Retirement, will I get my Social Security back?

[Silvertwinkie]

Like CC said, I've got about 20-25 years before I get near this problem.

Almost every person I know that has retired has come across some sort of going back to work part time, be it a job where they once worked or as a Wal-Mart greeter....the first few years seem to be the hardest....but I gotta tell ya, from my persepective, I can't see myself having any issue with retirement. My only complaint is that I've paid for decades into the Socialist Security Fund so that folks like my parents and you retirees can enjoy a good after work years life.

What irks me is that I most likely will never see any perk from this when I get to that age.....and what really gets me steamin is that the reps that you and I elect (regardless of party), have their own retirement plan...and get a HUGE payout that we all pay for. So they really have ZERO incentive to fix the problem. They are all taken care of with a golden parachute, while the rest of us pay the bill and get stuck with what's there or soon not to be.

Soapbox off.

[jcanavera]

I think the biggest thing that scares me about retirement is the medical side. I think a lot of folks continue working to either procure drug coverage or extra income to pay for their medications. Personally I think its a crime when people have to make a choice between food and medicine.

Jack

[flyfisher]

Originally posted by Silvertwinkie
What irks me is that I most likely will never see any perk from this when I get to that age.....and what really gets me steamin is that the reps that you and I elect (regardless of party), have their own retirement plan...and get a HUGE payout that we all pay for. So they really have ZERO incentive to fix the problem. They are all taken care of with a golden parachute, while the rest of us pay the bill and get stuck with what's there or soon not to be.

Soapbox off.

It's interesting to me the number of people who really believe there won't be any social security when they get to retirement age. I'm not trying to be critical, but it's also interesting to me the amount of finger pointing that's done trying to place the blame with the other guy, rather than actually tackling some of these issues head on ourselves.

It has only been in the last 100 years that we've even had things like health care programs in either the public or private sector, and things like worker's compensation or pensions in the private sector. How in the world did people do without these things? It's only been less than 75 years, following the great depression, that we had our national social security program.

What was originally envisioned as a subsistance income for the truly needy has become (along with most other government programs) an overgrown and overblown "perk" to which almost all of us feel we are now entitled.

In my lifetime (I'm 57 years old, and retired at age 55 by the way), I've seen many of these health care and pension programs grow to the point of getting out of control. Now, we're at the point where many of us can no longer afford to continue to pay into social security, to afford our drugs and health care costs, or for employers to provide us free company-paid pensions. I'm convinced the pendulum is going to half to swing back toward the middle, and some of these benefits reduced or eliminated.

Why don't you tackle those greedy government bureaucrats with their oversized pensions, and I'll tackle all those blood sucking attorneys that file all those malpractive lawsuits that result in outrageous settlements?

John

[Janets Husband]

I turn 50 in 5 days and that makes me 5 years until I'm eligible for a full pension. I don't look at it as 5 to go, I look at it as 4 years and some days.
I am looking forward to that day I can retire from my current job.
Ya! Sure! Retire.
We own a little business which will be my second career. That is what I'm looking forward to, a new and personal challenge.
The pension from the first career will pay the bills, and will allow me to do the next without much worry.
Oh ya. I will be able to pretty much set my work schedule. This means I can start to travel more.

Looking Forward...

[norbert]

in the box...uh..sorry gary i meant on top of the box .....
i have a few misc. ramblings....
colorado camper: time for you to lose some hair... give your kids names like sky,and blue, and stream....call pbs, and maybe you too could become an inspirational speaker...yes, your post was very good my generation y brother......
twinkie:... i feel your pain man...i now think about SSI...not eligible yet...i'll get a whopping $863 a month...i have enough credits to retire but not get much...you see it all started when i was a young lad learning about responsibility by delivering newspapers...its was then that i got my first taste of the government suck coming all the way from the east coast to flyover country right into my little pocket...what happened to that job?....its now being down by illegal immigrants driving around in chebys, so they can send money home to the village.... but thats another story.....
flyfshr:....yes my brother...you speak the pure truth...most people are ignorant of what these vile forked tongue devils in washington have done.........
finally........after all this... i cant get out of my head, words said to me by my father who told me be out of the blue..."there's only one thing worse then being old"....whats that dad i said....."being old and poor".....now for me..."walk up the road, and walk down it, and you can say, youve walked".... ....soapbox off.......
norby
"shouda been a cowboy"....(has a nice ring to it)....

[Silvertwinkie]

Well, my main gripe is the fact that I personally have been paying into this program for serveral decades. I have a few alternate plans, however, it's just a real bummer that I basically flushed tens of thousands of dollars into something I'll never see. I could have used that money for a large number of alternate retirement things. Here is where I feel Social Secuity should be made private and/or folks should have other choices besides payroll deductions that force you to pay into the system.

I agree, the healthcare situation is also poor, but I blame most of the "it's someone else's fault" lawsuit happy, ambulance chasers out there that rake in billions of dollars on malpractice suits, etc. My friend is a doctor and his liability coverage is in the stratusphere. He has had ZERO claims and not been named in any malpractice situations. Medicine is big business, and again, I feel it's the insurance compaies that are partly to blame for the costs. The rest is plain greed. Let's not even get into drug compaines with the fun and games of cost variations, etc.

In November, I'll be voting Republican, mainly because all the Republicans in the past 20 years have had a hardline stance on not putting up with crap from outside the U.S. Either way it goes in November though, I doubt seriously anyone will be able to tame the retirement issues which have been brought up. I mean if you really look at it honestly, Clinton had 8 years, the Republicans had 12 before Clinton. In the last 20 years, not a whole bunch has changed. I am very glad that our representitives are well protected though.

[COLORADO_CAMPER]

Twinkie,

Vote Republican and I'll guarantee you that GW will be doing nothing during his second term to shore up SS or greatly improve healthcare or health insurance issues. GW has been the figure head of the most irresponsible administration in history, IMHO. Our budget deficit nearly equals our national debt and our trade deficit is setting new records. Some are benefiting greatly from the polices of the current administration, but I dare say it is not the ever-shrinking middle class or most folks over sixty-five. It will also not be those future generations that have to pay the bills that our governmnet is racking up at a blinding pace.

I would simply caution those of you who regularly vote straight party lines to review what it is that your party truly stands for today. It may be a very different platform than when you first registered to vote.

[Silvertwinkie]

CC,

I firmly believe that GW is the lesser of two evils here and the right man for the job we currently need now. I don't feel that we can sit by and deal with 4 years of a Clinton like president. Sure GW isn't the best one out there, but neither was Reagan (which we too had large deficits). People tend to focus too short term. If but nothing else, history should teach us the price we pay for doing nothing or too little. It would have been nice to have some of the larger countries on board, but it didn’t happen. That should not stop us from following through. I mean in 12 years what did Clinton do about the Middle East? What did he do about Bin Laden (a few cruise missiles)? What did he do after the Cole? What did he do after the embassy bombings? What did Clinton do after the nosebleed he took in I think it was Somalia? From an outsiders perspective it would appear that we Americans are not willing to go the distance. That same logic was true as Pearl Harbor was destroyed, only to find that we did have it and we backed it up with what I am sure is to this day a controversial use of nuclear weapons.

Bottom line, no one could have predicted 9/11 and it's contributing impact to the overall typical downturn of the economy (which happens every decade). We did not choose to be the guardians of the gate, but there is simply no one else to do it. As bad as things are, they could get a bunch worse if we get a pacifist in the office. We need action, not a few cruise missiles when someone does something bad. The other side plays both sides of the fence. They are for things, yet against them at the same time. They are quick to lay blame and criticize, yet have little to offer to fix. True a few larger countries didn’t agree, but you’ll find those same countries that were against it, in bed with us now as the money starts to flow. Funny, we and our friends do all the work, and the folks that did nothing but argue and disagree are some of the first ones out there with their hands out.

Of course folks will not agree with this and that is what make America, America....the right and ability to openly agree, disagree and talk smack. Lots of places don't have that luxury and we didn't get it by collectively sticking our heads in the sand and hoping the boogieman will go away.

Just .02.... if you want, I can tell you how I really feel!

[COLORADO_CAMPER]

Twinkie,

For the sake of the integrity of this thread I don't want to go into a long discertation on my political beliefs. Let me just say that I made no reference at all to the war in Iraq, the events of 911 or anything concerning the war on terror. I also made no gesture of support for the Democratic party or any previous administration. My beef with this administration is founded in its willingness to push its agenda at all costs, even if that cost should include outright lying to the American public, the further weakening of the American economy and foreign relations abroad. This is not 1941 and this country now has foundations which necessitate its participation in the global economy. I will whole-heartedly support our efforts at bringing some form of democracy (not necessarily one defined by our ideals) to other peoples of the world only when our own own people are employed, fed, housed, clothed and have access to the affordable healthcare that should, in my opinion, be a right and not a privilege. The Republican party used to be conservative - as in Teddy Roosevelt conservative. Deficit spending and drilling or mining in our National Monuments and Parks is not conservatism. Teddy Roosevelt would roll in his grave to be associated with present-day Republican conservatism. I will say no more on this subject.

[Silvertwinkie]

Well, I can appreciate your postion on the wildlife drilling, but I also have to say, we have to find some alternate means for fuel. It stinks that it has to happen, but the middle east with it's oil and our need with all this money is like giving the means to a child to do nasty things.

I wouldn't be so bold to say we were lied to. I think folks make decsions all the time based on info that is availible.

Times as you have clearly indicated have changed and some of the way things used to work changed forever in late 2001. In some cases were there over reactions, perhaps, but I feel it's a process. The simple fact is that you have 3 main choices when it comes to filling needs when you don't have the $$$. You can either rasie taxes....or you can cut services or go into a deficit.

In closing however, Teddy Roosevelt was no saint either and no matter how we feel about drilling in the wildlife areas or going into deficits, it still doesn't mean I am ever going to recoup the money I've paid and still currently pay into a sytem that might not be around for me to take out of.....but I very respect your comments CC.

[Ken J]

This administration has been irresponsible? Don't get me started on that one......... I could probably fill up pages on that one.

The problem is America is listening to what everybody is saying what this administration is saying, rather than listening to what this administration is saying..........and doing.

arrgg

Ken

[Gerald Clay]

Egad - and we still have 8 months to go. Thanks for being civil in your arguments.

I've been in Texas for 34 years and got no benefit from GW and his games. I do have corporate gloat all around me as they pollute and ignore the voters. The lies are just a side effect. At least the Dems seem to mean well. As RV owners, an interest in parks, open spaces and clean air/water should be formost.

[idahosafari]

Originally posted by Silvertwinkie
Well, my main gripe is the fact that I personally have been paying into this program for serveral decades. I have a few alternate plans, however, it's just a real bummer that I basically flushed tens of thousands of dollars into something I'll never see.

I, too, doubt I'll see much $$$ from Social Security when I retire. But I'm not going to get angry over the "unfairness" of it all because there is nothing at this point that can be done about it. It's a pyramid scheme, and if an organization other than the US government had initiated this, law enforcement agencies would have shut it down long ago.

In spite of the tens of thousands of dollars that you and I probably won't see, I think our quality of life will be better than what today's retirees see. My Grandparents had Social Security, but they never lived to see personal computers, the internet, cell phones and reliable vehicles. It's exciting to see all the new and improved stuff that comes out each year to make our lives better. And even if our quality of life doesn't improve any more in the next thirty years, US citizens will still be much better off than people in most parts of the world.

- Charlie

[Silvertwinkie]

Good point. I guess I'd just like to be the one to take the money each month and light it on fire rather than see it go to a bottomless pit that gets raided all the time like a $2 lady at a port of call!

BTW...show me an administration that doesn't not tell the full truth.....one recently comes to mind for starters....."I did not have relations with that woman." One of many. Part of being a politician is "kissing babies then stealing their lollypops when they aren't lookin'."

[Chuck]

ok..a couple of things: TR was no "republican", in today's sense, OR in his own days. He was one of the most progressive president's we've ever had. the current SS system was HIS idea, but only came about through is younger cousin, Franklin. The repubs of the day hated him as much as the repubs of today hate clinton. The reason he became prez in the first place was a ploy to get him out of the way. They gave him the VP slot to shut him up, and render him impotent. that all backfired when they shot McKinley. TR was only a "Repub" by birth, having been born into a wealthy family.

SS is not a pension plan into which you "invest" your earnings, to reap a dividend of sorts at a later date. it is simply a "Tax" that supports the current government programs. there's no "drawer" in Washington with your name on it, in which your money sits earning interest or anything like that. for some reason, that's the way people look at it, but it isn't so, and it never was. when it was instituted, most people never lived long enough to get anything from the program. The few that did considered themselves lucky (and they were) to have lived that long. Average life expectancy was 62. The idea was to keep these few people from starving to death for the last couple of years of their lives...not support a lengthy retirement.
The problem now is that modern medicine has been able to extend life...but not youth. So we live longer...but nor more able to work a 40-hour week than the 60-somethings of the 1930's. So what do we do? The "pyramid scheme" only works if there are a few people at the top, and lots and lots of people at the bottom, but the shape of the pyramid is changing.

[COLORADO_CAMPER]

Okay, since this thread was split I'll eat my previous statement and throw another couple cents into the coffer.

Personal feelings, prejudices and bias' aside, there are certain responsibilities that we as the voters have to our government and, ultimately, to each other. The most important of these is to educate ourselves on the subject matter and the candidates who seek public office and to vote our conscience. Far too many people don't vote at all and far too many who do vote do so without first knowing what is at stake when they punch their cards.

With easy access to information via the internet today, their is no logical reason, in my mind, why voters can't do their homework and learn somehting about the people and issues that they are pldeging loyalty to at the booth. Granted, information on the net is liekly to be as tainted as that which may be presented in other forms of the media. But it is our responsibility to do our best to sort through the fluff and find the heart of truth in these matters.

Politicians today are, essentially, no different than those of the last century or the one before that. They really get a free ride once on board and they will do everything they can to stay there. Who wouldn't? The difference in politics today may just be that we, as the voting public, don't require as much of them and don't hold them accountable for the things they do, or don't do. After all, this country has a far greater populace and the seats of government reside behind a much denser buffer of bureaucracy than was the case even fifty years ago.

The parties have changed, too. Once upon a time, the Republicans were a fiscally responsible, environmentally conscious and pro-human rights organization. Just look at the likes of Abraham Lincoln and, again, at Teddy Roosevelt. Over the last half century this trend has shifted and the Democrats began to embrace those ideals to a larger extent than the Republicans - witness the work of men like John F. Kennedy and (perhaps with the exception of his successor, Lyndon Johnson) all of the Democratic administrations that have followed. Sure there remain key issues which each party has incessantly run on for the past several decades (gun control and pro-life for the Republicans; healthcare and social security for the Democrats), but the scales of balance have shifted none-the-less with the Democrats ending up a bit more centred and the Republicans a bit more to the right.

No matter which party, if either, your ideals best align with, there can be no question that we have issues IN THIS COUNTRY which must be dealt with - and soon.

Oil is a problem, so is pollution. We have the means of positively impacting both available to us right now. Hydrogen-based alternative fuels and the engines to combust them are reality. I can only presume that they haven't been made widely available to the public because some huge corporation(s) stand to lose loads of money on oil sales in the process. Haliburton maybe? I don't know. But these are the questions that we should be demanding that our elected officials answer.

Our failing economy - another problem. Whether you want to believe it or not, one reason that our economy continues to defy recovery is because of our deficit spending. All of us are guilty of deficit spending at one time or another - ever carry a balance on your credit card(s)? So how does a government deficit spend? It seeks loans from foreign banks - loans which accrue interest. It prints more currency - which devalues the dollar (also known as inflation). When the value of the dollar becomes unstable, investment banks sell their dollars in favor of more stable forms of currency (just as one might sell a failing stock in order to cut his losses). When this happens, the economic failure is accelerated and stock markets crash.

The problems facing our government now are not new. Every administration has had these or similar issues to deal with. What is critical in the outcome is how these situations are handled. It is in the handling of these matters that I think our present administration is failing - choosing to allocate resources to concerns which are not those most critical to our peace, security and pursuit of happiness. We have no guarantee that the next administration will do any better, but I am willing to gamble my vote that they won't do any worse.

[COLORADO_CAMPER]

Chuck,

While it is true that TR's ideologies were not in perfect alignment with the majority of Republicans of his day, there can be no question that his own convictions initially led him to the Republican party because they shared more in common than did the Democratic party. Let's not forget that TR was the Republican candidate for Governor of New York three years before he ran for the Presidency with McKinley.

[Silvertwinkie]

I disagree with the last part very much. I think this administration has done no better or worse than other administrations.

Inflation is low, the economy as is the case every deacde is slowly coming out of a recession. The 9/11 attacks only made things worse. It's a slow process. Interest rates are low and the dollar although not in great shape is holding it's own.

Everyone is so negitive when it come to the current admin. I wonder how eveyone would feel if Gore had won....would we still be having these converstations? I know I would and believe it or not, I'd defend Gore as much as I can't stand the man because there is only so much you can do in a recession that also had the worst terrorist attack in our country's history. Gore, although he might not have gone into the wildlife reserves for drilling, he would have bought more oil from the Middle East, South America or the growing and developing African oil fields which is no better than going into the wildlife reserves...problem is we need it and as much as alternate fuels are out there, they still lack what it takes to do more robust applications at a price point. Computers were the same way...when they first came out, they cost thousands, now you get get one for a few hundred and it's 5000x more powerful. It took about 7 or 8 years for that to happen. Everyone wants everything fixed right away, and that's just not how the world works. How much can you expect from a man in only 4 years? That said, I can see no issue more or less with Bush comapred to Kerry, so I'm stickin with what I know. Kerry is too much of a variable in a time when we need a strong leader who isn't worried about world opinion. You really think Libya was gonna throw away it's WMD materials had it not seen what was going on? Don't think a few others are thinking twice too. These things take time and cost money and if we need to run into a deficit to cover our behinds, I'm all for it.

Sure I'd like to pay cash for my car and Airstream, but it's in my best intersted to float it. Same holds true with programs needed. You do as much as you can, get the rest on credit and pay down the debt when the economy is booming which will be in about 2 years or less. Meaning whomever is in the White House next terem is going to reap any benefits just like Clinton did...frankly you could have put a chimp in the seat and pure Capitalism and greed would have driven the economy upward, not a sitting president. Now you have Kerry out there claiming he's gonna restore the nation. How really is he going to do that? He has given no real workable plan except for getting rid of the tax cut and possibly raising taxes. Folks say only the rich got the tax refund. I guess either I missed the bank statement that said I'm rich or I too was included in the tax cut and refund. This years taxes were far lower than last years taxes and the meager 1800.00 I wrote off from my Airstream as a second home had only a bit to do with that. Most of my capital gains were not consumed by the government as they were just 4 years ago. I was paying 30%.

That said, I still don't expect to see any money at my retirement from SS, so I've done a few different things on my own, regardless of what ape gets into office.

[COLORADO_CAMPER]

Twinkie,

The dollar is not "holding it's own". To buy one Britsh Pound you now need $1.83; one Euro, $1.22. One year ago you could have purchased one Euro for exactly $1.00; a Britsh Pound for $1.50.

I hope you are right about our economy improving over the next couple of years. No one, particularly me, wants to pay the price for being able to say "I told you so."

[Tinsel Loaf]

Enough about SS & politics, just go vote,! Can we focus on AIRSTREAMS !!