How do you feel about Social Security??

[Moxie]

I'm not asking what to do about SS. I'm asking, what are your personal feelings about it??

 

My grandparents (who are wealthy) expect to get that check every month as promised. They are OFFENDED by the idea that they might not.

 

My parents, who are in their 50s, are counting on SS for their retirement. They have nothing saved as far as I know.

 

DH and I, in our mid-30s, have NEVER EVER NOT ONCE thought that we will get a dime from SS. We pay in with each paycheck but we've been raised in an era in which everyone has always talked about "the SS crisis". I don't know anyone may age (in my circle, anyway) who thinks they will get any SS. We are all trying to save for ourselves.

 

What are your thoughts? Do you think you'll get a SS check someday?

[Twilight Woods]

Nope. Retirement will be our responsibility 100% . I am not planning on receiving anything from SS.

[Aelwydd]

Maybe. I honestly hope to be in Canada by that time.

 

P.S. Whether people are wealthy or not, if they've paid into the system, they should get it back. SS is in a crisis, not because it wasn't well-planned, but because it has been raided to pay off debts incurred by, among other things, expensive wars.

[HollyBee]

P.S. Whether people are wealthy or not, if they've paid into the system, they should get it back.

 

 

:iagree: However, we aren't planning on relying on SS. If we get it, it will be a nice little plus.

[4everHis]

Nope. Retirement will be our responsibility 100% . I am not planning on receiving anything from SS.

:iagree:

[Diane in CO]

Nope, my DH and I do not plan on receiving any $ from SS. We have made plans to be financially independent by the time we retire (I am 40 DH is 45).

 

That being said, I do wonder about people that are in our age bracket that are not currently saving for retirement. Life happens and not everyone is able to put aside money for retirement. Does that mean that they will have to depend on family to support them or continue working past retirement age...I just don't know, but I do feel that they should receive something from SS as they have been paying into it their whole life.

 

Diane

[elfgivas]

i'm not quite sure how to put language around what i'm thinking, but it has more to do with the question than with the answer.

 

what do we learn by how other people "feel" about something? does "feeling" involve thinking and research or is it a stream-of-consciousness sort of reaction? how do we know which? does it matter?

 

for me, retirement is the question, and social security may or may not be part of the answer... how i feel about part of the answer doesn't matter so much....

 

not sure that makes much sense....

 

fumbling,

ann

[Remudamom]

No. Not only am I not counting on it, the very idea offends me.

[mom4him]

Whether people are wealthy or not, if they've paid into the system, they should get it back. SS is in a crisis, not because it wasn't well-planned, but because it has been raided to pay off debts incurred by, among other things, expensive wars.

:iagree: My dh is 76, I am 62 and we both draw SS. I am not sure how we would live if we didn't have that to help with our income. I have for the most part always been a sahm and dh has always had work but never much above minimum wage. I have done child care and am my oldest ds aid so both of us have paid in for many years. Since my dh is older and can't work the hrs he used to we have down sized in many areas but we are very much at this point dependent on SS.

 

I do think there needs to be some changes for the ones that haven't already paid into it. They need to be given a choice to opt out and establish their own retirement with those funds. Do I feel bad having that money deposited into my account? NO

[HollyBee]

No. Not only am I not counting on it, the very idea offends me.

 

This is interesting to me (the being offended part). Would you mind explaining a bit? If you'd rather not, no problem.

[5Wizards]

We're in our early 40s and plan to be at a place where social security isn't necessary anyway (but you never know what life might throw you). I think that eventually they'll do some kind of means testing to determine how much a person is eligible for, but I can't see them getting rid of social security completely.

[southcarolinamom]

My husband and I have been married 26 years. The first year we were married he came home from one of his business classes in college, and predicted "honey, I don't think Social Security is going to be around anymore by the time we are old enough to retire." Looks like he was right....

[Slartibartfast]

No. Not only am I not counting on it, the very idea offends me.

 

I would be more offended not getting any since it is *my* money and not an entitlement. I pay a ton into SS since I am self employeed. I want it back.

 

We pay into a retirement package.

[endurancerider]

I may have a somewhat unique perspective on this issue.

 

I have been a stay at home mom since we had our first child who is almost 12 years old. My husband had always worked, and had a 401K, in which he contributed 10% of his paychecks. We used to joke about how we would never see a dime of the social security that he payed every week, and it was a good thing that he had a 401k plan. Then, last year he died. I am so grateful for social security, because it allows me to continue to be a stay at home, home-schooling mom to my children.

 

Basically the system is not perfect. It had flaws from the start. But for our family, it lessons the trauma to my children by allowing things to stay as normal as they can under the circumstances.

 

My other thought is, if you payed into it, you should get to reap the rewards of it. Period. I can understand why it would be offensive to not be able to receive the money that you payed into it, no matter if you "needed it" or not.

[SunD]

I don't expect to see a dime. That money that comes out of DH's check every week? We see it as throwing money into a black hole without our consent. It's just sucked away and we'll never see it again. I don't know for sure that my parents will even see it and they're in their fifties.

 

Now, if something happened to DH and I was able to get funds (until the whole program goes down the drain), I would be glad for that. I just think that as a rule, barring tragedies, funding your own retirement would be better.

[eternalknot]

That being said, I do wonder about people that are in our age bracket that are not currently saving for retirement. Life happens and not everyone is able to put aside money for retirement. Does that mean that they will have to depend on family to support them or continue working past retirement age...I just don't know, but I do feel that they should receive something from SS as they have been paying into it their whole life

 

I work outside of the home, and pay into SS. I consider that money gone, once it is paid out.

 

I've been eligible for disability SS a few different times over the years, but I didn't apply for it. I didn't need it (financially) but appreciated that it was there if I had needed it. Technically, I guess that money was "mine" since I have paid in since I was 14 years old; honestly, it doesn't offend me to pay into something for the greater social good (real or imagined) and to not see a directly personal return on it.

 

I don't expect it SS be there when I'm of age to retire. If it's there, great - should I need it, I'll apply for it. If I don't need it or if it's not there - ::shrug:: I'll cross that bridge when I get to it. I don't fund my retirement. My husband will double-dip by the time he's 62 or 65, or whatever the age is nowadays, so that's helpful ... though government pensions appear to be just as precarious as is SS.

 

I'm investing in my children. That's where I expect to see a direct, personal payout. They know it, and it'll be made clear to anyone who decides or agrees to marry them. That's one aspect of our culture that I fully expect them to carry on, regardless of what their American peers (and mine) think, say, and do to the contrary.

 

In our culture it's not uncommon for grandparents to be caregivers while parents work; or for grandparents to continue working so that mom can stay home with the grandchildren. I'm sure we'll find some way to make the arrangment work for us, when my kids and I move up to our respective next rungs on the filial ladder.

[mom4him]

I may have a somewhat unique perspective on this issue.

 

I have been a stay at home mom since we had our first child who is almost 12 years old. My husband had always worked, and had a 401K, in which he contributed 10% of his paychecks. We used to joke about how we would never see a dime of the social security that he payed every week, and it was a good thing that he had a 401k plan. Then, last year he died. I am so grateful for social security, because it allows me to continue to be a stay at home, home-schooling mom to my children.

 

Basically the system is not perfect. It had flaws from the start. But for our family, it lessons the trauma to my children by allowing things to stay as normal as they can under the circumstances.

 

My other thought is, if you payed into it, you should get to reap the rewards of it. Period. I can understand why it would be offensive to not be able to receive the money that you payed into it, no matter if you "needed it" or not.

:iagree:I so agree with this. If you pay into a 401K you expect to be able to draw from it RIGHT? Why should it be different with SS?

[My3Boys]

I used to work for an actuarial firm that dealt with retirement plans exclusively. One of the actuaries I worked with said that you would cry if you saw how much more you would have at retirement if you had been allowed to invest for yourself the money that was taken out of your paycheck for SS. He said the average person would have 3-5 times more every month than they will with SS.

 

Plus, you could leave the balance of your account to your children when you pass on. The only way SS pays to family is to surviving spouses or minor children.

[mcconnellboys]

I do not think I will get a SS check (I am also in my 50's). The thing that bothers me about it is that it was MY money, that I earned, that was forcefully withheld from me in order to "help" me through forced savings. Now, if I had been told that it was a necessary tax that had to be taken out of my earnings, I would not feel this way. But when you work a long time and pay into something all those years and are always told that this is your savings for retirement (I know we need more than that, of course, but still), I can easily see how folks resent being told on the back end, "Oops, your money's gone...." If I had been forced to put my money into a simple interest bearing account, I would have more at retirement then I'll ever get out of the SSI system.

 

And the thing that really chaps me about all this is that Congress has their own private retirement system, separate from SSI, that of course if fully functional....

[tntgoodwin]

I don't expect it to be around when I retire. I wish I could opt-out.

[5Wizards]

I'd love to believe that is true, but I have a hard time believing it. We lost half of what we put into the 401K when the economy tanked. Luckily there is still time and we have gained much of it back, but really it's all still risky and I hate that part. I don't like feeling like I'm playing the black jack table when it comes to retirement money. And interest rates on safer investments are dreadfully low.

 

:iagree:

 

There is no guarantee with the stock market, and even though historically investors have done well over the long haul, past performance does not guarantee future performance.

[cdrumm4448]

People drawing benefits from SS typically receive every dime they paid into it in the first five years. They then continue to draw on the system (money they didn't pay in) for the rest of their lives.

 

I spent 25 years working, 10 of which I paid double SS since I was self-employed. I should be able to opt out. We could have done SO much better investing that money ourselves. My DH averages 20-25% return, no broker, all research and buying done himself.

 

Obviously, we are saving our own money for retirement.

[kalanamak]

 

What are your thoughts? Do you think you'll get a SS check someday?

 

I don't know. If I do, it will be nice. If I don't, I won't be surprised.

[Sevilla]

What about the whole other subest of SS - the SSDI where people who are disabled (or their children are disabled in some way) receive payments each month, totaling several hundred dollars each.

 

Is that a wrong entitlement or does it provide help and support for the vulnerable members of society who can't legitimately work? And how does their needs (and are those applications/approvals increasing or not) affect the solvency of SS in the long run?

[mcconnellboys]

I just wish I could have my principal now and invest it myself. I just heard that Rep. Weiner gets a retirement package of about 1.2 million. Why can't we borrow from the Congressional retirement fund?

[Hot Lava Mama]

dime of what we put in, we also expect them to come after us for more when we retire because we had the nerve to save enough for us to live on when we are old. We aren't "rich" by any stretch of the imagination, but we live very, very frugally so that we can put a little, tiny bit away for our retirement. Those who have lived beyond their means will again come to our watering hole to get more.

 

It sucks. I didn't vote these thieves into office, but they have the legal arm to rob us anyways.

Hot Lava Mama

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

I am not worried about social security being there for me. IMHO I think there are some politicians who want us to worry in order to get their agenda of ending social security:(

 

IMHO I think it is a great social safety net that should be preserved which would only take a little bit of tweaking such as a lifting the income caps that can be taxed for social security. The current income tax cap for social security tax is set at $106,500.00. This should be lifted IMO. I also see no problem with very generous means testing for social security as well.

 

I think it would be disastrous for our country to not fix social security. I know plenty of people who cannot retire now since their investments were wiped out:(. I also know plenty of people whose very lives depend on social security and medicare.

[mom2scouts]

I do not think I will get a SS check (I am also in my 50's). The thing that bothers me about it is that it was MY money, that I earned, that was forcefully withheld from me in order to "help" me through forced savings. Now, if I had been told that it was a necessary tax that had to be taken out of my earnings, I would not feel this way. But when you work a long time and pay into something all those years and are always told that this is your savings for retirement (I know we need more than that, of course, but still), I can easily see how folks resent being told on the back end, "Oops, your money's gone...." If I had been forced to put my money into a simple interest bearing account, I would have more at retirement then I'll ever get out of the SSI system.

 

And the thing that really chaps me about all this is that Congress has their own private retirement system, separate from SSI, that of course if fully functional....

 

:iagree:

[My3Boys]

I do not think I will get a SS check (I am also in my 50's). The thing that bothers me about it is that it was MY money, that I earned, that was forcefully withheld from me in order to "help" me through forced savings. Now, if I had been told that it was a necessary tax that had to be taken out of my earnings, I would not feel this way. But when you work a long time and pay into something all those years and are always told that this is your savings for retirement (I know we need more than that, of course, but still), I can easily see how folks resent being told on the back end, "Oops, your money's gone...." If I had been forced to put my money into a simple interest bearing account, I would have more at retirement then I'll ever get out of the SSI system.

 

And the thing that really chaps me about all this is that Congress has their own private retirement system, separate from SSI, that of course if fully functional....

 

They are exempt from the new healthcare bill too.

 

I think the people that vote these programs in should have to live with them just like the rest of us (except for those who have been granted waivers, of course :glare:).

[Nestof3]

Social security is not supposed to be a welfare, income-based return. If it had operated as it was supposed to, things should have worked far better.

 

I personally am in favor of dropping it all together rather than just giving it to certain income brackets. Being self-employed, my husband pays in and matches his own. What we pay in is based on how much we earn, and there are already enough welfare programs set up. I am of the thought that we had better get something in return after paying double. I certainly don't want our withholdings just going to people who are now waiting for the day they can quit working in order to start collecting -- or those making $4,000 a month between govt retirement and social security checks.

 

I do think the age should be raised to begin collecting.

 

And, no one pays in as much as they receive in Medicare benefits. This is one of the problems in the system. Medicare is a small portion of one's paycheck withholding, but most people receive thousands upon thousands of dollars in benefits.

 

One thing that burns me up is my aunt, for example. She retired from the library, then went back to work there part-time, and she also collects social security. But, she purposely limits her hours so that her SS earnings don't diminish.

[pqr]

IMHO I think it is a great social safety net that should be preserved which would only take a little bit of tweaking such as a lifting the income caps that can be taxed for social security. The current income tax cap for social security tax is set at $106,500.00. This should be lifted IMO. I also see no problem with very generous means testing for social security as well.

 

.

 

Why should there be means testing? We were all told that SS was OUR money and that we would get it back when we retired. If there is means testing then it is not our money and we were lied to. We all know that those wonderful people who foisted this system on us would never lie....would they?

[JumpedIntoTheDeepEndFirst]

I am not worried about social security being there for me. IMHO I think there are some politicians who want us to worry in order to get their agenda of ending social security:(

 

IMHO I think it is a great social safety net that should be preserved which would only take a little bit of tweaking such as a lifting the income caps that can be taxed for social security. The current income tax cap for social security tax is set at $106,500.00. This should be lifted IMO. I also see no problem with very generous means testing for social security as well.

 

I think it would be disastrous for our country to not fix social security. I know plenty of people who cannot retire now since their investments were wiped out:(. I also know plenty of people whose very lives depend on social security and medicare.

 

 

Sorry but no, means testing is pushing it--Social Security was instituted as a method of forcing me to save for my own retirement. I receive regular statements about how much I have. That money isn't a tax to be distributed to anyone, it is mine to have when I reach a certain age or disability level.

[JustGin]

I'm not asking what to do about SS. I'm asking, what are your personal feelings about it??

 

My grandparents (who are wealthy) expect to get that check every month as promised. They are OFFENDED by the idea that they might not.

 

My parents, who are in their 50s, are counting on SS for their retirement. They have nothing saved as far as I know.

 

DH and I, in our mid-30s, have NEVER EVER NOT ONCE thought that we will get a dime from SS. We pay in with each paycheck but we've been raised in an era in which everyone has always talked about "the SS crisis". I don't know anyone may age (in my circle, anyway) who thinks they will get any SS. We are all trying to save for ourselves.

 

What are your thoughts? Do you think you'll get a SS check someday?

 

Nope - retirement savings are up to us not the government, and I honestly don't expect there to be any there for us in 20 years anyway.

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

Why should there be means testing? We were all told that SS was OUR money and that we would get it back when we retired. If there is means testing then it is not our money and we were lied to. We all know that those wonderful people who foisted this system on us would never lie....would they?

 

No actually, social security is a tax and a safety net. There are many people who die before they even get social security:( It is not the same as a retirement account at all.

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

Sorry but no, means testing is pushing it--Social Security was instituted as a method of forcing me to save for my own retirement. I receive regular statements about how much I have. That money isn't a tax to be distributed to anyone, it is mine to have when I reach a certain age or disability level.

 

Again social security is a tax and there are no guarantees that someone will get it back if they die to soon or have no dependents after their death.

[Dawn in OH]

Honestly, I want back every penny my husband and I ever paid into SS right now, and I'll invest it for myself. We would have more money by the time we retire that way than we would ever get from SS.

[lea1]

I think there are many people who are going to be very disappointed because they are counting solely on SS as their only retirement. I have a friend who is in her 50's and she flat out says that she and her husband, who is younger than she is, are not saving anything, nor are they planning to. She flat out says that she expects the government to provide for their retirement. She also started receiving disability a couple of years ago.

 

There is no actual money in the SS retirement fund, only IOU's. The people working today are paying in right now to cover those who are currently retired. (My friend did not believe me when I told her this and said that she reads literature from AARP that says this is not true.) People like my friend who are relying on this are going to be very disappointed in the not too distant future.

 

As for the thieving politicians, I really think there are many people to blame. How many years now have we been hearing this is a problem and everyone has just kept kicking it down the road. We the people vote these guys in and we have not made fixing this a priority, even though we have known it is broken. It seems most people just want to keep the status quo and pretend that everything is OK and hope it won't come crashing down on their watch.

[BabyBre]

My grandparents (who are wealthy) expect to get that check every month as promised. They are OFFENDED by the idea that they might not.

 

 

They should be. They paid into the promise of SS (with or without their consent) their whole lives and they're entitled to get it back as they were promised they would.

 

 

 

My parents, who are in their 50s, are counting on SS for their retirement. They have nothing saved as far as I know.

 

Typical of the baby boomer generation. My parents are in the same boat. They're in big trouble and it will lead to big trouble for the rest of us.

 

 

 

DH and I, in our mid-30s, have NEVER EVER NOT ONCE thought that we will get a dime from SS. We pay in with each paycheck but we've been raised in an era in which everyone has always talked about "the SS crisis". I don't know anyone may age (in my circle, anyway) who thinks they will get any SS. We are all trying to save for ourselves.

 

What are your thoughts? Do you think you'll get a SS check someday?

 

Dh and I are also in our mid-30s. It's not even the mildest of considerations in our financial planning. It isn't even brought to mind. Dh saves religiously for our retirement from each paycheck. We live frugally now with our life after employment in mind, no thanks to our parents' generation. They're going to soak up whatever may be left of SS long before we're supposed to draw from it. I certainly don't expect to receive a SS check, and if we do, it will be meager gravy.

Edited June 18, 2011 by BabyBre

[Mrs Mungo]

I disagree that at this point people who had their 401ks in the stock market are necessarily doing better than SS. We would have more money if we had stuffed it under the mattress v investing in IRAs.

 

Most of what people have said about Congress and retirement and/or the health care plan is wrong. Google it or look up one of the many, many other threads where I have posted about it.

[Laura Corin]

We are hoping for government retirement money (from the UK, but the system has similar issues to the US) but saving as much as we can to support ourselves in retirement if it disappears. I can imagine the pension system here turning into a poverty relief payment, rather than an entitlement for everyone.

 

We also don't expect to retire early until close to 70, if we are both well enough.

 

Laura

[FrogMom5]

Dh and I don't think it will be there when we retire (we are 47 & 49). Many years ago I went to a presentation by the SSA about how SS was a secure program. I came out convinced it was doomed. Dh and I were in our late 20's/early 30's at that time. We've never planned on SS in our retirement. And yes, life happened to us so we plan on working long into our 70's, maybe 80's.

 

That being said, we don't mind paying in now. It helps support people who need it, like my mom. Oh, btw, the benefit paid out to recipients is much more than the amount they put into the system. So, no, I don't believe that just because I contributed that I should later receive the benefit, especially if I don't really need it. If they want to return the lump sum or let me invest it, that's ok.

Denise

[Mom0012]

I'm not counting on it and we are saving as much for retirement as possible, but I do hope to receive it. I remember my dad ranting about social security when he was about my age and how he would never see a dime of it, so I do think it's possible we will receive it.

 

Lisa

[Nestof3]

I agree. We have a friend who owns a lawn business. His FIL helps him. He is paid in nontangible ways. His FIL draws disability every month. Drives me crazy b/c he can clearly work.

 

We also know a family where the grandparents raised their grandson. The parents, who had split up, were perfectly capable of doing so, but neither wanted their lifestyle cramped. So, when the boy was 16, they learned they could have been drawing ss on him. They began to. The father at this point had remarried and had another child. Instead of taking money from their deadbeat son, they began taking from the pot.

 

I think the SS system needs better management.

 

The elderly in our family are receiving more than they every put in. Their SS + generous tax-free pension after the man worked just 20 years put them at the same salary as the median working family in the county before the wife was old enough to draw SS. Their children who did not get gov't jobs will be much poorer, as they have no pensions, which mean they need to save about 1.5 million to get a similar yearly income as those with pension. Then add what they need to save to get medical insurance similar to that the pension came with....impossible unless they are professionals. Yet the elderly see themselves as not having enough...

 

Then there is the disability racket. We have a family member who is retired on medical disability from the state receiving 3/4 of his pay with full medical, has a wife that works a part-time professional job, and SS deemed him and his children eligible for benefits. They are living high on the hog with a six figure combined income and both have medical for life w/pension ..SS essentially paid for college for his chidlren. His disability does not prevent him from working at all...he's doing quite well as a barterer and is careful not to be in situations where he can be videotaped working. The idea that you can not work in any occupation b/c you've disabled yourself from one occupation really needs to change.

 

I don't mind that SS is used as a tax to help those who are truly needed - the truly disabled whose families cannot ever earn enough to help them - but I'd like to see that split out as a separate cost and seperate program.

 

I would like to see realtors drop their commision prices so that the elderly have an incentive to downsize. Too many are rattling around in 2300 sq ft homes here, using their SS to pay the property taxes. (Property taxes are significant here...on a starter home it's about 3K a year, a 2300 sq fter on 3 acres would be about 5K at the senior 50% discount rate; significant when the SS averages about 13K).

[MBM]

My husband occasionally works on parts of SS supplying the numbers Congress needs. He knows the Chief Actuary of SS, who is well-regarded as being an intelligent, decent person.

 

The problem is that political parties have been tinkering with SS for their own agenda. I'm not going into those details here, but that is a big part of the problem.

 

No, I'm not counting on it, but there's no way I would've relied solely upon any one of my investments to see me through retirement. It's best to be diversified.

[JumpedIntoTheDeepEndFirst]

Again social security is a tax and there are no guarantees that someone will get it back if they die to soon or have no dependents after their death.

 

Whether or not I die before I get it or if I have no one to leave it too has nothing to do with a "means" test. Early death or lack of dependents has nothing to do with my making or saving enough money to not "need" social security. I could be Bill Gates and have a fortune and social security is still mine to receive just like anyone else, that is why I had to pay it in the first place.

[Stacy in NJ]

It was intended as a safety net for the very poor so they could live their end years with some dignity. It has, like so many other entitlements, morphed into a guaranteed check that too many depend on.

 

Most Americans will get much more money out of SS than they will have ever contributed to it.

[cdrumm4448]

I disagree that at this point people who had their 401ks in the stock market are necessarily doing better than SS. We would have more money if we had stuffed it under the mattress v investing in IRAs.

 

That is irrevelant. Many of us are highly diversifed and still doing well investing. The point is that my SS contributions were not my choice, nor would they be many other people's choice. If people want to contribute to SS, be my guest. I would rather poke myself in the face with a fork than let the government control my investment.

[cdrumm4448]

I would like to see realtors drop their commision prices so that the elderly have an incentive to downsize. Too many are rattling around in 2300 sq ft homes here, using their SS to pay the property taxes. (Property taxes are significant here...on a starter home it's about 3K a year, a 2300 sq fter on 3 acres would be about 5K at the senior 50% discount rate; significant when the SS averages about 13K).

 

As a broker for 10 years, I think that is a strange statement. My services are worth what they're worth. If people don't want to pay for them, don't use them. Try selling your home yourself and see how well you do. Most of my clients were farmed from FSBOs. Actually, most realtors actively pursue FSBOs in the paper because we know most will eventually list. Being a Realtor is an actual job that requires real skills.

 

Why don't you recommend sellers drop their prices. Everybody thinks what they own is gold and they usually start out too high in price.

[MrsMe]

I feel I should invest my own money the way I want without government interference. Relying solely on SS for retirement will never happen. There won't be any, not to mention it's not enough.

 

SS is a huge portion of my check and I would want to invest it in the way I wish. Right now, putting it under my mattress seems like a better option.

[mcconnellboys]

Tax or no, when I was growing up, every working person I knew (my family owned and operated two businesses during the years I grew up and I worked in both from the time I was 11) considered the SSI portion of their pay check to be something they would get back with interest at some point in their lives (if they lived, of course, or had dependants). I worked full or part time from 1971 through 1998. At no time while I was in the workforce did my understanding or what I heard from others about the intent of SSI change. I was never, ever told that it was a simple "tax" that I might or might not get back. Now, it has been 13 years since I've been in the workforce, so perhaps that has changed, but I've not heard of it.

 

The "I" in the SSI that I grew up with stood for Insurance. Social Security Insurance was billed to the working masses of my parents' and my generation as money held in escrow for us should we become disabled before retirement, or should we become disabled or die leaving dependants, or for when we ourselves retired.

 

If the bureaucratic administration of SSI continues as it has in the past couple of decades, the sheer amount of error and fraud are sure to wipe out the fund:

 

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2011/06/14/social_security_makes_8b_in_improper_payments/?rss_id=Boston.com+--+Latest+news

 

I wonder what the fraud level might be for the Congressional retirement program?