Likely not enough money. I am planning to support myself.
2007-12-01 10:23:17
·
answer #1
·
answered by moonman 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
As many people depend on Social Security for survival, the government can't just do away with it. At some point, the politicians have to step up and fix the problems. The solution will most likely be a combination of the following:
1) Decrease in benefits
2) Increase in payroll taxes (don't forget, employees pay half and the employer kicks in the other half...we could always place a larger burden on employers)
3) Increase the normal retirement age (people are living longer anyway)
Naturally, these solutions will make people (voters) unhappy which is why the politicians are reluctant to take action until we are at a crisis point. That point will come in about 2017 when the projections indicate that the amount of Social Security payments will exceed the amount taken in. When we are standing on the edge of the cliff, it will get fixed. We might not like the solution though.
In the meantime, you should be saving for retirement on your own because just depending on social security payments is going to mean a pretty low standard of living in retirement even if there were no changes to the system.
2007-12-01 19:12:26
·
answer #2
·
answered by The Professor 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
I will not worry about it my self because I will take care of mine, my self. As the number of Social Security recipients explodes, and the number of workers available to support each Social Security recipient dwindles, Social Security is facing big problems. No one knows whether it will be around when they retire. For example, take a look at the ratio of workers to retirees over the years; ( CNBC.com, Jan. 23, 2007)
During the Truman administration: 16 workers to 1 retiree
Today: 3 workers to 1 retiree
By the time today's youngest workers reach age 65: 2 workers to 1 retiree
The average U.S. Social Security check is $1,007 per month (Social Security Administration, June 2006)
Could you retire on that?
I would also like to say the rich still pay taxes in a higher tax bracket than most, it is simply thatthere is an cap on the portion that goes to the Social Security program of $90,000 a year which in fact is Not rich. So if someone make $1,000,000 a year, they still pay taxes of around $400,000.
The money that does not go to the Social Security program goes to other programs.
2007-12-01 18:46:42
·
answer #3
·
answered by jeffery d 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Maybe, maybe not. But don't expect SS to be your only income source - oof so you'll be eating ALPO out of the can. Save 12-15% of your income towards retirement, stay out of debt, and you'll have more money then you know what to do with.
2007-12-01 21:34:08
·
answer #4
·
answered by voluntarheel 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
The Social Security system is in nowhere near as big a pile of trouble as the Eminent Mr. Bush would have us believe. All it takes to get it back where it belongs is an increase in the amount of wages which are subject to the SS tax. Bush does not want to do this because it affects upper income wage earners.
2007-12-01 18:53:45
·
answer #5
·
answered by acermill 7
·
1⤊
3⤋
No one under 40 should expect to collect Social Security. Fortunately, that gives us plenty of time to save so we won't need it.
2007-12-01 18:43:35
·
answer #6
·
answered by winters in buffalo 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
If they save and don't rely on the government, the answer is yes.
If they spend like there's no tomorrow and never save a penny, chances are good that they'll be working until the day they die.
2007-12-01 18:28:17
·
answer #7
·
answered by curtisports2 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
You never know. That's why I'm starting to save my money now at 21 so I'm not broke at 71.
2007-12-01 19:51:10
·
answer #8
·
answered by twirpy_gurl 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
I sincerely hope so , if not am in a big trouble.
2007-12-01 18:22:14
·
answer #9
·
answered by mauripaladi 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
I would be really surprised if there was.
2007-12-01 18:23:17
·
answer #10
·
answered by jon s 4
·
0⤊
1⤋