Quote:
Originally Posted by Stu from NYC
When the system was set up the retirement age was 65 even though the vast majority did not live that long.
That allowed SS to build up a very large nest egg.
Not exactly fair to the people who paid in and didnt live to collect.
If someone in the private sector set up a system like that they would probably be doing 10 years in Leavenworth as they used to say.
|
Social Security was never intended as a system where you got back what you put in.
Yes, there are people who don't get back what they put in but imagine the uproar if you got cut off when you reached the amount you paid in. You can't have it both ways.
Social Security is broken because too many people are getting benefits that exceed what they contributed. There are also challenges with population growth, or the lack thereof which leads to more people drawing benefits than those that are paying in.
The system needs an overhaul and some people are going to be unhappy. The longer Congress kicks the can down the road the bigger the gap becomes. Congress continues to accumulate debt at extraordinary levels that someone will have to pay back. Those of us over 60 are hugely fortunate as most/all of the solutions will fall on our children and grand-children.