Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Baby Boomer Social Security shortfall

At 62 I am withdrawing WHAT I WAS REQUIRED TO PUT INTO THE SYSTEM. Just because the government can't do math is no reason to put off meeting my needs. (Eleven years "retired".)

I’m thankful I have teachers retirement, living off SS is tough, even if you draw the max 2871. That won’t hardly keep the lights on and buy beer!

It is not the people's fault the federal government uses that money for all.

Between my bride and I, we receive a touch over $3800/month from SSA. I also draw some from my IRA to cover the monthly "shortfalls" until we are 100% debt free anyhow. Bride retired at 62 and I retired at 66. My IRA will last beyond when bride HAS to start withdrawing minimum from her 401k. We worked hard to get where we are and are tickled to get back some of what we put into SSA. I really didn't think there would be any $ to get back when I started working full time in 1975. As it is, I will be in my mid 70s before I hit the break-even point of what I put in SSA vs what I get back . . .

Pisses me off every time I hear SSA is an "entitlement" and lumped in with SSI and other pure welfare give-aways. Sure do wish I/we could have put the monies we contributed into an IRA/401k/savings account instead of the .gov coffers.

one of the other things people don't realize is that premium for part a medicare is not the same for all.
in some cases it is waived. in some cases if a high wage earner you pay a higher premium.

No sheet Raeford, You, I, have done nothing but work and follow the law.

Getting boned by birth date link below. This only applies if you work, if you are a parasite, then everything is free. Post 1960 models lose the most.

https://www.ssa.gov/planners/retire/agereduction.html

Just to keep the numbers simple, let's say you'd get $1000/mo at age 62, and $1500/mo at age 66.

In those four years, you'd take in $48,000. At 66, it would take you 96 months (eight years) to make up the $48k you didn't take. So you wouldn't "break even" until age 74.

Plug in your own numbers and then make your decision based on your health, your family lifespan history, and your financial needs at each age.

LOL, that figures, again, GLAD I never put much stock into my retirement future relying on ss, I could smell SCAM even when I was a young and much stupider man. frankly, I didn't figure to even live as long as I am now.

SS was never intended to be a retirement. When it was started, most men didn't live to 65 but their widows did. The country was awash with poor widows. SS was actually intended to support those widows.

I pay extra for Medicare, Wifey and I make too much.

Well that is because they hammer you for going early. In four more years you would be closer to $2800 a month. I think they levy such a heavy penalty because they know many will endure it, more money stays in in the long run.

I have two pensions coming to me, and I'll never see a dime of the SS I paid into for nearly 30 years. I'll have a pension from the Army Reserves at 60, and can retire with a pension from the railroad at 62 (15 more years). Since railroad retirement bought themselves out of Social Security program years ago I don't pay in anymore. If I choose to collect SS I lose my RR retirement. I should draw about $6K a month retired between the two plus my wife will draw an additional 50% of my RR retirement, so there is no way in hell I'm choosing SS.

Jeezus.....you boomers make it reeeeeeal hard to feel sorry for you people!

I'm 34. I'm not counting on this SS thing.

Railroad Retirement predates Social Security. In fact, SS was modeled after the RRA.

you see lots of talk about how much baby boomers are taking out of the system but nothing about how much they put in. If gov hadn't raided the system there might be enough. I get that it was designed for more people putting in than taking out, but it's odd that the shortfall started while the bulk of the boomer generation was still putting in.

It's all on paper and always has been. No real money has ever been raided because there's never been any to raid. There's never been a SS fund for them to take cash out of. They just juggled the books. It's true, though, that the juggling made SS look smaller after they rewrote the balance figures.

I’m 52, and don’t plan on SS being available when I hit 67. I’ve been screwed by our government enough in my life, they are nothing but a blood sucking black hole to me. Were in the ninth inning of game.

Not all completely true, they were similar as SS was established in 1935 and the Railroad Retirement in 1936 was the foundation for my current Railroad Retirement. In 1951 the railroad separated themselves from SS and had to basically buy themselves out all the way back to 1937.

Yes, prior to 1936 some rail workers had pension plans depending on which railroad you worked for. However, you could also get fired at any time and lose that pension as well. So you were correcting when you said railroad retirements predates SS, however both were essentially created at the same time.