General Discussion

jaxexpat

(6,833 posts) Sat Mar 23, 2024, 09:11 AM Mar 23

147

Social Security and the life expectancy meme: the age of SS cutting is upon us again. [View all]

We are going to be hearing about how the "life expectancy" in 1932 was so low that by 2024, the SS system would, logically, go broke if people started using their funds at age 65. Because the average life expectancy has gone up so much, we don't even live in the same world anymore. So, it's time we panic, logically, and throw out the baby with the bath water. (an interesting adage considering the subject of child mortality). We MUST immediately raise the age of retirement drastically!......Suckers............. The American public fell for that crap once. That's why my sister hates that I could retire at 65 but she must carry on until she's 67.

2 things:
1. The age of concern for retirement is not "life expectancy" but life expectancy at the age of retirement. There is no great difference between the life expectancy of 65 years olds in 1932 from those in 2024. It's about 10-15, not the 25-30 "conservatives" will try to cite in their ceaseless, underhanded effort to swindle workers out of the ONLY real means they have to retire before they die in the streets.
2. This fact of statistics is not lost on the SSA. The "A", meaning administration, indicates there are people working at the SSA who deal with statistics for a living and recommend adjustments which may be required to sustain the Social Security System. That's why it "a pretty damn simple rise in maximum income level for SS levy would fix it for a long time, easily and painlessly", is a FACT.

Edward Rutledge lives on in the heart of every Republican.

143 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Social Security and the life expectancy meme: the age of SS cutting is upon us again. [View all] jaxexpat Mar 23 OP

There should be a means test that would keep people like my dad from drawing it. As I told him many times ... marble falls Mar 23 #1

Actually it was designed to even give money to the wealthy. The strength of its support was it was not need based karynnj Mar 23 #15

You said what I was going to say TxGuitar Mar 23 #28

this is exactly y i oppose scrapping the cap. mopinko Mar 23 #16

There is no reason to keep the payments Voltaire2 Mar 23 #41

changing that changes the whole thing. mopinko Mar 23 #48

No it doesn't. It changes one aspect. Voltaire2 Mar 23 #53

No it doesn't. That's ridiculous. Voltaire2 Mar 23 #61

that was teddy kennedy's take. mopinko Mar 23 #76

Well Biden's 'take' is eliminate the cap for Voltaire2 Mar 23 #79

u got a link for that? mopinko Mar 23 #80

Sure. Voltaire2 Mar 23 #81

that's medicare, not fica. it never had a cap. mopinko Mar 23 #82

and this isnt 'scrap the cap' mopinko Mar 23 #83

It actually is. It is the long standing Democratic platform Voltaire2 Mar 23 #99

no it isnt. mopinko Mar 23 #104

No it is also Medicare. Voltaire2 Mar 23 #97

. mopinko Mar 23 #106

Some comments. jaxexpat Mar 23 #66

Lol. You must be present on your cellphone this morning!? KPN Mar 23 #68

Thanks The Bopper Mar 23 #86

if teddy kennedy's position is a rw talking point now, mopinko Mar 23 #92

There's no reason there cant be a cap on payouts too. oldsoftie Mar 23 #121

Social security income is Progressive dog Mar 23 #128

Payments are tied to contributions OrangeJoe Mar 23 #132

Also Rebl2 Mar 23 #19

I paid into my SS for 40 years.... TxGuitar Mar 23 #27

When you drive your insured car with no claims, should the insurance company give you back your payments ... marble falls Mar 23 #59

Are you including employer's share in your totals? jaxexpat Mar 23 #72

Um no. And by no I mean no fucking way. Voltaire2 Mar 23 #36

Employer's share OrangeJoe Mar 23 #134

A means test makes it a form of welfare drmeow Mar 23 #37

employers put in the same amount as u. mopinko Mar 23 #50

Disagree TimeToGo Mar 23 #47

My husband died at 70 BonnieJW Mar 23 #62

I'm sorry for your loss. area51 Mar 23 #137

I don't see it that way Skittles Mar 24 #141

As soon as that is done, SS becomes an entitlement and not an earned benefit. LiberalArkie Mar 23 #65

It is an entitlement means you ARE entitled to receive the benefit that you JohnSJ Mar 23 #110

It's an entitlement because Congress passed a law saying you're entitled to it. Igel Mar 23 #114

You are entitled to it because you have been paying into it. As for your JohnSJ Mar 23 #116

I've never understood the negative connotation with "entitled" oldsoftie Mar 23 #120

No means test. It will destroy SS...raise taxes so the rich pay their fair share. Demsrule86 Mar 23 #71

The asses who want to raise the age to 70 or 85 are the same ones who would never hire anyone over 50. CousinIT Mar 23 #88

Bill Gates & Donad trump dont need SS. oldsoftie Mar 23 #123

Nope. Freethinker65 Mar 23 #130

Right on, raising retirement age is not the only fix available. Take the income cap off SS taxes. And... dutch777 Mar 23 #2

imho the best fix is to include capital gains. mopinko Mar 23 #17

Totally agree drmeow Mar 23 #40

Holy crap! It's only March. Your partner must make bank. jimfields33 Mar 23 #51

This was for last year, not this year! drmeow Mar 23 #69

Thanks. I wish you both well! jimfields33 Mar 23 #101

my ex hit the cap early every yr for decades. mopinko Mar 23 #78

A MAGA Republican retiree will say they won't cut our SS, it's the future doc03 Mar 23 #3

Yes, exactly. Mariana Mar 23 #57

The actual age at which a person can collect SS PoindexterOglethorpe Mar 23 #4

That's wrong. Your SS benefits are taxable Voltaire2 Mar 23 #42

true but not true Tickle Mar 23 #45

Your income is always taxable. Voltaire2 Mar 23 #49

I mean no disrespect Tickle Mar 23 #58

Yours won't be if your other income Voltaire2 Mar 23 #60

If you go over a certain amount of income Lifeafter70 Mar 23 #67

Could it be they were refering to state taxes? Lifeafter70 Mar 23 #84

Taxable and actually losing $1.00 for each $2.00 earned over a set amount PoindexterOglethorpe Mar 23 #113

oh it's always been upon us since the day it started Tickle Mar 23 #5

The 401K, I think, was designed by big corporations as a way to avoid giving actual pensions. viva la Mar 23 #11

When 401k first came out my employer said this Emile Mar 23 #22

My employer sneakily went from a 5-year vesting in the pension to 10 years.... viva la Mar 23 #35

Cut the crap- raise the cap. FalloutShelter Mar 23 #6

Heard Raise The Cap For Decades modrepub Mar 23 #7

it gets raised every year, but somehow it's not part of the convo. mopinko Mar 23 #18

It gets COLA every year. Voltaire2 Mar 23 #43

How are Republicans going to be able to afford those huge tax cuts for the wealthy??? RAB910 Mar 23 #8

Remove the caps. Let rich people pay their fair share. Meadowoak Mar 23 #9

that is far in excess of what's needed. mopinko Mar 23 #20

No reason to not cap benefits. Voltaire2 Mar 23 #44

except that it changes the fundamentals of the program. mopinko Mar 23 #52

It may be in excess of what we need, but why should we Meadowoak Mar 23 #105

cuz it's a basic program for basic protection. mopinko Mar 23 #107

How much of a business owners revenue comes from Meadowoak Mar 23 #112

And life expectancy for people who don't work in comfort... viva la Mar 23 #10

You didn't mention the other part that raised my hackles; killing the widow(ers) and children's benefit. flying_wahini Mar 23 #12

You're quite right. I didn't try to expose all their intentions, though. I don't type well. jaxexpat Mar 23 #21

we only get half, anyway. mopinko Mar 23 #23

I wonder how much Social Security saved because of Covid? CanonRay Mar 23 #13

it night b offset by increased disability. mopinko Mar 23 #24

Decline in life expectancy due to COVID-19 (CDC) Bo Zarts Mar 23 #31

All the people who weren't working because their place of employment shut down didn't pay anything into SS MichMan Mar 23 #32

Life expectancy is longer because infant mortality Emile Mar 23 #14

Also, women's life expectancy is improved by modern prenatal care. It's an easier world to grow up in. jaxexpat Mar 23 #30

Exactly, another great point. Emile Mar 23 #33

Your math doesn't work. Igel Mar 23 #118

Don't understand a single sentence. Can you rephrase? jaxexpat Mar 23 #136

Wow DENVERPOPS Mar 23 #63

It raised one year out of the last twenty. Emile Mar 23 #85

Thx DENVERPOPS Mar 23 #98

Depends greatly on part of the country JT45242 Mar 23 #87

Thx DENVERPOPS Mar 23 #93

It should have been a lock box from day one - nobody raiding it for anything else. TBF Mar 23 #25

The only presidential candidate I know of to ever use the "SS lock-box" as a campaign plank was Al Gore. jaxexpat Mar 23 #34

It hasn't been raided. Voltaire2 Mar 23 #46

Is there somewhere DENVERPOPS Mar 23 #74

Google. Igel Mar 23 #119

If you think it has not been raided where in the hell have you been? Stargazer99 Mar 23 #127

It is interesting DENVERPOPS Mar 23 #138

Most successful social program of all time Johnny2X2X Mar 23 #26

And how are you supposed to survive after age 65 no_hypocrisy Mar 23 #29

repubs have told DownriverDem Mar 23 #38

Republicans need to practice what they preach and refuse SS benefits as a matter of personal ethics. Chainfire Mar 23 #55

It is an entitlement. You are entitled to a payment because you have been paying JohnSJ Mar 23 #108

The SSA disagrees. Igel Mar 23 #122

The benefit base for 2024 is $168,600 Shermann Mar 23 #39

Good point except it seems to play into the falsehood that Social Security is a tax based program. jaxexpat Mar 23 #75

False dichotomy, it can be a contribution to a benefit program and be a tax. Shermann Mar 23 #100

A lifetime record of taxes paid will not determine your monthly SS retirement check. jaxexpat Mar 23 #109

Form W-2 Box 4: Social security tax withheld Shermann Mar 23 #117

You retirement money could be better spent by the wealthy on necessities like yachts and vacation homes. Chainfire Mar 23 #54

Republicans want old, hungry, desperate and are willing to work cheap labor pool Emile Mar 23 #56

Okay, let's start with the foundations... GiqueCee Mar 23 #64

Absolutely love the passion-n-logic of your rant, GC. I think I'll go out onto the balmy patio's 75 and think on it. jaxexpat Mar 23 #77

Central Vermont... GiqueCee Mar 23 #90

It's a burden. jaxexpat Mar 23 #95

That's why we need to put trump back. Turbineguy Mar 23 #70

Every percent Traildogbob Mar 23 #73

I'm one of those who had to wait until 67 and I am LIVID. CousinIT Mar 23 #89

I got mine so screw you is a republican trait. Emile Mar 23 #91

Absolutely. I hear it from them every day. That, and.. CousinIT Mar 23 #94

General information about Social Security for the curious Silver Swan Mar 23 #96

That can't be right. Igel Mar 23 #124

Everyone who pays into social security deserves to get social security regardless of income. What JohnSJ Mar 23 #102

Exactly right FakeNoose Mar 23 #139

I am not in favor... Mike Nelson Mar 23 #103

We ascend a slippery slope when we oblige a political institution to define "need". jaxexpat Mar 23 #111

These seem to be contradictory MichMan Mar 23 #131

Bet money we'll still be sitting here in 10 years with little or nothing done to bolster SS. Raising the cap appreciably Silent Type Mar 23 #115

I started collecting at 62 for 3 reasons. oldsoftie Mar 23 #125

Should go by life expectancy for 21 year olds Kaleva Mar 23 #126

It shouldn't go by life expectancy. Elessar Zappa Mar 24 #142

Why is 65 or 67 the magic number? Kaleva Mar 24 #143

George Carlin once said orangecrush Mar 23 #129

Smart bettors do not argue with Carlin's ghost. jaxexpat Mar 23 #135

What killed men off when SS was devised was alcohol Warpy Mar 23 #133

Lower the retirement age and expand the benefit. Tactical Peek Mar 24 #140