Social Security, contrary to popular opinion, is not going to be a problem until at least 2040. The problems are most likely to arise in the healthcare area. People are living longer than ever, and the trend towards increasing longevity shows no signs of abatement.
Jeremy Siegel, a Wharton finance professor, recently offered some interesting thoughts on the financial aspect of population aging:
http://www.cfapubs.org/doi/pdf/10.2469/cp.v24.n3.4846
__________
2007-11-20 06:59:59
·
answer #1
·
answered by NC 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
When social security was first issued, the gap between the average retirement age (i.e. the age at which SS benefits were dispersed) and the life expectancy was only about 1-2 years. Now that gap has grown to about 15-20. On top of the, baby boomers are much more numerous relative to younger population vs. decades ago. The result will be a tremendous burden on younger workers as they're forced to support a non-productive aging population. Any time a large segment of the population is subsdized for non-productivity, it costs the economy tremendously.
2007-11-20 03:57:26
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
We'll have to pay for the policy mistakes of the FDR administration. Social Security is inevitably going to run out. The common misconception is that the government has an unlimited pile of money to simply divvy out as is necessary. However, the reality is that SS revenue is collected via taxes. In order to keep the promise made by FDR, taxes must be increased. Social Security is nothing more than a Ponzi scheme; eventually there will be more money flowing out than is flowing in. This is yet another painful example of how a welfare state is not only inefficient but unfair to all involved. Taxpayers paying for Social Security now are forced to take care of someone they don't even know as well as themselves, which is asinine. Privatization of retirement is the way to go, regardless of how vehemently people support SS. A person should be responsible to themselves and themselves alone. If someone wants to use their income to support retirees, they can do so; however, government mandates forcing people into that situation are never a good idea, as evidenced by the current dilemma.
2007-11-20 06:21:57
·
answer #3
·
answered by Viginti_Tres 3
·
0⤊
2⤋
I'd re-pharse.
The problems caused by the excess government spending of the social security income.
The baby boomers paid into the system more than was required to supprt the generation before them, but what happened to that excess payment- it was wasted by government expenditures (and then some).
2007-11-20 06:53:50
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
In 1994 I had the ultimate activity in my lifestyles, at that element we've been given pregnant. whilst my baby grew to become into born i grew to become into employed via somebody else yet with out reward. the comprehensive technique fee properly over $10,000. Then like now that grew to become right into a huge sum of money to me. Now Answerman, my first reaction to this question could be that, no this brought about no problems i did no longer easily need all those issues I labored so complicated to purchase i grew to become into happy to sell them! For you... specific a loss of low-priced well being care brought about important problems no longer the least of which grew to become right into a destructive tension on my marriage.
2016-11-12 04:53:54
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
They have 3/4 of the wealth in this country, and we are going to have to pay for their social security and medicare.....
They should make a law that if you are going to receive social security retirement and medicare you have to go to a retirement camp.
This would greatly reduce the number of people in the system because many who can afford it would opt out.
So lots of the money could stay in the economy and be used how people feel like using it.
2007-11-20 04:13:53
·
answer #6
·
answered by csn0331 3
·
1⤊
3⤋
Well last month the first Baby Boomer filed for SS. I think things will be alright. I doubt we'll have to to raise taxes that much if any.
2007-11-20 03:53:02
·
answer #7
·
answered by mikess484 2
·
1⤊
2⤋
Having to put up with our snarky children who would rather we died than have to carry our burden on them...Just wait till you are retiring ungratefull brats.
2007-11-20 04:09:03
·
answer #8
·
answered by Raymond C 6
·
2⤊
2⤋