Social Security reform, perhaps another angle?

[Flying Tiger]

Do you think that those against reform are taking that position because then it's less vunerable/accessable for congress to borrow from it?
Any truth to the story that Social Security is mostly full of I.O.U's from congress borrowing from it?
I haven't heard anyting on that side of the arguement.

[HM]

Do you think that those against reform are taking that position because then it's less vunerable/accessable for congress to borrow from it?
Any truth to the story that Social Security is mostly full of I.O.U's from congress borrowing from it?
I haven't heard anyting on that side of the arguement.
Ding ding ding ding ding ding ding ding ding!!!!!!
Well, it is much complicate than that, but that is a major problem - social security revenue is the majority of revenue for the fed. Social Security revenue is NOT kept separate and they depend on it. Watch out for what they do to pension fund deposits and IRA deposits - they will soon get raided in the name of the government, and all the legislation is already in place for them to access that money in an "emergency". Pensions and IRA are backed by the government - and they were given a back door to these funds when they were created.

[Flying Tiger]

The thing that stings me is I'm fully invested in Social Security.
Because I'm invested in other retirement accounts, I'll probably see about 1/3 of what I would be normally entitled to.
I paid those Social Security quarters when I needed the money the most.
I was a $220 a month Sgt in the Marines (including $35 combat pay), and that social security deduction was a hell of a hit.
Now they tell me that the pay back is far less than promised because I invested and took risks in the therory of taking care of myself in the future?
Again, do I have nothing to bitch about for not wanting to be a financial burden to anyone else?

[HM]

Rembember, when they created social security, it was designed to not pay! Benefit pay out was 65 years old, and the mortality tables (average death age) was 62. Social Security was designed to be a floor of income for those still alive and to pull them out of the workforce so that a job could be created for younger workers.
One of the main reasons social security is in so much trouble(I will spare you from one of my "socialist programs always fail" rants) is they have not followed the plan in which it was built. Benefit pay out should be late 70's now since the mortality tables have average death age around 75. You see, early on, social security was a major major major cash cow for the feds and they spent it like sailor on payday at a ***** house. Now, so many programs are dependant on this revenue and now most people are alive - and have to be paid from revenue that is already spent.
My dad was telling me 25 years ago that social security will fall apart and that I needed my own plan for retirement as if social security did not exist. Social securiy income is so tiny anyway - why would anyone ever plan to live on that?
Ever notice how government programs do the exact opposite of what they intended? Social security is failing when people's dependancy on it will be hitting a record high. (say babyboomers are retiring.)