Baby Boomers and Social Security

[Delphinus85]

Delphinus:

I know you meant no offense to anyone. It’s just one of those realities that are hard to take when you’re struggling. But it’s funny how those realities can turn around. And one of the things I always kept in mind is that, while there are all kinds of things that don’t seem fair or just plain aren’t fair, the only resource you and your husband have is yourselves and, when you get right down to it, there’s a certain satisfaction in that.

I know. It’s not really fair, and frankly, since one of your problems is taxes, I feel that everyone is in similar danger. It just seems to me in this world the ones that do the right thing and the innocent are always punished so that people can continue to live immorally, and not plan ahead. I guess satan really does rule earth LOL

 

[MiddleBear]

as a boomer who is now in the age frame to consider SS up close and personal, I can attest that the boomers who make it in retirement are those (like us) who have taken steps toward their own financial security and have completly disregarded SS in the equation of the retirement assets. Those who rely on SS for the bulk of their support in retirement years will be living in virtual poverty. One thing that can’t be ignored is medicare, because unless you are wealthy enough to self-insure totally, you cannot buy private health insurance that does not force you to first apply for medicare benefits if you are over 65.

this debate or discussion has NOTHING whatever to do with retirees taking government subsidies or entitlements. we paid taxes sometimes at a rate higher than are federal, stare or local income taxes into this system throughout our entire working life (to support our grandparents and parents in their SS years), money we could have invested for our own security and that of our children, but is now going to be lost to us forever, so do not talk to me about entitlements. those of us who have been self employed paid even higher taxes into SS/medi

Thank the liberals.

 

[Delphinus85]

Population growth was figured into the future benefits. Abortion and contraception put an end to that and the burden becomes over burdensome to the younger families.

I understand your frustrations. But, many of us OLD people have watched those younger then us purchase everything their parents have taken years to get. We don’t have a big screen tv but we do have the satelite dish (we don’t get cable or good reception here). We drive our cars till they die of old age yet most of the young people I know lease a new one every two years. It seems the economy is based on new every two years on most of the sutff we have.

LOL my grandfathers old Westinghouse refrdgerator was older then I was when Opa died and it still ran. His stove had good insulation and was over 40 years old when he died. Now everything is broken or replaced every two to ten years. Sad.

But with the way the economy is set up the majority of people have not had the blessings of alot extra for luxury or savings. Taking care of the family, giving to others in need and saving for that rainy day is the most many of us have been able to do. I pray that my children and grandchildren do better. But they could not have a better life then we have had for we have been blessed with them.

Oh I agree! And if my dad was ahead enough that he could really afford these things, I’d be all for it. I just hate that he buys all this stuff, and then whines about not having any money, and blaming everyone but himself.

 

[cecilia97]

When you get right down to it, though, it seems to me a self-indulgent consumerism is behind the whole thing. People used to save for their retirement; much more than now. People invested in assets more. The prevalence of 401K plans is going to help over the very long term, but most people really don’t own any earning assets at all.

Amen. I think this is the crux of the problem too. Baby Boomers without enough children to support them? What’s that supposed to be about?..that’s not the problem. My parents (I’m 32 and my parents are older than Boomers) and their parents didn’t ask their children to support them in old age…they hoped to be able to LEAVE assets behind afterwards! Grandma will leave money, my parents will leave money, and hopefully I’ll leave money behind.

The 30-somethings I know are saving in 401ks and IRAs and expect to recieve NOTHING from social security. If we get anything it will be gravy on top. We’re not having that many children either. I may never have kids, but I’ll still be paying my own bills from the old folks home at age 110, God willing.

 

[kentuckyliz]

Agree w/cecilia. I don’t count on Social Security existing when I get there. There’s all kinds of dire predictions economically for around my retirement year. Most of the younger people believe in UFO’s and extraterrestrial life more than Social Security when they retire.

I started saving and investing young (age 22) when I was making peanuts…and never stopped…no emergencies ever will make me crack my nest egg. And I’ve been really down and out desperate before. I’ve drawn the line in the sand and said NEVER. Because while you can recover from being young and broke, you can’t recover from being old and poor. I am in touch with my Inner Bag Lady and boy, that’s a great incentive to saving and investing.

I’m not a stockpicker or a real estate investor or a wheeler-dealer…you don’t have to be those things to end up wealthy. It’s very simple, really, start young, contribute the most you can regularly, and invest in good growth stock funds, and NEVER touch it. Of course you also have to build up a good rainy day fund outside of retirement so you can deal with Murphy when he comes calling.

I coach new younger employees about how to do it when they get started, and they get on board and follow through. It’s good to share the basic steps of personal prosperity with my friends so we can be old and rich together.

My parents grew up poor and hungry in a war-torn, depressed economy…but they moved to another hemisphere to pursue opportunity. No one is chained to a place. No one is holding a gun to your head. Make your choices, and if you choose to live in a depressed area without opportunity, own your choice and quit playing victim.

I live in Appalachia and there’s only a couple of other places in the country as poor and economically distressed as here, but there is opportunity here for those with the guts and work ethic to pursue it. You can do well anywhere if you pursue the right opportunity and make the sacrifices needed to grab it.

My number crunching shows me that even if I don’t contribute much more than a minimal % of salary to my savings and investments for the rest of my working career, even if returns are low and inflation is high, I am going to be fine. The sense of peace is very good. But I’ve been doing the right things for decades with self-discipline and simplicity and it’s paying off. I’ve never sat back and blamed external forces for my rotten luck. That’s what the poor people do. It’s a mental block to personal and financial achievement. And I don’t want anyone to be poor and have that awful learned helplessness in their lives, so I am going to continue coaching others towards personal success and prosperity. And those things are possible entirely outside of whatever the hell happens to Social Security.

(BTW Social Security is not a personal savings account. It’s a safe in Parkersburg WV filled with IOU notes because the federal government has raided the trust funds dry for other spending to please the voters and stay elected. Rotten thieves.)

 

[Joe_Kelley]

. . .
(BTW Social Security is not a personal savings account. It’s a safe in Parkersburg WV filled with IOU notes because the federal government has raided the trust funds dry for other spending to please the voters and stay elected. Rotten thieves.)

Now,now; we have the best government money can buy.

 

[KathleenElsie]

Agree w/cecilia. I don’t count on Social Security existing when I get there. There’s all kinds of dire predictions economically for around my retirement year. Most of the younger people believe in UFO’s and extraterrestrial life more than Social Security when they retire.

I started saving and investing young (age 22) when I was making peanuts…and never stopped…no emergencies ever will make me crack my nest egg. (this is what we said till our oldest child was badly injured and the insurance refused to cover the costs Long story) And I’ve been really down and out desperate before. I’ve drawn the line in the sand and said NEVER. Because while you can recover from being young and broke, you can’t recover from being old and poor. I am in touch with my Inner Bag Lady and boy, that’s a great incentive to saving and investing.

I’m not a stockpicker or a real estate investor or a wheeler-dealer…you don’t have to be those things to end up wealthy. It’s very simple, really, start young, contribute the most you can regularly, and invest in good growth stock funds, and NEVER touch it. Of course you also have to build up a good rainy day fund outside of retirement so you can deal with Murphy when he comes calling. (this is what my mother thought when the savings and loan bust came she moved in with us after she lost everything but her little SS)

I coach new younger employees about how to do it when they get started, and they get on board and follow through. It’s good to share the basic steps of personal prosperity with my friends so we can be old and rich together.

My parents grew up poor and hungry in a war-torn, depressed economy…but they moved to another hemisphere to pursue opportunity. No one is chained to a place. No one is holding a gun to your head. Make your choices, and if you choose to live in a depressed area without opportunity, own your choice and quit playing victim.

I live in Appalachia and there’s only a couple of other places in the country as poor and economically distressed as here, but there is opportunity here for those with the guts and work ethic to pursue it. You can do well anywhere if you pursue the right opportunity and make the sacrifices needed to grab it.

My number crunching shows me that even if I don’t contribute much more than a minimal % of salary to my savings and investments for the rest of my working career, even if returns are low and inflation is high, I am going to be fine. (I pray that you are correct and that there is nothing that eliminates your funds)The sense of peace is very good. But I’ve been doing the right things for decades with self-discipline and simplicity and it’s paying off. I’ve never sat back and blamed external forces for my rotten luck. That’s what the poor people do. (never blame anyone but understand that there are circumstances our of your control in some cases) It’s a mental block to personal and financial achievement. And I don’t want anyone to be poor and have that awful learned helplessness in their lives, so I am going to continue coaching others towards personal success and prosperity. And those things are possible entirely outside of whatever the hell happens to Social Security.

(BTW Social Security is not a personal savings account. It’s a safe in Parkersburg WV filled with IOU notes because the federal government has raided the trust funds dry for other spending to please the voters and stay elected. Rotten thieves.) (and this is the root of the situation)

 

[brigid12]

Abortion and contraception - without which you wouldn’t need to worry about SSN.

 

[kentuckyliz]

My health insurance was denying many of my cancer treatment claims and I called daily and harassed them until they submitted. I knew and read my certificate of coverage and didn’t give up. Me with Humana was like a dog with a bone. If insurance companies don’t honor their contracts, you get a lawyer. I came very close to calling one but Humana submitted just in time. So either the condition wasn’t covered, or you didn’t get a lawyer.

FSLIC deposits are insured. If you didn’t get all or most of your money back, get a lawyer.

You have to stand up for yourself! No one will walk all over you if you refuse to lay down like a doormat. (Butchering an Eleanor Roosevelt quotation there!)

My investments will be fine because I am well diversified. If one thing suffers, others perform in the opposite manner and make up for it. If you are apocalyptic about the American economy, hain’t no thang, because the international investments will make up for it.

My dad is a cash client in the nursing home and he doesn’t even have to touch his assets to pay the bill. His net worth keeps on increasing…he can’t spend it fast enough (frugal habits too). He is the one who taught me. But it’s not a mystery. There’s books at the library.

I focus my efforts at younger people because they aren’t so ingrained in their excuses and blaming the system and bad luck. They are just learning how everything works and are very eager to use the time that is on their side once they understand it.

 

[SeekerJen]

as a boomer who is now in the age frame to consider SS up close and personal, I can attest that the boomers who make it in retirement are those (like us) who have taken steps toward their own financial security and have completly disregarded SS in the equation of the retirement assets. Those who rely on SS for the bulk of their support in retirement years will be living in virtual poverty. One thing that can’t be ignored is medicare, because unless you are wealthy enough to self-insure totally, you cannot buy private health insurance that does not force you to first apply for medicare benefits if you are over 65.

Hear, hear.

I don’t worry about my parents or my in-laws. They have prepared wisely and are in a position to weather hardships (and have, as my dad was unemployed for about a year earlier in the decade and my MIL was recently hospitalized for a month due to illness). My husband and I are attempting to follow in their footsteps and I would advise everyone in our generation to do the same. Guess what- SS is not going to be around when we’re old enough to claim it. Best deal with it at 30 rather than try and play catch-up at 65.

DH and I are of the mindset that we will get none of the money we’ve already paid or will pay into SS. Thus, it is in our best interest to pay off our current debt, avoid unnecessary debt, and save money. No, I don’t have a fancy new car. I do however have a car that runs well and is completely paid off. I don’t purchase the latest, greatest designer things. I do occasionally invest in well-made things, like my clogs which tend to run about $100/pair. These are worth it because I’ve got two pairs from 2001 that I’m still wearing. We could have easily gone into massive debt; when credit was still free-flowing, it was a noteworthy day if we did NOT receive a credit card app in the mail. Sure, we could have used credit to buy all new furniture, big screen TVs, new lease cars every three years, fancy designer clothes, etc. Nice as that stuff may be, it’s all disposable. All that money down the drain and nothing to show for it except a pile of bills with ever-growing interest.

We also can’t expect that we will have children to pay for us when we’re old. DH and I are infertile. God willing, we will adopt, but we won’t be doing so in order to have people who feel obligated to take care of us. And of course, we can’t count on adoption working out. International adoption laws are tightening and domestic adoption is often a nightmare (not to mention that many babies that could be adopted are killed before they’re even born).

 

[puzzleannie]

to those here who blame the SS crisis on boomers who failed to save enough to self-fund their retirement, I might point out that if we had been able to invest the amount taken from our pay since 1963 (the year we both began working any paying into SS) even at an average 5% interest rate we would have a retirement fund that would pay far more than we can ever expect to collect from SS even at the highest rates for our age group.

 

[mary_bobo]

Hear, hear.

I don’t worry about my parents or my in-laws. They have prepared wisely and are in a position to weather hardships (and have, as my dad was unemployed for about a year earlier in the decade and my MIL was recently hospitalized for a month due to illness). My husband and I are attempting to follow in their footsteps and I would advise everyone in our generation to do the same. Guess what- SS is not going to be around when we’re old enough to claim it. Best deal with it at 30 rather than try and play catch-up at 65.

DH and I are of the mindset that we will get none of the money we’ve already paid or will pay into SS. Thus, it is in our best interest to pay off our current debt, avoid unnecessary debt, and save money. No, I don’t have a fancy new car. I do however have a car that runs well and is completely paid off. I don’t purchase the latest, greatest designer things. I do occasionally invest in well-made things, like my clogs which tend to run about $100/pair. These are worth it because I’ve got two pairs from 2001 that I’m still wearing. We could have easily gone into massive debt; when credit was still free-flowing, it was a noteworthy day if we did NOT receive a credit card app in the mail. Sure, we could have used credit to buy all new furniture, big screen TVs, new lease cars every three years, fancy designer clothes, etc. Nice as that stuff may be, it’s all disposable. All that money down the drain and nothing to show for it except a pile of bills with ever-growing interest.

We also can’t expect that we will have children to pay for us when we’re old. DH and I are infertile. God willing, we will adopt, but we won’t be doing so in order to have people who feel obligated to take care of us. And of course, we can’t count on adoption working out. International adoption laws are tightening and domestic adoption is often a nightmare (not to mention that many babies that could be adopted are killed before they’re even born).

Very wise and insightful post. One thing that has not been mentioned here is that SS was never intended to be the only retirement asset for a person. It was meant to HELP. Somewhere along the line and thru the years, we have become the entitlement society that thinks someone else has the responsibility to take care of us. That thinking is not what made this country great. We can moan and groan about our life circumstances, but many people have risen above meager beginnings to achieve great things. Granted, it is much easier to sit back and complain. Takes no real effort to do that. But to stand up and accept responsibility for onesself takes work and effort. Far too many of us are not willing to accept the challenge.

 

[Ridgerunner]

. I am in touch with my Inner Bag Lady and boy, that’s a great incentive to saving and investing.

 

[cecilia97]

to those here who blame the SS crisis on boomers who failed to save enough to self-fund their retirement, I might point out that if we had been able to invest the amount taken from our pay since 1963 (the year we both began working any paying into SS) even at an average 5% interest rate we would have a retirement fund that would pay far more than we can ever expect to collect from SS even at the highest rates for our age group.

You’re absolutely right, annie. That’s why I think we should start phasing SS out in favor of private savings (maybe with tax incentives)…I’ll volunteer my generation to be the first to not collect any benefits, since we don’t expect to collect recoup anything anyway. May as well get some philanthrophic kudos. I’d take some extra IRA deductions on my taxes in exchange for my 15% self employment SS tax. Better than nuthin.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Another great governmental trick is that, as the Boomers pass away, the present estate tax “lifetime exemption” is such that the government will gain in estate taxes more than the present government debt. Not all Boomers are without assets. Far from it.

And, of course, the ones who WON’T get the heft estate taxes are the heirs of the Boomers who would otherwise inherit it.

So, the younger earners will get to pay more taxes, get less social security and lose inheritance that would have, in some instances, have made up for it.

Also, then, the rich Boomers and their heirs will, in a sense, pay for the benefits given to the non-rich Boomers, but only after a long time.

 

[jc-servant]

I’m just going to be a realist and expect no retirement benefits from Soc. Sec. when I’m older. I plan to work until I die at my desk anyway. I worked hard for many years in school and in the workplace to finally make a good salary, so I don’t see the point in quitting a sedentary job that I love. Hopefully, I’ll be able to continue doing the work until I fall over one day.

I think it is almost funny that so much attention is paid to the retirement programs at Soc. Sec. as if they are the big financial drain. If anyone wants to faint in disbelief, they need to check out supplemental security income (SSI) which is the program that pays monthly disability payments to people who never had to put a dime into the system. Ever! They need never have had a job at all. This is different from the the other disability program that requires worker’s to contribute to the system in order to qualify.

SSI is currently even paid to children in the form of monthly cash benefits which the parent can use for anything that they like. The adult program was meant to replace lost wages for a disabled worker, but a disabled child was never a wage earner. . .why not just pay for their medical needs with Medicaid (including all medicine and equipment), give them plenty of food stamps and cut off the cash?

The incentive for fraud would be far less if no cash changed hands. Additionally, the lag time between eligibility reviews would not cost taxpayers as much without the cash payments because a child whose condition had improved would not have as many medical expenses even if they had not been taken out of the program yet. In contrast, we are never going to recover cash payments made for years while a case awaits review after a child is improved. I think our politicians are far too afraid of the possible public outcry to cut off this gravy train before it wrecks the whole system.

 

[a_priori]

People see government as this inexhaustible source of largesse that we are entitled to. Many people put their homes in their kids names in order to save them from the nursing home when the other money runs out. “Why should we lose what we worked for to the nursing home?” So it is now the responsibility of the rest of us to subsidize decades of irresponsibility and consumption to keep someone in the nursing home.

We’ll, it can’t last forever. Americans believe that we are entitled to live exactly the way we want and someone else has to take care of us no matter the results.

Senior citizens complain about fixed incomes then go to the casinos. News flash: Even as we speak, the government is broke.

Social security CAN BE a cancer that has removed the need for people to take care of their loved ones just as they have throughout history.

We live in an artificial financial carnival that we think is normal. It’s not and some day the ferris wheel will detach, come off and roll down the street. The message will be: “Sorry but the park is now closed.”

 

[Ridgerunner]

I am hardly a supporter of the current SS system. I am sure there are abuses of SSI, and I have seen them. However, it must be acknowledged that it serves a substantial purpose as a vehicle for intergovernmental transfer of funds.

Most people in institutions for the disabled, including group homes, are supported by a combination of SSI, state funding, special tax districts and donor funding. The SSI component is not the biggest part of the cost, but terminating SSI would place a burden on state and local (usually regional) governments that they would have great difficulty replacing, if it could be done at all. This money is paid directly to the state or regional agency by the federal government. Such people are usually in the care of such institutions from age 18 to the end of life, and have never been capable of working. Consequently, many of them have no living parents who might aid in their support. They are typically on Medicaid which, though difficult to get physicians, etc to accept, is less costly to the government than is Medicare. This is an example of a function that the government really must serve.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

I am hardly a supporter of the current SS system. I am sure there are abuses of SSI, and I have seen them. However, it must be acknowledged that it serves a substantial purpose as a vehicle for intergovernmental transfer of funds.

Most people in institutions for the disabled, including group homes, are supported by a combination of SSI, state funding, special tax districts and donor funding. The SSI component is not the biggest part of the cost, but terminating SSI would place a burden on state and local (usually regional) governments that they would have great difficulty replacing, if it could be done at all. This money is paid directly to the state or regional agency by the federal government. Such people are usually in the care of such institutions from age 18 to the end of life, and have never been capable of working. Consequently, many of them have no living parents who might aid in their support. They are typically on Medicaid which, though difficult to get physicians, etc to accept, is less costly to the government than is Medicare. This is an example of a function that the government really must serve.

As you note, Social Security helps many, but as welfare, not as the insurance program it is claimed to be. Selling it as insurance was a blatant case of false advertising that the Federal Trade Commission would prosecute if the program were run by a private company.

Fortunately, I worked for the government for about 20 years so contributed to the civil service program instead of Social Security during that time, When I left before I was eligible for retirement I was able to withdraw my contributions and invest them myself. With the help of a good broker I came out better off than if I had left the money in either system.

 

[stinkcat_14]

As you note, Social Security helps many, but as welfare, not as the insurance program it is claimed to be.

This may not be politically correct, but I think that Social Security has made many of our old folks lazy. In the 1880’s, 75% of men over 65 were still working. Today it is less than 25%. Think about this for a minute, a 65 year old today is much healthier than a 65 year old a hundred years ago. Therefore, at a time when they are better able to work, they are less likely to work. This leads to a simple solution. Raise the minimum age for benefits to 75 and the problem is solved.