Started By
Message

re: The Coming Social Security Crisis

Posted on 3/28/24 at 10:18 am to
Posted by La Place Mike
West Florida Republic
Member since Jan 2004
28843 posts
Posted on 3/28/24 at 10:18 am to
quote:

ShermanTxTiger


From the article linked.

quote:

Since we do not know what will happen on the policy front, I focused on the SSA's numbers assuming no change in current law. They found that every age group received a positive return. Among current workers and retirees, the rates of annual return varied by about two percentage points - from a high of 6.52 percent (for single-earning couples born in 1920) to 4.52 percent (for their counterparts born in 1985). So if you wonder whether you will "come out ahead" on Social Security, here are some key differentiating factors to keep in mind:


quote:

A single-earning couple with medium wages, born in 1943, will see a 4.59 rate of annual return, while a single female born the same year - also with medium wages - can expect a 2.49 percent return. (Spousal benefits are also available in cases where a lower-earning spouse had some earnings but so much less that their worker benefit is less than half.)


quote:

The odds here are especially good for women, since they have a higher likelihood of surviving to retirement age and longer lives after retirement. That gives them higher rates of Social Security return - a medium-earning single female born in 1943 can expect a 2.49 rate of return compared with 2.09 percent for her male counterpart.
--Lower-income workers come out ahead. Low-income workers enjoy higher rates of return by design, because Social Security's benefit formula is weighted toward lower-earning beneficiaries and their payroll tax contributions will be relatively lower. A very low-income couple born in 1943 will receive a 6.79 percent annual return, compared with 3.92 percent for their high-earning counterparts.


I don't see any returns less than 2.09,

Interesting article none the less.

This post was edited on 3/28/24 at 10:20 am
Posted by ShermanTxTiger
Broussard, La
Member since Oct 2007
10905 posts
Posted on 3/28/24 at 12:42 pm to
quote:

I don't see any returns less than 2.09,

Interesting article none the less.


I could be wrong but I don't see any data supplied for workers that pass before full retirment age. I am sure they would have a hard time tracking that down. I am also sure that would push the ROI on the program as a whole lower.

The truth of the matter is... It is a horrible program for retirement and the government still can't get its act together to not steal from it.

In my case I will have paid in about $432,000 ($864,000 with employer match) by full retirement age with a $40,800 year payment (If no changes made to restrict it) per year. If I live to my expected life age of 79, I will have collected $489,000 on a combined investment of $864,000.00.

It is also modeled like an annuity. Once you die the benefits cease except for surviorship for minors (I have none any longer) and my spouse provided she doesn't remarry by 67. The rules and crap tied into this program make it very lucrative for the Govt but totally screw us. Now they want to restrict it more.

I ran the #'s. At 44 years of age I would have been better off forfeiting all contributions walking away from the program left to invest future contributions with a disability rider. The program is that bad.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram