Let's decrease or even elminate corporate subsidies to lower government deficit.

[Imran Siddiqui]

And where did MY SS contributions come from? My salary combined with matching employer contributions that would be part of my salary if they didn't have to give them to the government.
THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE, which I why I find it funny.

Wait... so you got statements as to how much as in your personal account? If you ever thought SS was exactly like a 401(k) Plan, you are ridiculous.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Fed govt employees are not IIRC subject to ss withholding.

They are. At least those who have been in the government after 1986.

And the pensions rah is likely referring to are their ridiculously underfunded defined benefit plans, not like 401ks which are defined contribution

Once again, prior to 1986. Of course, state government employees with super underfunded DB plans are going to get screwed. I don't see rah defending them while he demands every penny of his SS even though he doesn't need any of that money to survive (what, you really though SS was just a retirement plan and not so certain old people didn't have to eat dog food after they got old?).

[Imran Siddiqui]

You aren't entitled to the money you contributed. You are entitled to Y per month, where Y can be defined as the government sees fit (basically).

Y doesn't depend on what you contribute, it depends on what the government defines.

JM

This.

[notyoueither]

We're entitled to our entitlements.

A whole nation of Liberals.

[Al B. Sure!]

nm

[rah]

You aren't entitled to the money you contributed. You are entitled to Y per month, where Y can be defined as the government sees fit (basically).

Y doesn't depend on what you contribute, it depends on what the government defines.

JM

Currently by government definitions, how much you contribute does impact what you would get back.

ANd if the government can change that definition for me, then it's only fair that they can do it to them also. I still don't see any difference,

[DinoDoc]

If I'm not entitled to the money I contributed, then they shouldn't be either.

You should be more pissed about the government robbing you of the potential returns you could have made with the money that took from your check that they piddly payouts from SS. I promise you that you could have gotten a better return on the money.

[rah]

Wait... so you got statements as to how much as in your personal account? If you ever thought SS was exactly like a 401(k) Plan, you are ridiculous.

NO, I got regular statements that said based on what you've paid in, here is what you will receive at certain ages. This was supposed to help me plan for my retirement. Really no different than my 401k statements. SO not so ridiculous at all.

SO it's not self-entitled whining. I've been getting statements saying what I would be given. If they break that promise then I should be entitled to complain.

[rah]

You should be more pissed about the government robbing you of the potential returns you could have made with the money that took from your check that they piddly payouts from SS. I promise you that you could have gotten a better return on the money.

Unfortunately I was not given that option. If so, I'd have an extra million lying around for my retirement.. I understand that some of the money I was contributing was going to go to others that contributed less and I don't have a problem with that. I would just like the amount that my statements said I would get. I've been getting those statements for over 20 years.

[Jon Miller]

Currently by government definitions, how much you contribute does impact what you would get back.

ANd if the government can change that definition for me, then it's only fair that they can do it to them also. I still don't see any difference,

Because that is how the government has defined Y.

You do not get back a certain amount X, which is based on how much you put in. What you receive won't suddenly drop because you lived longer than they calculated. It is completely different from a 401k.

It is an insurance, indexed to the amount you contribute.

JM

[Jon Miller]

Unfortunately I was not given that option. If so, I'd have an extra million lying around for my retirement.. I understand that some of the money I was contributing was going to go to others that contributed less and I don't have a problem with that. I would just like the amount that my statements said I would get. I've been getting those statements for over 20 years.

Those statements didn't say that you get an amount X based on your contribution. They say that you get an amount per year (Y) (for as long as you live) based on your contribution. When they were defined, people lived less time/the situation is different. As such, they need to be recalculated.

You are not entitled to an amount based on what you contributed. You are entitled to the 'insurance', which should be 'correct'. The 'statements' were information about what the 'insurance' would provide at that time. The insurance could always change in the future.

The time to complain is if it drops so much that you are left eating dog food...

JM

[Imran Siddiqui]

NO, I got regular statements that said based on what you've paid in, here is what you will receive at certain ages. This was supposed to help me plan for my retirement. Really no different than my 401k statements. SO not so ridiculous at all.

SO it's not self-entitled whining. I've been getting statements saying what I would be given. If they break that promise then I should be entitled to complain.

I don't think you understand what 401(k) statements are. Those statements tell you exactly how much is in your own personal account. SS tells you what you may recieve based on how much you put in. There is no personal account, there is no direct relationship between contributon and amounts you get paid. There is a reason SS is called a ponzi scheme by some.

[rah]

You guys just don't get it. Yes I understand the difference between a 401k and SS. But that's not the point. The point is, for the last 20 years, I've been getting notices from the government telling me what I could expect to Plan for retirement. Thank god I knew better and didn't count on it, but I can still complain that I have been lied to for the last 20 years. Think of those poor souls that believed what they were told and planned accordingly. If the government can screw us on that, they can screw the state pension people that they underfunded also. What is the difference? Too many people here think it's totally different. It's not. At least I was smart enough to contribute heavily in my 401k on top of what they were taking out for SS. Public servants should have done the same.

[Jon Miller]

But they didn't underfund.

You are living too long in retirement.

JM

[Imran Siddiqui]

If the government can screw us on that, they can screw the state pension people that they underfunded also.

What in the world makes you think they aren't?!

At least I was smart enough to contribute heavily in my 401k on top of what they were taking out for SS. Public servants should have done the same.

You are talking about public servants' 401(k) Plans. Let's restate your comment: "at least public servents were smart enough to contribute heavily into their 401k on top of what the government was taking out for SS".