☎📞Don’t want to ask your questions during our FREE LIVE Q&A Sundays 3pm PST (6pm EST) or Thursdays 4pm PST (7pm EST)? How about a private one-on-one call with Dr. Ed? Click here to schedule: calendly.com/mygovexpert/consult
There is a benefit cap, which is $3822 for 2024, hence the ss cap on earnings. Also, employers match ss contribution so that would be a lot of strain on businesses if they had to match ss tax on millions of dollars in earnings.
Remove the cap is ONLY ok if they also increase the benefits for those paying more. Currently, I make above the CAP but only be willing to go above it if my social security benefits increase commensurate with the increase in taxes. I am not willing to pay more otherwise.
The Social Security tax rate grew to 1.5% in 1950 and gradually increased to top 5% by 1978. Social Security current tax rate of 6.2% has been in effect since 1990. It's been 32 years since the last increase. Many boomers were still working during this time. Just increasing by .5% in early 90's, would have made a big difference in the money in the Social Security coffer. People need to realize corporations and rich/wealthy plan & play the long game. Thus, some in Congress always plan to get rid of it or they want to privatize it so they can make money for themselves and their rich/wealthy buddies. In USA, so much is driven by Greed today.
During the presidential debate, Vice President Gore told the nation, “I will keep Social Security in a lockbox, and that pays down the national debt.” Well, which is it? If you take the Social Security surplus each year and use it to pay down the national debt, you’re not exactly keeping Social Security funds in a lockbox.
The SS surplus goes anonymously into the general fund. A bit of it goes into every federal payment. To be clear, these excess funds are used to purchase government bonds, and this stays as an asset in the SS Fund. The cash folds into the general fund.
A few years ago the government had more funding for the IRS. That year was the first year that I called in with a question about my return my call was answered almost immediately and I got an answer to my question very quickly. I do believe there is merit in your observation that if the government stopped catering to their buddies and actually funded the agencies as they needed to this country would run so much more smoothly. Also, think about it logically if Social Security is on the brink of bankruptcy and catastrophic failure what investor worth their salt would even want to invest in a failing endeavor?? It's not failing, you hit the nail on the head the Wall Street types want to get their hands on even more of the average person's money and this is just another attempt to do just that. Great presentation. Thank you.
As a former securities broker I would say NEVER privatize it. Most people don't have the financial sophistication to manage it...and won't. The majority will have NOTHING in retirement if you give it to them. Politicians need to keep their hands out of it.
I can guarantee you that no politician will touch this issue on their watch, they will kick the can down the road and it will come up as an issue in 2032 or later.. I turn 62 in 2036 hopefully I will not be affected by any changes
Sooner or later Social Security's future can and will be fixable with some tweaks, whether voluntarily via mustering the political will to make the required tough decisions or because the numbers are ultimately going to force the situation. Medicare and Medicaid spending I'm not so sure can be fixed without both huge tax increases as well even bigger reductions in healthcare spending.
My understanding is that the retirement age was changed to 67 and other changes were made 30 years ago and that's why we've gotten this far without the trust fund going broke
Seniors vote in alarming numbers. So, there's no reason to be alarmed about the Social Security Trust Fund running dry. Also, only one party is in love with the idea of privatization.
Putting my little two cents in. I don't trust Wall Street investors either. Residing two boroughs away, and remembering some of the past downturns with the stock market. Too risky to play with people's money when they haven't had a choice to invest in the market.
The short falls are the governments missmanagement. The givernment should not have any right to reduce our agreed upon amount of retirement. I didn't find out they changed my retirement age until I was 60! I had already worked 25 years when they changed my retirement age.
First off nobody knows if 45 will cut SS until he decides to do so. Secondly, about 2.7 trillion dollars has been borrowed from SS. So if the SS fund today is 3 trillion that means that almost the same amount of money has been borrowed from it. Imagine if that 2.7 trillion had not been borrowed from SS. I bet we would not be having these discussions. Furthermore, to my knowledge the 2.7 trillion was to be payed back starting in 2017 which I believe has not. Go figure, how would that happen when we have a national debt approaching 35 trillion. Lastly, just increase the tax thresholds for SS and increase the cap. I believe the tax thresholds on SS have not been changed since 1984 and they clearly do not reflect the average middle class household income today. Any other changes is just making the working middle class pay the price once again. It all looks good on paper and they can then say it is solvent for another 85 years but if they continue to do the actual things that they have been doing then we will be revisiting this again. To me the proposed changes is just kicking the can down the road so that their case for privatizing SS is stronger. If they keep saying SS is broke people will begin to believe them. Believing any politician when it comes to issues like this without doing your own research is a recipe for disaster. Just my .02.
IMO SS best serves those that made poor choices throughout their working years and did not save for the future on their own. Those of us that did plan, sacrifice and save would be much better off with that 6.2% in our portfolios all these years. So I have no choice but to be a part of the SS system so others can survive. It’s in a way self funded welfare. The welfare of myself later in life.
Don't forget that SS came about in Depression when a lot of good people had investments in Wall St and the banks. Poverty is not always some kind of moral failure that was brought on by bad choices.
@@MyGovExpertGreat point Ed. For those who are able to save & plan for their future, SS is an insurance policy with perks. There's no commercial insurance policy that can start providing income in one's 60's & can provide them with low cost but good quality health insurance.
Planned? Yes by a public that can't agree on a fix, doesn't push the issue with their votes and just don't even understand the problems associated with the program The program is simple to fix but it's hard to pick who pays for the fix
Like everything else they will wait until the last minute to do anything. They should have looked into this before the baby boomers retire. I think they should just give back every penny that we have paid into social security and Medicaid and do away with it.
Partial privatization is not las Vegas gambling. Put into index funds of American companies. Why is it evil for private companies to make money but somehow government workers are somehow angels? Dumb. Invest in American companies.
☎📞Don’t want to ask your questions during our FREE LIVE Q&A Sundays 3pm PST (6pm EST) or Thursdays 4pm PST (7pm EST)? How about a private one-on-one call with Dr. Ed? Click here to schedule: calendly.com/mygovexpert/consult
Remove the cap from $168k so those making millions a year pay the same into the system as the people that actually created their wealth!
I agree
Agree 100%. That cap is ridiculous now. So, so many people make over $168,000 - in tech, certainly in finance, and in consulting.
Absolutely.
There is a benefit cap, which is $3822 for 2024, hence the ss cap on earnings. Also, employers match ss contribution so that would be a lot of strain on businesses if they had to match ss tax on millions of dollars in earnings.
Remove the cap is ONLY ok if they also increase the benefits for those paying more. Currently, I make above the CAP but only be willing to go above it if my social security benefits increase commensurate with the increase in taxes. I am not willing to pay more otherwise.
The Social Security tax rate grew to 1.5% in 1950 and gradually increased to top 5% by 1978. Social Security current tax rate of 6.2% has been in effect since 1990.
It's been 32 years since the last increase. Many boomers were still working during this time. Just increasing by .5% in early 90's, would have made a big difference in the money in the Social Security coffer.
People need to realize corporations and rich/wealthy plan & play the long game. Thus, some in Congress always plan to get rid of it or they want to privatize it so they can make money for themselves and their rich/wealthy buddies.
In USA, so much is driven by Greed today.
It's up to us to stop them!
During the presidential debate, Vice President Gore told the nation, “I will keep Social Security in a lockbox, and that pays down the national debt.” Well, which is it? If you take the Social Security surplus each year and use it to pay down the national debt, you’re not exactly keeping Social Security funds in a lockbox.
The SS surplus goes anonymously into the general fund. A bit of it goes into every federal payment. To be clear, these excess funds are used to purchase government bonds, and this stays as an asset in the SS Fund. The cash folds into the general fund.
It is and should stay a separate fund.
@@MyGovExpert believe SS is included in Intragovernmental holdings folder :) is at $7,072,944,247,261.90 as of 3/12
A few years ago the government had more funding for the IRS. That year was the first year that I called in with a question about my return my call was answered almost immediately and I got an answer to my question very quickly. I do believe there is merit in your observation that if the government stopped catering to their buddies and actually funded the agencies as they needed to this country would run so much more smoothly. Also, think about it logically if Social Security is on the brink of bankruptcy and catastrophic failure what investor worth their salt would even want to invest in a failing endeavor?? It's not failing, you hit the nail on the head the Wall Street types want to get their hands on even more of the average person's money and this is just another attempt to do just that. Great presentation. Thank you.
Thank you and thanks for the insightful comments!
As a former securities broker I would say NEVER privatize it. Most people don't have the financial sophistication to manage it...and won't. The majority will have NOTHING in retirement if you give it to them. Politicians need to keep their hands out of it.
I agree 100%
Big bucks floating back and forth to the private sector. What could wrong?
"Politicians have no desire to rob banks when whole countries will do." J. Wm. Middendorf, Sec of the Navy, '74-'77
Great quote!
Thank you for your honest answers and all the information you are giving us.
My pleasure!
More evidence of taxation without representation.
Major problem is that people don't seem to be interested in being represented...just entertained.
@@MyGovExpert 👍🏻❤️
I can guarantee you that no politician will touch this issue on their watch, they will kick the can down the road and it will come up as an issue in 2032 or later.. I turn 62 in 2036 hopefully I will not be affected by any changes
I hope there will be changes, but not negative ones
@@MyGovExpertand what is a positive change? Someone else pay more that isn't you,?I'm not being mean I'm being honest.
The love of money is the root of all evil.
Sooner or later Social Security's future can and will be fixable with some tweaks, whether voluntarily via mustering the political will to make the required tough decisions or because the numbers are ultimately going to force the situation. Medicare and Medicaid spending I'm not so sure can be fixed without both huge tax increases as well even bigger reductions in healthcare spending.
Yea, the longer we wait the tougher the decisions and pain!
Great perspective. Thank you
Glad you like it!
My understanding is that the retirement age was changed to 67 and other changes were made 30 years ago and that's why we've gotten this far without the trust fund going broke
Changes have been made since the beginning, 1935. It's just time to do it again.
Seniors vote in alarming numbers. So, there's no reason to be alarmed about the Social Security Trust Fund running dry. Also, only one party is in love with the idea of privatization.
That's the trick, vote, vote, and vote. Obviously, not the same person voting three times, but you know what I mean.
*comforting numbers, comforting 😉
Putting my little two cents in. I don't trust Wall Street investors either. Residing two boroughs away, and remembering some of the past downturns with the stock market. Too risky to play with people's money when they haven't had a choice to invest in the market.
More speculation than investing in American companies if you ask me.
Give it to Nancy Pelosi's Husband so he can turn it in to 10 trillion. Lol 😆
Or pretty much any political spouse
Hasn't Nancy's husband taken enough abuse from a certain side of the political spectrum? Dang, he literally took one to the head from your team.
or supreme court justice ewh
The short falls are the governments missmanagement. The givernment should not have any right to reduce our agreed upon amount of retirement. I didn't find out they changed my retirement age until I was 60! I had already worked 25 years when they changed my retirement age.
First off nobody knows if 45 will cut SS until he decides to do so. Secondly, about 2.7 trillion dollars has been borrowed from SS. So if the SS fund today is 3 trillion that means that almost the same amount of money has been borrowed from it. Imagine if that 2.7 trillion had not been borrowed from SS. I bet we would not be having these discussions. Furthermore, to my knowledge the 2.7 trillion was to be payed back starting in 2017 which I believe has not. Go figure, how would that happen when we have a national debt approaching 35 trillion. Lastly, just increase the tax thresholds for SS and increase the cap. I believe the tax thresholds on SS have not been changed since 1984 and they clearly do not reflect the average middle class household income today. Any other changes is just making the working middle class pay the price once again. It all looks good on paper and they can then say it is solvent for another 85 years but if they continue to do the actual things that they have been doing then we will be revisiting this again. To me the proposed changes is just kicking the can down the road so that their case for privatizing SS is stronger. If they keep saying SS is broke people will begin to believe them. Believing any politician when it comes to issues like this without doing your own research is a recipe for disaster. Just my .02.
I like the increase the cap idea too.
SS gets paid back as needed. It was needed the last few years with FICA shortfalls. And where would you pay it back to??
I wish there was a different choice between Biden and Trump for president. They are both terrible!!
It does seem like a country with over 350 million people we would have more options.
Your wish came true😉
IMO SS best serves those that made poor choices throughout their working years and did not save for the future on their own.
Those of us that did plan, sacrifice and save would be much better off with that 6.2% in our portfolios all these years.
So I have no choice but to be a part of the SS system so others can survive. It’s in a way self funded welfare. The welfare of myself later in life.
Yea, that's where the "social" part of Social Security comes in...unless of course you had died early or become disabled.
Don't forget that SS came about in Depression when a lot of good people had investments in Wall St and the banks. Poverty is not always some kind of moral failure that was brought on by bad choices.
@@MyGovExpertGreat point Ed. For those who are able to save & plan for their future, SS is an insurance policy with perks. There's no commercial insurance policy that can start providing income in one's 60's & can provide them with low cost but good quality health insurance.
And then, we get called, conspiracy theorists lol because we figured them out, and called them out 😂
What part?
Question......Did the government take money from the SS fund and not repay what they took out? Or is that an old saying?
It's in treadury bonds. One of the safest places in the world.
Treasury bond. 😉
Planned? Yes by a public that can't agree on a fix, doesn't push the issue with their votes and just don't even understand the problems associated with the program
The program is simple to fix but it's hard to pick who pays for the fix
I agree. Very simple to fix, but...
@@MyGovExpert but we all want different fixes
Like everything else they will wait until the last minute to do anything. They should have looked into this before the baby boomers retire. I think they should just give back every penny that we have paid into social security and Medicaid and do away with it.
I've talked to millions of people personally about SSA...I don't think that is a good option.
@@marianne1959 yes that’s what I meant.
@@marianne1959: We all pay into Medicaid.
The money is basically gone. Except for the trust fund everything is paid out.
It's impossible to give the money back.
Partial privatization is not las Vegas gambling. Put into index funds of American companies. Why is it evil for private companies to make money but somehow government workers are somehow angels? Dumb. Invest in American companies.
I can see your point. I would just worry that it's part of an incremental approach to full privatization.
Scrap the cap.
😀
Dr Ed what's your email if you have a question?
Live is always best. Unless you need help from my Medicare plan team, etc. They are at 888-817-0446