[QUOTE=SteveZ;183930]The only place where we may not agree is on the issue of Social Security. For as long as I have been alive, SS has been a contract between the government and the people based on the 1920-1940 economy. Only a few years ago the US Government changed its civil service retirement system - which formerly did not have SS contribution/deduction - to one which SS is now involved and marketed as one-third of one's overall retirement package.


I do agree with your statement and should have filled out my thoughts better after saying I wouldn't want to see my folks hurt by SS cuts. The current recipients beyond a certain age (30ish) have based their retirement on their contract with the government. The rest need to be reset to a self funded retirement system of their choice. It is true that we cannot retroactively dump on a lifetime of expectations, but change has to be made in how we continue into the future.

Now that that's said, means testing can still cut SS costs. There is currently a maximum amount that can be received from SS and I don't see why beyond a maximum amount of retirement income that benefits can't be cut. I don't believe that the introduction of SS into our society in the thirties foresaw the amount of corporate retirement that is available to us today. Upper income people, golfing in Florida, rely on their SS to pay their greens fees! Hardly what was intended by the SS act. There is some level of income where if you can support yourself adequately, for instance above the mean level of retirement income in the US, that your SS benifits be reduce, to wher at some point you receive none at all. Does Warren Buffet need SS? Bill Gates? Corporate execs with golden parachutes in the millions of dollars" I feel not.