[manaboutown]

Originally Posted by buggyone

Do you think that your dad has recouped the 40 years of Social Security ontributions in the 21 years of retirement? My guess would be YES!

Is this statement based upon X dollars in, X +Y dollars out? If so it is essentially meaningless, an old time life insurance salesman's trick. Money has interest earning capability if not left in a sugar bowl or safe. An accurate calculation would reflect "interest" earned on the money as well as adjust for inflation over the last 61 years.

Social Security is nothing more than a government sponsored Ponzi scheme. New contributors pay premiums which, in part, fund payments to retirees. In addition Social Security funds have been raided by politicians to meet other government programs and a seemingly ever increasing vast smorgasbord of entitlements. Plus, nowadays there are far fewer earners per retiree than in earlier days of the program.

My father, born in 1898, living 94 years, paid in very little in from 1937 to 1963 yet he received 29 years of Social Security benefits as well as 27 years of medicare. He did indeed profit from his contributions but those days are long over. He used to tell my brother and me that we were funding his SS retirement benefits through our payroll deductions and of course he was correct.

[Gerald]

did anyone think that the date talked about is during a time when hundreds of thousands lost their jobs and were not paying into SS.

[buggyone]

Originally Posted by manaboutown

Is this statement based upon X dollars in, X +Y dollars out? If so it is essentially meaningless, an old time life insurance salesman's trick. Money has interest earning capability if not left in a sugar bowl or safe. An accurate calculation would reflect "interest" earned on the money as well as adjust for inflation over the last 61 years.

Social Security is nothing more than a government sponsored Ponzi scheme. New contributors pay premiums which, in part, fund payments to retirees. In addition Social Security funds have been raided by politicians to meet other government programs and a seemingly ever increasing vast smorgasbord of entitlements. Plus, nowadays there are far fewer earners per retiree than in earlier days of the program.

My father, born in 1898, living 94 years, paid in very little in from 1937 to 1963 yet he received 29 years of Social Security benefits as well as 27 years of medicare. He did indeed profit from his contributions but those days are long over. He used to tell my brother and me that we were funding his SS retirement benefits through our payroll deductions and of course he was correct.

I understand what you are saying but do not agree.

Do you think that a person should be allowed to opt out os SS 100 percent and do their own investing for retirement? Then IF that did not work out for him by the end of his career, that person would be left with absolutely nothing and no government agency would give him anything! Good idea or not?

I opine, you decide.