:34:13
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
cutting the $10 Billion/year Grant to Israel might solve it.
2006-12-05 07:23:09
·
answer #10
·
answered by taco 2
·
0⤊
1⤋