Jeb Bush has as one of his talking points raising the age to receive Soc. Security. Of course, he isn't the only one who proposes that. But-- what jobs are available to those people waiting to be old enough to receive Soc. Security? I'm not talking about lawyers and such who can work until their kids push them out of the family firm . And who probably have plenty of savings. How many Walmart checkout jobs are available and are they enough to live on while waiting? This thread is NOT for those who are against Social Security. And what would you propose in lieu of raising the age to fix Social Security? I propose, for one thing, raising the earning limit for SS deductions.
Raising SS age
- Thread starter IamHawkeye
- Start date
What kind of quandary will we be in when people become too old to be employed (whether it be they just can't do it anymore or people simply hire younger, cheaper workers), yet people are too young to reap the benefits of their 40 years of contributing to SS? We raise the age when you can begin to receive benefits to point where people have to find someway to survive for 10-15 years before they get there. Will we have a pre-SS tax in order to provide a pre-SS safety net?
I'll probably work into my 70's. It may not be full time, but I'm going to need something to keep me busy.
Why is SS running out but Welfare going strong?
This, I have several uncles who have retired, but are still working 40+hrs a week. One of them is a groundskeeper at a country club. All he does is mow fairways, greens, rough, whatever they want him to do. He loves it and says it keeps him mobile and a part of society. One of my other uncles retired from John Deere and is a study hall monitor at the local school. All he does is sit in on study halls during the day and gets paid for it. Nothing too strenuous but he is earning a paycheck and keeping busy.
I know I will have to keep working, there is no way I could sit and do nothing. I will probably work at a golf course and get a sub teaching license so i can stay busy year around.
For healthy people, why do they need to retire? I plan on working until I drop dead. When I "retire", I will go do something that I want to do. It will be on my terms. It is better to remain active than to retire and watch TV all day (and believe me, I have seen retirees that do this).
Solvency of SS and making small changes now is the key.
I am for a combo of a bit higher retirement/eligibility age along with a higher ceiling on taxable earnings.
SS is a good example of a relevant, pretty much earned social safety net program that I can support.
Wish it was really in a "lockbox" though from other government spending/borrowing.
I am for a combo of a bit higher retirement/eligibility age along with a higher ceiling on taxable earnings.
SS is a good example of a relevant, pretty much earned social safety net program that I can support.
Wish it was really in a "lockbox" though from other government spending/borrowing.
I had an uncle that did this and he passed away. He gained something like 50lbs and would do nothing all day but watch TV or sit on the internet. His only social interaction would be morning coffee at the local cafe.
Sad deal, his wife retired 5 years before him and she still works part time just cause. She has nothing to do, besides work in her small town.
You'll find plenty to do. Trust me. A lot of people have that "what will I do with myself" worry before they retire. Almost nobody feels that way after they have been retired for a while.
Just think of all the extra time you'll have to post on HROT.
At the risk of indulging the stereotype, I suspect this is more a problem for women, the more socialized gender. And perhaps, too, for those who have not adapted very well to the internet culture.
I think you might be surprised at how employers value older workers as opposed to gum smacking tat obsessed kids who can't put their freakin phones down for five minutes.
I will retire and continue to do Tri's and workout, travel, etc. Retiring doesn't mean dying
THe age needs to be raised to 68 or 69 over a period of time......The "cap" on earnings taxed needs to be removed so ALL income is subject to SS fees.... A lot of the "immediate" issues some have would be alleviated greatly with these 2 simple steps.
Amen.
I retired and I figure I have 15-20 years of activity, if I'm lucky. Retirement is far from dead. I haven't had this much fun since grade school recess!
I think for many nearing retirement, it is not an issue of finding enough income, it is the quandary of healthcare. Financially, I can retire at 57. However, I wouldn't be eligible for subsidies if the ACA still exists and wouldn't be able to afford the 1000/month in health insurance for me and the wife.
The talk of raising the age always surfaces every few years. It's kind of a hot button issue and the politicians use it when they think they can score a few points with a specific audience, imo.
Me, personally... I could accept it. My dream job is a valet at a casino.
Me, personally... I could accept it. My dream job is a valet at a casino.
Why does the age "need" to be raised?
I would suggest that the age actually needs to be lowered. For at least 2 reasons. First, to free up jobs for younger workers. Second, so people can start enjoying not being a wage slave earlier in life.
We are a very wealthy nation. We not only don't need for people to work longer, we don't have the jobs for them.
Raising the retirement age simply increases the number of workers competing for diminishing jobs. How is that good for any person or purpose - except maybe to depress wages.
The statistics for people who feel they will need to work well into their 60's and 70's is pretty high. Most people are not ready to fund a retirement they will like.
We are a wealthy nation that has a lot of people carrying a lot debt.
There's a mathematics that goes into this and I don't think you can make the math works as you desire. Lifting the earnings cap is paramount. People are living longer and retiring younger. Remember to look at Europe and see what happens when the reality of arithmetic is ignored. There are too many (influencial) here who want this program kabashed, as it is.
True, but not an argument against what I said. Debt or no debt, it's still better, I would argue, for the limited available jobs to be freed up for young workers than to force older workers to hang onto them longer by raising the retirement age.
If we got smart and invested heavily in modernizing and upgrading our infrastructure and going green and so on, we could create a lot of new jobs for at least as long as it took to get those things done - which would be many years. But there would still be no need to force the elderly to keep working.
There are lots of young folks looking for work. Moreover, with more people working, SS would have more revenues flowing in.
what ever works, 22...or would you prefer a .45 to the head?
It is an argument against your plan to the extent that SS is not going to be able to service a lot of the debt people have and leave them enough for a standard of living they have by working.
My argument is people are going to work longer not because they are forced to by a change to SS but because to maintain the life style they want will require it.
Investing in infrastructure and green jobs could happen with most of the jobs going to younger workers or older workers taking them freeing up their old job for a younger worker.
I agree that we should lift or at least adjust the cap.
The argument that people now live longer has been proven to be misleading over and over again. Do we really need to cover that ground yet another time? Living several years longer is not the same as being able to stand on your feet 8-10 hours a day for several years longer. Or to shovel coal for several years longer. Or even to do higher math, or perform neurosurgery for several years longer. Do you really want septuagenarians flying the plane on your next trip?
Simply said, many people have trouble working to the current retirement age. You raise that a few more years and one "unintended consequence" I can almost guarantee is that you'll see disability claims skyrocket - and not just fraudulent ones.
You may be right that some will choose to work longer to pay their debts or to live a higher lifestyle. Bully for them. But that debt and those desires are really entirely independent of SS.
Are you suggesting that SS should somehow be redefined from being enough to survive on to being enough to pay off the debts for a lifetime of profligacy?
I mean I'm supportive of the idea of modestly increasing SS befits, but let's not get carried away.
I'd like to retire at 60. I figure my kids will be out of college all the houses and clinics will be paid off and I'd like to spend 10 years or so traveling and diving. After that I'll probably just become a recluse and tell kids to get off my lawn.
A lot of people don't realize the age already has been raised. I think as long as the early retirement age remains at 62, that will become more of a factor. A lot of people have jobs that they simply can't do when they get to 70 or thereabouts. Not as many as in the days when the U.S. had factories, but still a lot of people.
Because of the math, yes, I am....but paramount to keeping SS solvent is to rid itself of the income cap ceiling.....and that too is because of the math.
If you do the math, you will realize that getting rid of the income cap creates an even bigger problem a few years from now....but politicians have been kicking the SS can down the road since roughly 1934, so there's certainly a precedent. If you're a politician you apply a "fix" now, claim credit, and by the time the piper comes to be paid, some other poor S.O.B. will be in your shoes.
No I am suggesting that people will not retire based on when SS benefits kick in because they will have to work.
Here is the problem: Not everyone is still healthy and
able to work at age 65. The people in that category need
to be able to retire and start collecting SS. It would require
a medical doctor to sign off on their disability. We need to
help those who worked 40 years and simply ended up with
health issues.
able to work at age 65. The people in that category need
to be able to retire and start collecting SS. It would require
a medical doctor to sign off on their disability. We need to
help those who worked 40 years and simply ended up with
health issues.
In which case it doesn't matter at all (to them) if we leave the retirement age alone (or even lower it as I suggest).
Correct but I thought your argument was to lower it to help create jobs.
I would love to take a year and drive around the country.
Get a dog.
Visit my kids.
Play a little golf.
Ride my bike.
Take walks.
Ref or coach kids.
I have zero fear of being bored. My parents love retirement.
I am hopeful to save enough so I can go without SS for a few years if necessary. Zero desire to work until I am dead unless they gave me about three months of vacation a year and that isn't happening.
Get a dog.
Visit my kids.
Play a little golf.
Ride my bike.
Take walks.
Ref or coach kids.
I have zero fear of being bored. My parents love retirement.
I am hopeful to save enough so I can go without SS for a few years if necessary. Zero desire to work until I am dead unless they gave me about three months of vacation a year and that isn't happening.
That, too. But even now there is no mandatory retirement. I'm not suggesting we force people to retire early. I'm just assuming more will retire early if they can.
