I'm 64 and will strongly need social security income. But I'm not sure I would support taxing younger people to help we Boomers with social security. Maybe a special tax focused on excess consumption. I'm not a fan of taxing folks' earned income (i.e., their productivity).

Regardless, I would need to ponder.

Imagine that. People that don't work want those that do work to pay more so, they can continue to not work. I am referring more to deadbeats, the stupid and the lazy, more so than seniors that worked all of their lives to receive a portion of the money they paid in later.

It's a temporary problem. We're going to die off.

and just to think, we have been feeding, and housing tens of millions of illegals. What kind of dent would that have made.

how much of a dent would USAID have made.

How about fraud in minnesota. california. etc.

(10-08-2026 08:33 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  This is why the Trump accounts for kids is such a great idea. It can replace what SS will eventually fail doing. Just fund $1000 into a newborns ira account (a real citizen, not a fake one), and by the time they are 67, theres 1.5million in there.

$1000 invested for 67 years at the 10% nominal average return of the US stock market is 593k in today’s dollars and with 2.5% average inflation have the spending power of $134k of today’s dollars.

(10-08-2026 09:03 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(10-08-2026 08:42 AM)b2b Wrote:  The average SS tax per year is $4,140. Lets say over a lifetime you invest that into a 401K yearly. You end up with around a million at 60 and $1.3M at 65.

WTF are we doing?

Put that $300 per month into a retirement account. Start at 21, and by the time you are 46 you would have $4.5million.

You would have to contribute $3000 a month over 25 years at the historical nominal return on 10% to get $4.5M.

300 a month is 372k after 25 years.

(10-08-2026 09:03 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(10-08-2026 08:42 AM)b2b Wrote:  The average SS tax per year is $4,140. Lets say over a lifetime you invest that into a 401K yearly. You end up with around a million at 60 and $1.3M at 65.

WTF are we doing?

Put that $300 per month into a retirement account. Start at 21, and by the time you are 46 you would have $4.5million.

You'll have to show your work on that one.

(10-08-2026 10:30 AM)b2b Wrote:  

(10-08-2026 09:03 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(10-08-2026 08:42 AM)b2b Wrote:  The average SS tax per year is $4,140. Lets say over a lifetime you invest that into a 401K yearly. You end up with around a million at 60 and $1.3M at 65.

WTF are we doing?

Put that $300 per month into a retirement account. Start at 21, and by the time you are 46 you would have $4.5million.

You'll have to show your work on that one.

He would only need an average return rate of 25.2% over 25 years to hit that. Only have to beat Warren Buffets CAGR by 15% to get there, I’m sure he can do it.

(10-08-2026 09:49 AM)b2b Wrote:  

(10-08-2026 09:03 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(10-08-2026 08:34 AM)b2b Wrote:  

(10-08-2026 08:24 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(10-08-2026 08:17 AM)b2b Wrote:  ....
Why would ANYBODY support raising taxes for SS? It's such a horrible system and there's really no "paying into" it b/c at no time can you check your balance. We're just throwing money down a hole trusting the gov't to do the right thing and they never do.

Social Security does have recipients. The money doesn’t all go “down a hole.”

Room exists to improve things. No one doubts this.

Social Security is designed to keep large numbers of people out of poverty. It succeeds in this goal. Always has.

It's an absolutely horrible system. There is no defending it. You could invest the money in a 401k and end up with hundreds of thousands more by retirement age.

Likely so. But wrong question.

I didn't ask a question, dummy. I made a factual economic statement. I complained and I gave you an alternative. Sorry you can't understand compounding interest. It's not even worth quoting the rest of your stupid post b/c it has zero to do w/ the challenges we (especially younger folks) are dealing with in 2026. I don't care why SS was started just like I don't care much about why unions started. Good intentions and all..... don't apply to 2026.

Because of how much it's changed over time we have no idea what's actually "in our SS account" because there really isn't one. They take a **** load of money from us every year and then 10, 20, 30, 40 years later some ******** in congress decide what we get to be paid back. See how that works? There really isn't a "paying into" crap to this. It's just another form of taxation to prop up a bunch of older people who've had decades to get their crap together for retirement. It's worse than ever.

The question was implied, and you can mind your manners.

The implied question behind your comment was “Which ‘retirement plan’ makes an individual more money?”

That is not the question Social Security exists to answer. It was founded on the question “How do we keep people out of poverty?”

When we ask the right question—as University of Chicago researchers did (see link)—we find Social Security reliably does the job it was intended to do. It always has.

The numbers are clear. Without this assistance, millions more Americans would be living in poverty today, and that poverty would extend through families.

If one is going to propose a better idea, one is obliged to address the questions any competent legislator will ask:

1. How do we make this idea work at scale (and not just for one person on a message board)?

2. How do we keep faith with citizens while effecting the transition from the present system to the new one? Do both approaches run concurrently, or is it better managed some other way?

That’s the task.

_____

PGPF report
https://www.pgpf.org/article/what-effect...n-poverty/

Full study, University of Chicago
https://www.nber.org/system/files/workin...w24567.pdf

Related PGPF report on child poverty
https://www.pgpf.org/article/what-are-th...d-poverty/

(10-08-2026 08:33 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  This is why the Trump accounts for kids is such a great idea. It can replace what SS will eventually fail doing. Just fund $1000 into a newborns ira account (a real citizen, not a fake one), and by the time they are 67, theres 1.5million in there.

which will, with inflation be like $1000. LOL

(10-08-2026 11:02 AM)olliebaba Wrote:  

(10-08-2026 08:33 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  This is why the Trump accounts for kids is such a great idea. It can replace what SS will eventually fail doing. Just fund $1000 into a newborns ira account (a real citizen, not a fake one), and by the time they are 67, theres 1.5million in there.

which will, with inflation be like $1000. LOL

Should be good for a tank of gas by then.

(10-08-2026 09:51 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  I'm 64 and will strongly need social security income. But I'm not sure I would support taxing younger people to help we Boomers with social security. Maybe a special tax focused on excess consumption. I'm not a fan of taxing folks' earned income (i.e., their productivity).

Regardless, I would need to ponder.

Why not tax these guys? At least one has a documented streak of not paying any income tax at all (“That makes me smart!”) while office workers and schoolteachers feel a pinch every April.

If taxing consumption is your preference, there’s plenty to go after. Some CEOs actually get tax breaks on private helicopters and jets.

(10-08-2026 10:30 AM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(10-08-2026 09:03 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(10-08-2026 08:42 AM)b2b Wrote:  The average SS tax per year is $4,140. Lets say over a lifetime you invest that into a 401K yearly. You end up with around a million at 60 and $1.3M at 65.

WTF are we doing?

Put that $300 per month into a retirement account. Start at 21, and by the time you are 46 you would have $4.5million.

You would have to contribute $3000 a month over 25 years at the historical nominal return on 10% to get $4.5M.

300 a month is 372k after 25 years.

66 not 46.

(10-08-2026 09:51 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  I'm 64 and will strongly need social security income. But I'm not sure I would support taxing younger people to help we Boomers with social security. Maybe a special tax focused on excess consumption. I'm not a fan of taxing folks' earned income (i.e., their productivity).

Regardless, I would need to ponder.

I am 66, and unless health concerns intervene have no intention of retiring before 70 (or hopefully beyond that).

I realize therefore that this is a selfish statement on my part, but I would have no problem pushing Social Security eligibility to 70-plus.

(10-08-2026 08:24 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(10-08-2026 08:17 AM)b2b Wrote:  ....
Why would ANYBODY support raising taxes for SS? It's such a horrible system and there's really no "paying into" it b/c at no time can you check your balance. We're just throwing money down a hole trusting the gov't to do the right thing and they never do.

Social Security does have recipients. The money doesn’t all go “down a hole.”

Room exists to improve things. No one doubts this.

Social Security is designed to keep large numbers of people out of poverty. It succeeds in this goal. Always has.

Social Security has been a great slush fund and cookie jar for Politicians to freely take. Always has been and always will be until the river of money runs dry.


The very thought of SS was to a way to steal money under the guise you are too stupid to save for retirement which would not be as difficult if you weren't repeatedly taxed for something you paid taxes on when it was purchased.


Just more fleecing. The Government could run off the fuel taxes. There really is no need for anymore taxation its just slush pork barrel thievery at the highest level with no accountability.

(10-08-2026 09:51 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  I'm 64 and will strongly need social security income. But I'm not sure I would support taxing younger people to help we Boomers with social security. Maybe a special tax focused on excess consumption. I'm not a fan of taxing folks' earned income (i.e., their productivity).

Regardless, I would need to ponder.

That's nobody's fault but your own. Never married. No kids to support over the years. Jeez.

Married w/ 4 children and I've never factored Social Security into my retirement plans.

(10-08-2026 08:42 AM)b2b Wrote:  The average SS tax per year is $4,140. Lets say over a lifetime you invest that into a 401K yearly. You end up with around a million at 60 and $1.3M at 65.

WTF are we doing?

Uhhh, you really need to ask this question?

See spend happy Democrats and Socialists and their social welfare programs and of course pork barreling. Repubs are that far behind just waste money on other projects

(10-08-2026 09:11 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(10-08-2026 08:39 AM)Todor Wrote:  

(10-08-2026 08:34 AM)b2b Wrote:  

(10-08-2026 08:24 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(10-08-2026 08:17 AM)b2b Wrote:  ....
Why would ANYBODY support raising taxes for SS? It's such a horrible system and there's really no "paying into" it b/c at no time can you check your balance. We're just throwing money down a hole trusting the gov't to do the right thing and they never do.

Social Security does have recipients. The money doesn’t all go “down a hole.”

Room exists to improve things. No one doubts this.

Social Security is designed to keep large numbers of people out of poverty. It succeeds in this goal. Always has.

It's an absolutely horrible system. There is no defending it. You could invest the money in a 401k and end up with hundreds of thousands more by retirement age.

You could, but when the stock market collapses the rich will all have their money out already and we won’t.

There isn’t going to be a bailout that time.

Our retirements are not supposed to be going to a casino. They are supposed to be saved for us.

You think the rich pull their money out of the market during downturns? That's when the money is made. Granted, most of the really wealthy have investments elsewhere, outside of the market.

^^^^^^^

This, ALL DAY LONG

(10-08-2026 09:49 AM)b2b Wrote:  

(10-08-2026 09:03 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(10-08-2026 08:34 AM)b2b Wrote:  

(10-08-2026 08:24 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(10-08-2026 08:17 AM)b2b Wrote:  ....
Why would ANYBODY support raising taxes for SS? It's such a horrible system and there's really no "paying into" it b/c at no time can you check your balance. We're just throwing money down a hole trusting the gov't to do the right thing and they never do.

Social Security does have recipients. The money doesn’t all go “down a hole.”

Room exists to improve things. No one doubts this.

Social Security is designed to keep large numbers of people out of poverty. It succeeds in this goal. Always has.

It's an absolutely horrible system. There is no defending it. You could invest the money in a 401k and end up with hundreds of thousands more by retirement age.

Likely so. But wrong question.

I didn't ask a question, dummy. I made a factual economic statement. I complained and I gave you an alternative. Sorry you can't understand compounding interest. It's not even worth quoting the rest of your stupid post b/c it has zero to do w/ the challenges we (especially younger folks) are dealing with in 2026. I don't care why SS was started just like I don't care much about why unions started. Good intentions and all..... don't apply to 2026.

Because of how much it's changed over time we have no idea what's actually "in our SS account" because there really isn't one. They take a **** load of money from us every year and then 10, 20, 30, 40 years later some ******** in congress decide what we get to be paid back. See how that works? There really isn't a "paying into" crap to this. It's just another form of taxation to prop up a bunch of older people who've had decades to get their crap together for retirement. It's worse than ever.

Winner winner Chicken Dinner

BTW, You will never get back out of SS what you paid in. Its a rigged carnival game like so many other things in dealing with the Government.

But, here's the kicker while you may or may not receive your SS back its ok for illegals to be housed FREE, to receive medical treatment FREE, and to be fed FREE and to be offered transportation FREE.

This is all done with YOUR TAXES.

So, the next time you hear WE NEED TO RAISE TAXES just remember what they are spending on.