- Joined
- Apr 5, 2012
- Messages
- 2,802
- Reaction score
- 517
- Location
- Atlanta, GA
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
Two years isn't much. I was thinking it would be more.
This may be true. My understanding of such systems proposed is that those opting out could take their share of the SS and put in in the private account. Not the employer share.
The law can be changed, and the feds can bail out SS just like anything else.
Should the elderly get bailed out over banks?
I figured that it would be higher was well.
There is no money in Social Security to take out. The system has 26 trillion in promises for which the only cash that exists is in the Trust Fund. If you let anyone opt-out, everyone would. The Trust Fund would cover about 3 1/2 years of benefits. If people were allowed to reduce their SS payments to 1/2 of what it is today, the system is broke I 8 years rather than 16.
I am not a fan of the bank bail-outs. It is very unwise policy that none of these idiots went to jail.
Retirees will have a very difficult sell in the future for a bail-out. They voted for all of these goodies from government like Social Security, and then they voted for people who didn't pay for the goodies. Today, our revenue does not even cover the entitlement programs plus interest. The rest of the government is put on the credit card. I will not be surprised if future voters say that we will pay off the debt but will not bail-out those who were responsible for it.