PFRDA

Since Social Security is bankrupt, is it time to eliminate the program altogether?

Social Security was raided of it's funds for decades and now is bankrupt, basically. While this is unfortunate for those who contributed for decades, hoping for a safety net in old age, it just didn't work out that way due to misuse of funds. Is it time now to responsibly disband the Social Security program and go back to the "old days" of the elderly being cared for by family members, while they have no monthly income of their own?

Public Comments

1. social security is not bankrupt. a lot of money sitting there that the greedy so want to get their hands on. keep hands off!
2. Even if it was true that SS was completely bankrupt. You have to consider the costs of abandoning the program. What will happen if 30 million senior citizens who count on their SS check to pay the rent and pay for their groceries suddenly stopped receiving that money? Would you be okay with the sheriff kicking them out of their home and them depending on panhandling or theft to get their food?
3. The ramifications of this are catastrophic. You have a point and one which I personally have worried over a lot. I'm a 100% permanently disabled veteran. Without going into details of that, I know so many others who would be homeless, have no family to care for them. I know I cannot work in a job due to PTSD and physical stuff and so I wonder what really happens to me, if I'll see my grandchildren grow up, my sons marry...so many questions. Depression does not begin to describe the fear we share. Do we go back to hunter gatherer society again for those of us who fall? I don't know. I guess that's partly why I'm up at 2:30am.
4. SS is not broke. It's future problems could EASILY be solved. Currently, we pay SS tax on only about the first $100k of income, which means the average person pays on their entire income and the better off get a free ride on their higher income. Change that so we pay SS tax on all income, including dividends and capital gains and SS will be fine forever.
5. I agree with the theme of your question that I might be better off if I could allocate a pool of my social security to something like my 401k. More to your point, I agree it's totally unfair to allow entire generations to take out more money than they've put in. However to say SS is bankrupt is scary and to say we should eliminate it is an extreme position. Social security started during the great depression making payments out of an empty pot, so you can equally say that it's always been bankrupt. Literally speaking, SS will only be bankrupt when everyone's checks start bouncing, and (barring a series of nuclear attacks on US soil), that's not really likely while there still are Americans that work for a living. So if you accept my point that SS is not qualitatively worse that it was when it was created, I think the better question is whether or not it should have ever existed. Was it ever a good thing for the country? We can only speculate how this country could have unraveled if the great depression had been worse. So if we dismantled Social Security and didn't replace it with some viable alternative social safety net, there'd be chaos. Maybe not right now, maybe not even in 5 years, but there will come a time when we need it and it won't be there, and if that happens, we'll no longer be living in a civilized country. Let's use our imagination. What would you do if you woke up one day to a real tragedy, and nobody was there to make sure you and your 1-month old baby didn't starve to death? Meanwhile, I drive up in my BMW. You don't have a BMW, all you have is an uzi. I lose. If something happened so 1/3 of the people in the city where you live ended up in the same situation as you, mafia warlords take over and death squads roam the streets. Conclusion: I drive a BMW and I pay more taxes than 93% of Americans but I think a small social safety net is a good thing. I don't want a live in a country without one because then it wouldn't be safe to drive a BMW and I love my car. Taking it away would be bad for rich people. Edit: Still Quazee suggests we should look at the facts, that we should not dispute the fact that the system is in fact bankrupt. Still Quazee then makes a few good points about payments exceeding income in 7 years, and that the funds won't be depleted until 20 years thereafter. Folks, that's a contradiction. Either the system is bankrupt, or the funds won't be depleted for another 27 years. FYI, your information is a bit out of date, the situation is actually somewhat worse - because of the economy, the tipping point is no longer in 7 years. It is today. That really doesn't help your argument, the system still has $2.5 trillion in cash. So don't panic. We still have 27 years and $2.5 trillion before we need to avert crisis by balancing the budget (this actually happened in 1980 - there was nothing in the bank so expenses had to match receipts - it was Greenspan of all people who expanded the program). It's totally natural that with the baby boomers retiring we'll run a deficit for awhile.
6. To the libs that refute SS being bankrupt: http://www.chrismartenson.com/blog/social-security-stunner-bankruptcy-nation-moved-several-years/15944 Program expenses exceed revenues beginning in 2016 -- that's only seven years away, folks -- and all assets are exhausted 21 years later. http://www.usnews.com/money/blogs/the-best-life/2009/05/12/social-security-medicare-busts-move-closer See, this BS is the classic example of entitlement entrapment of the govt upon itself and the taxpayers. You start up a lovely program intended to 'help the unfortunate' like SS (or health care) you make all these pretty plans how it 'might work' and sell it (or shove it down their throats) to the dumb masses. Then the greed, corruption and inefficient bureaucracies take over, mismanagement, fraud and abuse ramp up (Medicare, Medicaid, anyone?) the funds get 'managed' into something else, TA DA the thing's bankrupt, but MILLIONS NOW DEPEND ON IT. We are stuck with it, taxes MUST go up to continue the programs or there would be riots in the streets, society crashes, etc. So, the taxes and burden on society goes up, dependency on the programs go up, politicians continue to screw with it, and the spiral continues.
7. I'm not going to bore you with a long letter. The fix is so simple. When SS started most people younger than 65 died before they could collect anything. So SS was working . Now many people are living longer and collecting longer is the reason the SS funds are dwindeling down. What they need to do is raise the retirement age to maybe 70 or even 75.