Now that we Amis have a nice tax cut, how to reduce spending to cover it?

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by JohnT
"Let's say it's my "perception" that the risk the US government will legislatively dance around what would otherwise be a default on SS obligations."

There are no obligations for the government to pay any SS funds according to Nestor vs. Fleming and another (earlier) USSC decision that I can't remember right now.

That's the first part of the dance, but it's also the one that SSA doesn't like to admit. They still throw around the term "obligations" (because it sounds nice) when the real meaning is "obligations which exist at the present time based on current legislation, which may be amended at any time"

[Japher]

Not the 20 somethings Kidicious. Just those who are of age to start collecting it. What is that age? 65? 20 somethings still have to pay. Yet, as more and more ppl opt out of collecting SS (not paying it) there will be more money going in and less going out. Making it easier to get rid of the whole thing all together.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Kidicious
Where would the money come from to pay the current retirees?

Why should that be my problem?

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Japher
Not the 20 somethings Kidicious. Just those who are of age to start collecting it. What is that age? 65? 20 somethings still have to pay. Yet, as more and more ppl opt out of collecting SS (not paying it) there will be more money going in and less going out. Making it easier to get rid of the whole thing all together.

Oh, Ok. The benefit for opting out would have to be better that staying in though, so wouldn't that cost more?

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Why should that be my problem?

Because the homeless elderly will clutter in the street, and sometimes you may have to step on them.

[DinoDoc]

Can someone explain to me how robbing Peter to pay Paul (as the current system essentially works) is a financially sustainable strategy for the Social Security slush fund?

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Can someone explain to me how robbing Peter to pay Paul (as the current system essentially works) is a financially sustainable strategy for the Social Security slush fund?

It's worked so far. It's up to you to show why it won't.

[Arrian]

Kidicious,

Because demographic trends indicate that Peter's getting smaller & Paul's getting much bigger. Peter isn't going to have enough pounds of flesh to cough up.

-Arrian

[DAVOUT]

Solidarity between generations. Works well until the generations paying becomes smaller than the generations retired. We are currently facing that problem. Difficult.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Arrian
Kidicious,

Because demographic trends indicate that Peter's getting smaller & Paul's getting much bigger. Peter isn't going to have enough pounds of flesh to cough up.

-Arrian

There aren't THAT many baby boomers. True, they are a larger generation, but they aren't as big as people are making them out to be. The histeria in here is absurd. There have been no serious projections that have predicted that the current system can not be maintained with some minor adjustments.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by DAVOUT
Solidarity between generations. Works well until the generations paying becomes smaller than the generations retired. We are currently facing that problem. Difficult.

What can you tell us about the French system?

[Dinner]

What we need is massive population growth to solve our demographic problem. I propose we start importing hot Russian women and then I will handle it from there.

[Arrian]

Kidiculous,

By the way, my prediction of collapse wasn't limited to Social Security. I was talking about the US government in general.

Sound crazy? Maybe, but the utter and complete lack of anything remotely resembling fiscal responsibility in government will eventually catch up to us.

As for SS in the particular, your "minor adjustments" are most likely political heresy. Everyone has gotten used to a big juicy pie, and they want their slice - regardless of the fact that we cannot afford it.

-Arrian

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Arrian
Kidiculous,

By the way, my prediction of collapse wasn't limited to Social Security. I was talking about the US government in general.

Sound crazy? Maybe, but the utter and complete lack of anything remotely resembling fiscal responsibility in government will eventually catch up to us.

As for SS in the particular, your "minor adjustments" are most likely political heresy. Everyone has gotten used to a big juicy pie, and they want their slice - regardless of the fact that we cannot afford it.

-Arrian

Cutting benefits will be hard, but raising taxes will be easier once the deficits start skyrocketing. Like I said earlier. The working people are going to end up paying for this crisis.

[DAVOUT]

We are exactly facing the consequences built in the system (for the basic retirement pension). The baby boomers expected to retire in 2006 appears to be largely exceeding the average number of yearly retirees. Minor adjustments is an understatement since their effect on the pension is not marginal, and people desagree; currently, civil servants are in strike, and make demonstrations.

The civil servants have their pensions paid by the state, but all others have an autonomous system totally financed by employers and employees.

What make the matter worse, is that the civil servants have a system much more favorable that the other one which has already been hardened seriously 10 years ago. This hurt the equalitarian principle of the French.

In addition to the basic pension, a complementary pension is financed also by employers and employees, and is facing the same difficulties, since working people are paying for retirees.

Currently (first figure civil servants):
- number of years of work required = 37.5 / 40
- age of retirement = 60/60
- average salary referred to = last 6 months/last 20 years

Project :
- number of years of work required = 40 / 42
- age of retirement = 65/65
- average salary referred to = last 6 months/last 20 years