Fucked on both ends .... Retirement risk

[bigvalboy]

Sheesh. What do you take me for? A high class whore? I'm all about Palm Springs and flip flops. Although truth be told I did just land in Key West. Headed off to see Warren right now.

 

And by the way, we do know most retired people these days still draw more from Social Security than they put in, even assuming a decent rate of return, right? In addition to raising my retirement age, I'd also be all for means testing it to so that rich old whores like me even got less than we put in. That's me. Whorish and liberal.

 

[Frequentflier]

It is a defined contribution plan 15% of your income.

 

Ugh, there you go again. The 6% is an assumed rate of return on the money invested, not the percent of income that can be invested. The world can use a different assumed rate of return but I use 6%.

[rvwnsd]

...But sex with my older brother? Dude, that's incest! That's totally fucked up!

 

But it's the game the whole family can play!

[+ deej]

It would have been wise to slowly increase the age of social security benefits over time starting years ago as life expectancy increased.

 

Many of the workers in our factory are already consigned to heavy labor until age 67. The age has been increased. Do YOU want to be toting and lifting crap around a factory when you're approaching 70?

 

And for those who say, I deserve every penny I get because of what i put in, ought to calculate how much they put in and how much they will get out if they live to be 80.

 

This seems to be an incomplete thought or a weird leap of logic. When is someone not deserving of receiving a return on their investment?

 

You appear to favor a limit on what someone who has invested for a lifetime can receive, and apparently it's less than what they contributed. Can you explain that math for us?

 

For the record, I am completely in favor of abolishing Social Security. I look forward to the refund check that will include my total investment plus interest. Any plan to abolish Social Security that does not include that refund to every contributor will basically be theft. I'm not in favor of theft.

[+ purplekow]

I said "every penny owed to me". There's a difference. What I get is owed to me by government calculations. I've maxed out my payment into the system continuously since I was 18 years old.

So it is owed to you but you don't deserve it?

[instudiocity]

Deadbeats? You mean, like laborers? Truck drivers? Farm workers? Yeah, raise retirement to 70; the hell with 'em if they can't keep up.

 

Sheesh.

No, I mean people who draw Social Security with fake disabilities like my neighbor, people who receive benefits having never paid a dime into the SSA, people who work less so they can draw more government aid. I never would include people who gave up 15% of their income for Social Security and need the benefits early, but I would include the guy who incorporated his company with his kids as owners so that he could draw disability, they could draw supplemental assistance while the corporation paid their college funds handsomely.

[instudiocity]

Ugh, there you go again. The 6% is an assumed rate of return on the money invested, not the percent of income that can be invested. The world can use a different assumed rate of return but I use 6%.

You wrote, "I think SS and Medicare should be changed to work like a defined contribution plan, but mandatory."

Quit looking down your nose at me correcting your ignorant statement. Ugh!

[+ purplekow]

Many of the workers in our factory are already consigned to heavy labor until age 67. The age has been increased. Do YOU want to be toting and lifting crap around a factory when you're approaching 70?

 

 

 

This seems to be an incomplete thought or a weird leap of logic. When is someone not deserving of receiving a return on their investment?

 

You appear to favor a limit on what someone who has invested for a lifetime can receive, and apparently it's less than what they contributed. Can you explain that math for us?

 

For the record, I am completely in favor of abolishing Social Security. I look forward to the refund check that will include my total investment plus interest. Any plan to abolish Social Security that does not include that refund to every contributor will basically be theft. I'm not in favor of theft.

 

Quick calculations show maximum amount contributed from age 18 to 65 ending in 2015 would be about $175000 over 50 years. Averages out to $3500 per year Receiving $25000 per year. So you need to collect for 7 years to call it even as a interest free loan. Average life expectancy for a 65 year old is 2o years. Not a great return on investment. About 3 for 1 over 50 years. You did get some disability insurance for that. And widows of workers got some cash. That is assuming you paid full amount and that you did not start to collect early.

Take Social Security for what it is. An inefficient tax on workers to help support seniors who are no longer working but in fact doled out to anyone and everyone, so in that way, not a tax based on need. Horror of horrors, an entitlement. But even here, the wealthy get a tax break. Pay in until the max contributing income, and nothing on the rest of the income above that. That is assuming that you are actually reporting income. 6.5% of income up to income of $118000 this year.

I discovered that I didn't want to be working in a factory at any age, when I was young and worked in one. That is why i do not work in a factory now. I would not consign anyone to work in a factory or a mine or on a fishing ship or oil rig.

People live longer now than when Social Security came about. They are healthier and so asking to wait to collect, not necessarily to work, just to wait, seems reasonable. We all knew we were going to get old sooner or later, well sooner for some of us and later for others. Planning on living on Social Security now, then and in the future, is foolishness. Planning on not having that money at 65 but at 67 or 70 should become part of the reality of aging in America. An America, i might add where those collecting Social Security are the wealthiest age group. Come to Atlantic City NJ and see your SS contributions at work. Going into the pockets of casino owners one quarter at a time.

[BabyBoomer]

Sheesh. What do you take me for? A high class whore? I'm all about Palm Springs and flip flops. Although truth be told I did just land in Key West. Headed off to see Warren right now. {QUOTE}

 

Did Warren send a G650 for your trip from PS to KW?

 

~ Boomer ~

[+ stevenkesslar]

Boomer:

 

Is a G650 a fancy ass plane or something?

 

I'm just a working class whore. I fly United coach.

 

You guys think working in a factory til your 70 is bad? Try being a 70 year old whore. It's one thing to be getting up in years, it's another to not be able to get it up at all.

[+ stevenkesslar]

Quick calculations show maximum amount contributed from age 18 to 65 ending in 2015 would be about $175000 over 50 years. Averages out to $3500 per year Receiving $25000 per year. So you need to collect for 7 years to call it even as a interest free loan. Average life expectancy for a 65 year old is 2o years. Not a great return on investment. About 3 for 1 over 50 years. You did get some disability insurance for that. And widows of workers got some cash. That is assuming you paid full amount and that you did not start to collect early.

Take Social Security for what it is. An inefficient tax on workers to help support seniors who are no longer working but in fact doled out to anyone and everyone, so in that way, not a tax based on need. Horror of horrors, an entitlement. But even here, the wealthy get a tax break. Pay in until the max contributing income, and nothing on the rest of the income above that. That is assuming that you are actually reporting income. 6.5% of income up to income of $118000 this year.

I discovered that I didn't want to be working in a factory at any age, when I was young and worked in one. That is why i do not work in a factory now. I would not consign anyone to work in a factory or a mine or on a fishing ship or oil rig.

People live longer now than when Social Security came about. They are healthier and so asking to wait to collect, not necessarily to work, just to wait, seems reasonable. We all knew we were going to get old sooner or later, well sooner for some of us and later for others. Planning on living on Social Security now, then and in the future, is foolishness. Planning on not having that money at 65 but at 67 or 70 should become part of the reality of aging in America. An America, i might add where those collecting Social Security are the wealthiest age group. Come to Atlantic City NJ and see your SS contributions at work. Going into the pockets of casino owners one quarter at a time.

 

Does anybody dispute PK's math? My basic understanding is for most of its history Social Security had paid out more than most recipients have put in. That's partly why it will eventually go broke, right?

 

What I love about it is that it is a great example where we came up with a government program that works. It has mostly ended poverty among older people. I'm all for the idea that people get more than they put in, especially if it keeps them out of poverty when they are old. Conversely, I don't have a problem of means testing how much you get. For me, if I live to be my parent's age, its going to be icing in the cake, not the cake.

 

Really, though, assuming you are not one of the unfortunates who dies shortly after retirement, is there really a danger that you'll live to be 80 or 90 (my parents are 93 and 94) and not get your money back, plus some?

[bigvalboy]

So it is owed to you but you don't deserve it?

 

What?....I have no idea what you are talking about. When did I say I didn't deserve it? (sigh)...... Kessler, come wake me up when this thread is over. I'll be by the pool, I'm buying drinks. It's the third Wednesday of the month and my check is coming this morning...

[+ stevenkesslar]

Fuck you, BVB.

 

I'm staying at the Island House in Key West so I read your post and went out this morning with full-on morning hard on and was walking around the pool asking if there is a "man of color" in the house.

 

Needless to say next thing I know I'm in a sling and all these guys with colored handkerchiefs are working me over. I got pissed on, cum dumped, bottom holed, milked dry, and at one point I had cocks in holes I didn't even know I had.

 

"Person of color" my ass! Where the fuck are you when I need you? Now I feel like a disabled old hag and I'm gonna have to go on disability. Take your fucking Gucci shoes and shove 'em up your ass.

[bigvalboy]

Fuck you, BVB.

 

I'm staying at the Island House in Key West so I read your post and went out this morning with full-on morning hard on and was walking around the pool asking if there is a "man if color" in the house.

 

Needless to say next thing I know I'm in a sling and all these guys with colored handkerchiefs are working me over. I got pissed on, cum dumped, bottom holed, milked dry, and at one point I had cocks in holes I didn't even know I had.

 

"Person of color" my ass! Where the fuck are you when I need you? Now I feel like a disabled old hag and I'm gonna have to go on disability. Take your fucking Gucci shoes and shove 'em up your ass.

 

lol...you sound a little irritable. LMAO. You're in the Keys for Christs sake. If you can't have fun there, then there is no hope for you my friend. Do a shot a 'Jack' then knock back a bottle of Corona, and go work Duval with your new Gucci Loafers, you'll feel better. Now go turn on the TV, the colored girl is getting swarn in today. That's worth watching.

[+ stevenkesslar]

lol...you sound a little irritable. LMAO.

 

I have had cum dripping out of my man pussy all morning. My new panties are soiled. And this Daddy with whiskers pretty much rubbed my ass cheeks raw.

 

You are damn right I'm irritable.

 

And yes. It's 1 pm and I definitely need a drink.

[Kenny]

No, I mean people who draw Social Security with fake disabilities like my neighbor, people who receive benefits having never paid a dime into the SSA, people who work less so they can draw more government aid. I never would include people who gave up 15% of their income for Social Security and need the benefits early, but I would include the guy who incorporated his company with his kids as owners so that he could draw disability, they could draw supplemental assistance while the corporation paid their college funds handsomely.

 

Oh. You mean fraud. Did you turn the guy in?

[Kenny]

Planning on living on Social Security now, then and in the future, is foolishness" -- yes, and mainly because SS was never designed to be a living income, but a supplement to savings.

 

Quick calculations show maximum amount contributed from age 18 to 65 ending in 2015 would be about $175000 over 50 years. Averages out to $3500 per year Receiving $25000 per year. So you need to collect for 7 years to call it even as a interest free loan. Average life expectancy for a 65 year old is 2o years. Not a great return on investment. About 3 for 1 over 50 years. You did get some disability insurance for that. And widows of workers got some cash. That is assuming you paid full amount and that you did not start to collect early.

Take Social Security for what it is. An inefficient tax on workers to help support seniors who are no longer working but in fact doled out to anyone and everyone, so in that way, not a tax based on need. Horror of horrors, an entitlement. But even here, the wealthy get a tax break. Pay in until the max contributing income, and nothing on the rest of the income above that. That is assuming that you are actually reporting income. 6.5% of income up to income of $118000 this year.

I discovered that I didn't want to be working in a factory at any age, when I was young and worked in one. That is why i do not work in a factory now. I would not consign anyone to work in a factory or a mine or on a fishing ship or oil rig.

People live longer now than when Social Security came about. They are healthier and so asking to wait to collect, not necessarily to work, just to wait, seems reasonable. We all knew we were going to get old sooner or later, well sooner for some of us and later for others. Planning on living on Social Security now, then and in the future, is foolishness. Planning on not having that money at 65 but at 67 or 70 should become part of the reality of aging in America. An America, i might add where those collecting Social Security are the wealthiest age group. Come to Atlantic City NJ and see your SS contributions at work. Going into the pockets of casino owners one quarter at a time.

[+ WilliamM]

Planning on living on Social Security now, then and in the future, is foolishness" -- yes, and mainly because SS was never designed to be a living income, but a supplement to savings.

 

I was a social worker for several years. Many elderly people live only on their monthly social security check. Luckily, they also have Medicare. My experence was that responsible people were sad that they had fallen on such hard times, and seldom told their family members. Couples who were both getting SS did better than single people, but all have to be very careful about each expence.

[instudiocity]

Oh. You mean fraud. Did you turn the guy in?

Are you aware of the hoops the SSA has in place for reporting fraud? You have to have their SSN in order to complete the online form, you cannot call in a report without it either.

[JDXXX]

An interesting and scary companion piece to what I posted on college costs and student debt:

 

http://time.com/author/greg-smith/

 

With guaranteed pensions going the way of the dinosaur, students who will start saving late because it will take longer to pay off debts on the front end are likely to have less waiting for them on the back end as well.

 

As the article says, half of Americans have no access to any workplace retirement plan whatsoever.

 

To those of you who are making good money - might as well start saving now while the going is good as we could be heading into another recession phase, and this time, who knows how long this particular phase of the recession may last.

[gallahadesquire]

I just want to go on the record as officially not commenting on this thread.

[instudiocity]

Planning on living on Social Security now, then and in the future, is foolishness" -- yes, and mainly because SS was never designed to be a living income, but a supplement to savings.

In truth, is was designed as a pyramid scheme whereby government could transfer money from the paychecks of wage-earners through the government (which always holds one to some of the cash) to non-wage earners. Originally designed for Old-Age benefits, there were 16 wage-earners for every one recipient. The age at which one could draw SS benefits was 65. The average life expectancy at the time was 65.

 

Poli-Tick-ians learned a valuable lesson with Social Security. For once, the non-wage-earners discovered their benefits came through their elected officials, they began to reelect them. Further poli-tick-ians discovered they could further ingratiate themselves to their electorate by increasing benefits while the ratio of earners to recipients dropped from 16:1 down to 3 or 4:1. Increasing the payroll tax was hidden first by splitting the amount between the employer and the employee, so the wage-earners only saw 1/2 of the tax deducted from their paychecks while employers still met the brunt of the entire tax in the payroll expenses.

 

Later, poli-tick-ains figured out that if they expanded Old-Age Retirement benefits to include Survivor benefits they could buy more votes and 20 years later, they added Disability benefits to get even more votes. Before 1935, if you retired, you paid for it from your own savings. Until 1956, if you became disabled, you had to pay your expenses from your own savings or disability insurance.

[JDXXX]

I was a social worker for several years. Many elderly people live only on their monthly social security check. Luckily, they also have Medicare. My experence was that responsible people were sad that they had fallen on such hard times, and seldom told their family members. Couples who were both getting SS did better than single people, but all have to be very careful about each expence.

 

Easily can relate to what you've experienced in that realm, William.

 

At one point during my weekend stay with Sir Steven Kesslar (), I revealed to him of the fact I have an elderly 75 year old mother who receives SSI monthly, and despite the fact she receives a monthly check from SSI, the funds she receives from them on a monthly basis does not help contribute much towards her monthly expenses of any kind.

 

Due to the fact they limited her funds over the past two years versus higher dues she was paid from the previous years. So, what do I do to be of help to her, and not see her suffer financially.....help my mother pay monthly towards her expenses, of course which is in the sum of $2,000 just to help keep her afloat. Don't wanna witness my own flesh, and blood, especially my own mother, sink deeper and deeper into a possible depression or even into bigger hole to a point of intense debt or possibly homelessness. That will be devastating beyond belief for me to witness her suffering to such devastating levels knowing all she done to take care of me and my siblings as a single parent to not step in and help the best way possible. Who would I be as her son, to take the initiative by stepping in to help manage to take care of her by all cost.

 

The poor woman just informed me last month that SSI has put her on Medicaid versus Healthnet (for whom she originally wanted her health care provider), and stated they will NOT pay for any type of Dental or Vision coverage, so I'm having to pay for that too. Because of the unfortunate denial of Dental coverage, I had to cover over $4,000 Dental cost as she had to have done just this past Monday some extensive heavy work done that required crowns, and extractions that were not cheap in slightest possible terms.

 

They'll be more procedures she has to have done by the end of the calendar year that will require more financial assistance which will equal total in the end of $11,000 I'll have to fork out, but what can I say - It's her health, and gotta do what I have to do for her to have the best dental there is.

 

So trust me, when I read this thread, and especially the post you written, I can easily relate to how even though the elderly who receive SSI may have been responsible in saving for they're future, and will receive SSI may cover some yearly annual expenses still encounter hard times in the end. Even to a point to where(like in my case) they're children may have to fill in financially in order to help give they're elderly parents who are not surviving well on Retirement or SSI, a secure, and more stable "Quality Of Life" per say.

[JDXXX]

Now that is totally fucked!!!

 

Here I thought if you were a man of color like you promised we could really get it on someday. I mean, you know I'm all into black and Latino and older and thuggy and what not.

 

But sex with my older brother? Dude, that's incest! That's totally fucked up!

 

Talk about a big disappointment.

 

Guess it goes to prove even being a "Man Of Color" has it's disadvantages to thinking of such brutal ideas, Steven.

 

Never thought BVB would go as low to think of the term "incest". What in the world is he thinking? Now I know the world is going to shit.

 

From your perception of BVB's post and outcome in the prior post, being an old pervert is in, and innocence as an aging "whore" is out. LOL. .

 

On that note, that's a major disappointment, and can't win from losing with BVB. In this case, which one of you is more open minded? "The Aging Whore" or "The Old Pervert"? LOL.

[JDXXX]

...AND see what you've started SK, another God damn thread that's going to go on for 5 days.

 

You should know this about Steven by now, BVB. Once his intellect gets started on a subject of importance starts, it never stops til it's drilled into you're head for future reference. LOL. That's what we love about our, Steven. All about the facts, and only the facts. Right babe?