Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Actuarial Discussion Forum > Pension - Social Security
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #41  
Old 11-11-2011, 01:48 PM
Duffer's Avatar
Duffer Duffer is offline
Member
ASPPA COPA
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Teeing off
Studying for Blues guitar
Posts: 1,493
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Werewolf View Post
I fully expect to be penalized for saving for retirement by receiving a bigger proportional cut in Social Security benefits than to the people who were irresponsible with their money.
Well, if you are an actuary, you are the 1% that will be expected to pay the biggest share. Wear your exceptional status with pride, I say.
If that comes from your savings, well, you get the money from those who have it, so deal with it.
__________________
*Humor Disclaimer: Funny or not, some of the above may be intended as humor. No offense is ever intended, but if offended please accept this disclaimer as a blanket apology. If you remain offended, you’re on your own. Ask your doctor if this humor is right for you. Common side effects include forehead slapping, eye rolling, knee pounding, and occasional gastric symptoms. No TARP funds were used for this disclaimer. If you can get cash for this clunker notify me immediately!
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 11-11-2011, 02:20 PM
Eimon Gnome's Avatar
Eimon Gnome Eimon Gnome is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ironforge
Posts: 5,050
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Werewolf View Post
I fully expect to be penalized for saving for retirement by receiving a bigger proportional cut in Social Security benefits than to the people who were irresponsible with their money.
You'll be penalized - but it will have nothing to do with Social Security. It will be the tax code that does it to you.

You'll save for retirment under a tax regime based on income. Then you'll spend those savings in a tax regime based on consumption. Hit you on the way in, then hit you on the way out.

That will be the knockout punch.
__________________
A very great politician, Winston Churchill, once said that politicians complaining about the newspapers is like a sailor complaining about the sea.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 11-11-2011, 03:04 PM
echo echo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 826
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Werewolf View Post
I fully expect to be penalized for saving for retirement by receiving a bigger proportional cut in Social Security benefits than to the people who were irresponsible with their money.
I think this is a reasonable expectation.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 11-12-2011, 02:36 AM
Mr. B's Avatar
Mr. B Mr. B is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 5,744
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MountainHawk View Post
30 years ago the country wasn't buried in debt of around 100% of GDP (due to the greed of the people of your generation, who refused to pay the taxes for the things they spent), it was more like 35%. Anyway, I've started researching the possibility of having any and all benefits from SS retirement portion being put into a trust for my kids and (future) grandkids. I have no desire to steal money from the young who are just starting out in workforce to support spending for myself. It could reimburse them any SS taxes they pay. My own personal opt out, if you like.
Well, as Bruce has pointed out, it could be made pretty functional with a few appropriate changes.

I'm taking his word for it, since he was on hand when SS made the changes necessary for my fears of 30 years ago to be extirpated.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 11-13-2011, 08:25 AM
DanielSong39 DanielSong39 is online now
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
College: Caltech, Class of 2000
Posts: 6,562
Default

Social Security was secured for now thanks in part to government policies that allowed National debt to go from 35% of GDP to 100% GDP. It will be secure 30 years from now as long as National debt goes from 100% GDP to 165% GDP.

Debt is good as long as you can pass the buck to the next generation and you're dead by the time it has to be paid back.

Last edited by DanielSong39; 11-13-2011 at 02:56 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 11-13-2011, 06:26 PM
Wigmeister General's Avatar
Wigmeister General Wigmeister General is offline
Member
CAS
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Beverly Hills off Canon Drive
Favorite beer: Ringnes
Posts: 18,275
Default

Social Security is doomed. Get over it.
__________________
Spoiler:
* * * * * *
"No one remembers 5K and I wrote a nice poem for the occassion. No one remember's 10k. No one will remember 20k either." - Sir Post-A-Lot

"One of the ordinary modes, by which tyrants accomplish their purposes without resistance, is, by disarming the people, and making it an offense to keep arms."
-- Constitutional scholar and Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story, 1840

"The problem with socialism is you eventually run out of other peoples' money." -- Margaret Thatcher

"Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master." -- George Washington

"Caca pasa" - Anonymous
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 11-13-2011, 06:35 PM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 81,672
Blog Entries: 6
Default

I think it's plenty fair that Boomers aren't going to get the Social Security or Medicare benefits that prior, more fecund and shorter-lived, generations got.
__________________
It's STUMP

LinkedIn Profile
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 11-13-2011, 06:36 PM
Salzmann's Avatar
Salzmann Salzmann is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Midwest
Posts: 5,759
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanielSong39 View Post
Let's just make the Social Security program voluntary. The people who complain about the program don't have to pay taxes and will get nothing in return. The people who sing its praises will pay taxes and get whatever's in the pool.
I wish. First of all, the people who opt out will include a large number of people who can do better saving the money on their own because of SS's progressive benefit structure (lower-income earners get a higher % of average wages in their benefits). Thus, the transfer of $$ from the high earners to the low earners is impossible. There will also be a lareg segment who won't or cannot save but will opt out anyway. They'll reach old age with no money and wonder why "the government" doesn't help them and, because it's politically unpalatable (and not nice) to let masses of needy people die, funds will be found to support them. SS, at least, is some forced savings.

It occurred to me that you may have been facetious and you know all this. But believe me, I wish I could opt out! Getting all my contributions (and employers' contributions) back starting with the withholdings from the week I delivered telephone books when I was 17 would be nice, too.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 11-13-2011, 06:40 PM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 81,672
Blog Entries: 6
Default

The "contributions" are just federal tax. Doesn't matter what label was slapped on it.

Social Security was never "savings". You don't own any assets as a result. You may or may not get money back, but the federal government owes you nothing in exchange for these taxes.
__________________
It's STUMP

LinkedIn Profile
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 11-13-2011, 08:33 PM
Salzmann's Avatar
Salzmann Salzmann is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Midwest
Posts: 5,759
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by campbell View Post
The "contributions" are just federal tax. Doesn't matter what label was slapped on it.
I know that and you know that but my dear paternal grandparents went to their graves convinced that their SS payments were coming out of a little bank account in Washington, DC with their names on it. It didn't help that for years, the payroll deduction was labeled "F.I.C.A.", or "Federal Insurance Contributions Act".

That facade kinda crumpled when there were threats that SS payments would stop if the debt ceiling wasn't raised last August. If SS is adequately funded by payroll taxes, why was there anxiety about makiing the payments? You can either claim that it's adequately funded or admit that if an insurer funded annuities this way it would be put out of business by regulators.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:02 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
*PLEASE NOTE: Posts are not checked for accuracy, and do not
represent the views of the Actuarial Outpost or its sponsors.
Page generated in 0.64431 seconds with 9 queries