Can Social Security survive the Baby Boomer retirement?

Right now for every one person drawing Social Security benefits there are 7 workers paying into Social Security. With in the next 10 years that will become 2 workers for every one person drawing benefits. If the average person draws $800 a monthe then the workers will have to contribute $400 dollars a month to Social security to cover the payments. How can Social Security survive that? Should it survive? Galveston, TX. was used as an experiment in the early 80's. Every worker in Galveston was given the opportunity to withdraw from paying into the SS admin. They were allowed to invest their money in their own retirement plans. Those people are now retiring with 4 to 5 times the amount of money than those who elected not too.

Can Social Security survive the Baby Boomer retirement?
The one thing you are not factoring into your formula are the billions upon billions of investment dollars that the Boomers will soon be drawing out of retirement accounts. Most of that money will be taxable.





Besides that fact, social security is not something guaranteed under the Constitution and should be done away with. The 10th Amendment states:





"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."





Social security was an ill-thought out program rushed through Congress with FDR's New Deal. Many of the problems we face as a nation have their roots in the New Deal. Any governmental program that is based on open or enforced enrollment is doomed to fail at some point - the rolls just grow too large for the base to handle.





What this country needs to do is teach people fiscal responsibility and how to prepare for their own retirement. PRIVATIZING social security is the first step. The program that was suggested was a mirror image of the Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) available to every Federal government employee. I have two such accounts (one for my civilian job and one for my National Guard job), and BOTH accounts have grown by an average of 60% over the last two years. They do not allow people to invest in whatever they want - contrary to what the Democrats and liberals would have you believe. They consist of five very structured mutual funds based on market indexes. If it is good enough for the President and for Congress, it is good enough for me.





Phasing it in - as was proposed - is the right answer, too. It allows people to keep receiving social security benefits but eventually weans people off of the government rolls.





The irony of liberals and Democrats not supporting privatized social security is this: They are the first ones that claim you cannot trust the government, yet they want the entire nation to trust the government with their retirement.
Reply:You got something against Democrats or are you just mean Report It

Reply:Why do I have to be mean just because I disagree with their policy? There happen to be a lot of people who agree with me ... Does that make them all mean? Once again, Democrats are displaying that they are the "party of tolerance." Report It

Reply:He hates Democrats, just read his answers to the questions. SGT_K is a horrible person on these pages. Report It

Reply:sgt k is moron! Don't step on any landmines sarg. We would hate to miss your hillarious stupidity! Report It

Reply:Are we getting personal attack here, he just want to express his opinion. We dont have to agree with him but respect what's in one mind Report It

Reply:Social Security is not a pension it is a welfare program. As such it should be funded from general taxes. If that was done it would be solvent. The problem is the rich pay very little due to the FICA cap. That cap makes US taxes regressive which is unjust. Report It

Reply:No let's just end the stupid program NOW
Reply:I hope so since I am one of those baby boomers and so is my husband. But social security needs massive work. Bush is spending soooooooo much on the war in Iraq that is helping NO ONE that I doubt anything will be done until he leaves office.
Reply:NO. there has to be some sort of reform and not by privitizing it. increasing the retirement age...etc...
Reply:Simple....


People there is no Social Security fund. The Congress of the the US spends ever penny and then some. Yet, Congress does not pay into Social Security and can retire after 12 years. Stop Congress from spending the money and invest it.
Reply:This argument assumes that the US has to keep its population in check. If "illegal" immigrants were to be allowed in without limit, there would soon be 10 or 20 workers paying in to Social Security for every baby boomer payout. This is a created crisis and proof that the Republicans are deliberately creating a Social Security crisis so they can end Social Security.





And if the investors in the Galveston experiment had had to retire about 2 years ago, when the market tanked, they would not be doing too well.
Reply:Not as it stands.





Socialist-style programs always fail. Time to think more realistically.
Reply:No all the old people are using it up . Compare what they contributed to it to what we are.They are going through it fast and the way the cost of living keeps going up the only people that will be able to retire are the wealthy with plenty of mutual funds, stocks and hand me downs from their parents. Also the farmers that own and farmed and polluted thousands of acres with chemicals are now selling it to all the real estate scalpers %26amp; loting it off so what they once bought for $3000.00 they will now get millions for so they can go back and forth to several homes in several states. Sorry to offend anyone but I know of people that are doing it. Thats the Truth!
Reply:Social Security, as it is currently structured, will not make it. Something has to be done, but privitizing it, and allowing people to not pay fully into Social Security right now is not the right answer.
Reply:This is one of my biggest fears...I cannot retire for about another 20 years and I have "contributed" into Social Security since the mid 70's. I wish that I were afforded the same opportunity as the people in Galveston, TX, maybe then I wouldn't fear retirement.
Reply:Social Security is just a government sponsored ponzi/pyramid. The problem is that it is not actuarially sound. What I think we should do is a one time buy out of based on age and means. I think we should honor the commitment to those who are closest to retirement age and in the most need of assistance. The best way to this in my opinion is to buy those that qualify based on age/means an annuity, annuities are actuarially sound usually a fixed income for the rest your life (not all mind you but a lot). They are stable and to my knowledge has never failed to pay. Then those who are young enough and those that have the means are on our own. I have annuity because I do not believe SS will be there when I retire.
Reply:definitly not, something must change... there was a math competition that our school participated on where 4 kids from the school sat in a room for 14 hours and had to figure out using math what needs to be changed. I do not know the exact numbers but either taxes are adjusted or the way social security is given out must be changed.