How long, and under what conditions, do you think SS will last?

Mr. Gloom & Doom here.


Given the projections that SS will need payout reduction around 2035 a healthier financial base would be something to consider. More to consider is the projection that natural resources will be diminished quite a bit in 30 years. How to plan for that when it took 11 years for the population to grow to eight billion from seven billion, the United Nations said it expected 15 years to pass before we reach nine billion, in 2037, and another 22 to pass before 10 billion, in 2058.Nov 15, 2022. Concern for finances will probably be secondary to where to get food, & everything else we enjoy now.
Could be.

But I've got some level of control over our financial strategy and almost none over world resource allocation. I'm going to have to limit it to financial stuff.
 

I think some sort of social security type program will always be around, how those programs are funded is the mystery.

Society wants to protect its citizens, but we don't want the responsibility as individuals, so that leaves the govt. to step in and create programs. But it ends up being a dog chasing its tail scenario; where does it start and where does it end? Where does the money come from?

Sadly we will never live in a world of complete self responsibility, there will always be a segment of the population that can't or won't take care of themselves, during their lives and certainly with no consideration to retirement planning. So what happens with those people? Do we just discard them? Create poverty cities for them and let them fend as they may? It's easy to think yes but that's not reality, it's not how evolved societies work.

So that circles me back around to believing there will always be some sort of social security program.
 
I think SS will be cut for future recipients, perhaps those who are under 40 at the time of the rejiggering, but will not affect people who are already receiving it or are on the precipice of getting it.

Members of Congress who vote in favor of benefit cuts for current SS recipients would find themselves looking for a job when they're up for re-election and they know it.

They'd not only motivate seniors to oust them, they'd motivate a whole lot relatives who might be facing couch surfing grandparents in the living room.
 

From what I've been reading, including reports published by the SS administration, technically, they shouldn't run out of money but will have to reduce our payments by 23 to 24% for all recipients by 2034 (the year I saw mentioned most often) When I first mentioned this here, probably around 6 years ago I warned people to get ready for it. Some scoffed and said it would never happen. But I read financial analysts reports about the impending reduction a couple of years before I posted about it, then the SS administration confirmed that it's coming down the pike unless some serious fixes happen before then.
@David777 @StarSong David said: "Any changes are not likely to affect we seniors already receiving benefits but rather those still of working age that can plan for shortcomings." From everything I've read, this is not the case. Here's an excerpt of one of the latest articles on the subject.
  • Anyone who is 56 years old or younger today won’t receive a full benefit. Anyone who is 56 or younger today will not reach Social Security’s normal retirement age of 67 before the program runs out of money. And anyone who is currently between the ages of 57 and 107 today who is still alive and collecting benefits in 2033 will also be subject to benefit cuts."
  • https://www.dailysignal.com/2022/12...-governments-new-social-security-projections/
  • This is from SSA.gov page: "If no legislative change is enacted, scheduled tax revenues will be sufficient to pay only about three-fourths of the scheduled benefits after trust fund depletion."
  • https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/solvency/
  • By scheduled, I take it to mean payments that are already in place regardless of age but the article in the Daily Signal indicates a lower cut rate may apply for seniors.
 
Last edited:
From what I've been reading, including reports published by the SS administration, technically, they shouldn't run out of money but will have to reduce our payments by 23 to 24% for all recipients by 2034 (the year I saw mentioned most often) When I first mentioned this here, probably around 6 years ago I warned people to get ready for it. Some scoffed and said it would never happen. But I read financial analysts reports about the impending reduction a couple of years before I posted about it, then the SS administration confirmed that it's coming down the pike unless some serious fixes happen before then.

I have not really thought about it. I would think if changes have to be made that would come into play for those that have not reached social security age. More would be taken from their incomes to fund their retirements. As for us, already drawing and met the requirements, they should not be allowed to lower ours to make way for those still in the workforce. In any case, I don't expect to see that in my lifetime but for future generations, they will learn they have to plan for old age just as we have done. Some of us are/were better prepared than others. It is sad but it is true.

I think so many just did not really understand how it is/was so important to be prepared. Of course we know that social security does not guarantee us a certain standard of living but niether did our jobs. It is always important to be cautious with our money, even when we are young. Just because you have the money does not need you need the "thing". I am still frugal, I rarely puchase anything I want, I focus on paying the bills that are my reality.

No, I do not need fancy shoes, handbags, cars, clothes, makeup, of beauty services. Did not do it when young, do not do it now. So many of our young people think that those things are all that matters in life. Keeping up with the Jones, not being honest with themselves. Pay me now or you are going to pay later when you have not saved and invested for your future. As we all know, when you get old, have health problems money can just flow out the door like a river.

It can be a struggle for so many to keep a roof, food, just the basic things.
I am sure if many could go back they would have made different decisions and been more prepared. I would also say that there are those out there did not choose this, circumstances beyond their control have determined their retirement. I do not currently think the government is doing enough to take care of those struggling, many will disagree, but I can see myself there without the grace of God. No one should have to go without housing, in hunger, need of medical care IMO.
 
Departing a bit, how do you folks feel about the current proposal to forgive up to 20K in student debt per borrower?

This is currently in adjudication, and I'd prefer not to discuss the legal merits, but more along the line of extending a loan, a signed contract, and then forgiving it.
 
Departing a bit, how do you folks feel about the current proposal to forgive up to 20K in student debt per borrower?

This is currently in adjudication, and I'd prefer not to discuss the legal merits, but more along the line of extending a loan, a signed contract, and then forgiving it.
No, Nope, NO WAY, If I take out a loan I have always paid it off. You know what you are doing, you are taking a loan that must be repaid. If you decide not to get your education, make good grades, party all the time, that is not on us, that is on you, grow up and pay the money back!! or be prosecuted for theft/fraud to the fullest extent of the law. The taxpayers are not responsible for your actions and I sure as heck do not want to foot the bill. I sent my son to college, I paid the bill, he knew it was serious, did not take it for granted. We are a lower middle class income family and his Dad had died at that point. His education was always our goal and we saved, went without, scrimped to make it happen. It is not nor will ever be my resonsibilty to give someone the easy street to go to college. My taxes are not paid for someone else's luxuries.
 
Departing a bit, how do you folks feel about the current proposal to forgive up to 20K in student debt per borrower?

This is currently in adjudication, and I'd prefer not to discuss the legal merits, but more along the line of extending a loan, a signed contract, and then forgiving it.
I could swear I saw a separate thread dedicated to that question but I can't find it now. I'm sure there are pros and cons but haven't come to a conclusion yet.
 
Seems logical that a reduction will take place about 10 years from now. Given the stats on this web site https://www.statista.com/statistics/200143/employment-in-selected-us-industries/
and technology replacing a percentage of those. Service jobs are lower paying and the largest percent & even some of those are being replaced by technology.

Combine technology replacing human manual labor with tech not paying taxes & lower wages not paying into the system to the degree needed. It seems to me that sustaining payments to the level paid now will be possible.

But were it me & I expected to live another 30 years I think I'd be more concerned with what is needed most to because earths resources aren't finite. When those resources reach the level of unable to feed, provide heat & cold, water & the general things we take for granted now. I'd look back on how good we have it now.
 
Last edited:
I have not really thought about it. I would think if changes have to be made that would come into play for those that have not reached social security age. More would be taken from their incomes to fund their retirements. As for us, already drawing and met the requirements, they should not be allowed to lower ours to make way for those still in the workforce. In any case, I don't expect to see that in my lifetime but for future generations, they will learn they have to plan for old age just as we have done. Some of us are/were better prepared than others. It is sad but it is true.

I think so many just did not really understand how it is/was so important to be prepared. Of course we know that social security does not guarantee us a certain standard of living but niether did our jobs. It is always important to be cautious with our money, even when we are young. Just because you have the money does not need you need the "thing". I am still frugal, I rarely puchase anything I want, I focus on paying the bills that are my reality.

No, I do not need fancy shoes, handbags, cars, clothes, makeup, of beauty services. Did not do it when young, do not do it now. So many of our young people think that those things are all that matters in life. Keeping up with the Jones, not being honest with themselves. Pay me now or you are going to pay later when you have not saved and invested for your future. As we all know, when you get old, have health problems money can just flow out the door like a river.

It can be a struggle for so many to keep a roof, food, just the basic things.
I am sure if many could go back they would have made different decisions and been more prepared. I would also say that there are those out there did not choose this, circumstances beyond their control have determined their retirement. I do not currently think the government is doing enough to take care of those struggling, many will disagree, but I can see myself there without the grace of God. No one should have to go without housing, in hunger, need of medical care IMO.
Starting backwards...I so agree with this "No one should have to go without housing, in hunger, need of medical care IMO." I could never understand why some people got their panties in a bunch and were so nasty when it came to the Affordable Care Act. IMO it's a "I got mine, damn if you get yours" attitude. Oh....we don't have enough money (to help our own citizens) but look how much foreign aid we give and are still giving!

Some people work hard all their lives and can never make ends meet and not because they are spending unwisely. As pointed out in the two articles I posted, the reductions will affect everybody (but maybe not to the same degree). 2034 is now only 11 years away. That would put me in my late 80's, about the age of two of my neighbors upstairs who are constantly on the go. I also have a cousin in her mid 80's who is very active. My mother (not by birth) died when she was 97, my maternal grandfather died at age 99. You may well still be here when those changes take place. Your attitude about handling money should prove beneficial going forward.
 
Last edited:
Seems logical that a reduction will take place about 10 years from now. Given the stats on this web site https://www.statista.com/statistics/200143/employment-in-selected-us-industries/
and technology replacing a percentage of those. Service jobs are lower paying and the largest percent & even some of those are being replaced by technology.

Combine technology replacing human manual labor with tech not paying taxes & lower wages not paying into the system to the degree needed. It seems to me that sustaining payments to the level paid now will be possible.
There a cynical route, too, maybe. Personally, I don't like it, and I'm not even sure it works this way, but...

Undocumented Mexican labor still pays SS tax and if they remain undocumented will never collect SS.

And many *do* receive taxed wages, not cash under the table, as many would like to believe. All those restaurants, housekeeping services, many of the yard maintenance guys, construction, etc.

Just sayin'...
 
Starting backwards...I so agree with this "No one should have to go without housing, in hunger, need of medical care IMO." I could never understand why some people got their panties in a bunch and were so nasty when it came to the Affordable Care Act. IMO it's a "I got mine, damn if you get yours" attitude. Oh....we don't have enough money (to help our own citizens) but look how much foreign aid we give and are still giving!

Some people work hard all their lives and can never make ends meet and not because they are spending unwisely. As pointed out in the two articles I posted, the reductions will affect everybody (but maybe not to the same degree). 2034 is now only 11 years away. That would put me in my late 80's, about the age of two of my neighbors upstairs who are constantly on the go. I also have a cousin in her mid 80's who is very active. My mother (not by birth) died when she was 97, my maternal grandfather died at age 99. You may well still be here when those changes take place. Your attitude about handling money should prove beneficial going forward.
Here's an observation that I've been playing around with about how modern life works.

Nowadays, the *sequence* in which you do things is much more important than previous eras. E.g., do you buy a car while in college, after you graduate, after you get a job, or after you've been in the same job two years?

That one is easy.

When you have kids in relation to moving to a new location for work, or if changing careers. That would be another big one.

If you really get to thinking about this, you can fine-tune the order in which you do things (those that are under your control) on a lot of smaller stuff, too. In the aggregate, it can make a substantial positive difference.
 
Due to WEP I only receive 60% of my SS and my main income is my pension. So a reduction won’t hurt me very much. However, I don’t believe it will be cut across the board. It would hurt too many low income people where that’s their only income.

I think one of 2 things will happen. Either it won’t be cut or it will be means tested so those with high incomes or assets will see a big reduction.
 
Due to WEP I only receive 60% of my SS and my main income is my pension. So a reduction won’t hurt me very much. However, I don’t believe it will be cut across the board. It would hurt too many low income people where that’s their only income.

I think one of 2 things will happen. Either it won’t be cut or it will be means tested so those with high incomes or assets will see a big reduction.
I think you're likely right about means-testing.

This is not likely to affect me, but might bite my wife, and I need to think about this. I don't know how to deal with it, but I haven't thought it thru yet, either.
 
From what I've been reading, including reports published by the SS administration, technically, they shouldn't run out of money but will have to reduce our payments by 23 to 24% for all recipients by 2034 (the year I saw mentioned most often) When I first mentioned this here, probably around 6 years ago I warned people to get ready for it. Some scoffed and said it would never happen. But I read financial analysts reports about the impending reduction a couple of years before I posted about it, then the SS administration confirmed that it's coming down the pike unless some serious fixes happen before then.
@David777 @StarSong David said: "Any changes are not likely to affect we seniors already receiving benefits but rather those still of working age that can plan for shortcomings." From everything I've read, this is not the case. Here's an excerpt of one of the latest articles on the subject.
  • Anyone who is 56 years old or younger today won’t receive a full benefit. Anyone who is 56 or younger today will not reach Social Security’s normal retirement age of 67 before the program runs out of money. And anyone who is currently between the ages of 57 and 107 today who is still alive and collecting benefits in 2033 will also be subject to benefit cuts."
  • https://www.dailysignal.com/2022/12...-governments-new-social-security-projections/
  • This is from SSA.gov page: "If no legislative change is enacted, scheduled tax revenues will be sufficient to pay only about three-fourths of the scheduled benefits after trust fund depletion."
  • https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/solvency/
  • By scheduled, I take it to mean payments that are already in place regardless of age but the article in the Daily Signal indicates a lower cut rate may apply for seniors.
Those cuts and shortages will occur if nothing is done to shore up Social Security between now and 2034. It's hard to imagine a scenario that won't bring some or all of these changes:

1. Raising the SS eligibility age or further financially penalizing those who draw at younger ages
2. Increase the SS age for maximum benefits from 70 to 72, or perhaps older.
3. Increase the SS and Medicare tax from the combined 7.65% (currently 6.20% for SS and 1.45% for Medicare)
4. Dramatically increase the maximum SS taxable earnings per year from 2023's $160,000 to a much higher ceiling.

If the federal government does nothing, allowing SS to have a shortfall of 23% - 24%, they'll be punished swiftly and mightily by voters. A whole new crew will be elected immediately based on promises to restore promised benefits.

Picture the political ads featuring real-life stories of suddenly destitute grandmas and grandpas whose government didn't deliver on its promises, that then shift to photos of lazy, uncaring, do-nothing politicians who made sure they'll get generous government pensions that are unaffected by SS cuts. but couldn't be bothered to take care of this vulnerable group?

Memes of Chris Christie on the beach would be child's play compared to what would be hurled at them.

In Washington, politicians may threaten to reduce SS or allow it to falter, but are well aware that they'll be slitting their own political throats by doing so.
 
It seems the first thing you hear from Washington when they are up against a budget crisis (like now) .... "SS checks might not go out "

Heard that again this week actually ..... gets old.
 

Back
Top