Social security?

why would social security not be able to continue? what would you recomend to working americans unstead of social security?

Social security?
That's the morals Republicans preach, have no respect for seniors.
Reply:Which Political Party started taxing Social


Security annuities?





A: The Democratic Party, with Al Gore casting the


"tie-breaking" deciding vote as President of the


Senate, while he was Vice President of the US Report It

Reply:I get tired of demo's constantly stating we gop'ers are not of the people. Lets get a few details:





The party of Slavery: Democrats.


The party of taxing: Democrats.


The party of hyprocrisy: Democrats.


Party of bigotry: Democrats. Report It

Reply:The best way to handle SS is to begin to ignore it as a kid or early..and start saving at least the same amt in your own ira/401k or investment.





One of my newphews was stared at birth with $2k from me, and he will have just from that, more $$ than SS will ever give him. Report It

Reply:It costs too much to maintain and shall soon dish out more than is put in.


Americans should depend upon themselves to save their funds for the future. Do not rely upon government to secure your futures. It is the task of the individual to seek out and secure for his or her self the security of their own fortunes and lives.
Reply:Pretty soon Americans are going to be immigrants to foreign countries.
Reply:Sacrifice now. if your employer offers 401k with a matchthen you should take advantage of that.


at any rate sacrifice now and open a roth ira you can put up to $4500 per year in the fund and since it is after tax it grows tax free
Reply:Only the politicians who are inept that are very pessimistic about continued social security, on the other hand, if the government makes it mandatory for people to contribute money into an IRA and make an age of 67 before they can start withdrawing, sounds good. Warning: Some politicians will still insist in governing such law and to control the funds as they please, hence, back to square one, because it will be like social security going bankrupt again.
Reply:I think rather than pay blanket social security as we all currently do. I think something similiar to a roth IRA account, or a 401K that workers have a choice as to which one, and have several plan choices. The money put in would be mandatory (We pay SS anyway!) You couldn't draw till earliest 62, your interest would accumulate as ever investment does. And you'd have a choice to leave the entire ammount in case of death to a spouse or family member.


The problem currently with SS is that around 25 years fron now, more people will be retired than will be working. When you put money in SS, it doesnt just sit there and wait for you. Several administrations in the past have borroed against it to pay for things which means, theres only as much money as is being put in every year with not much as a safety. Remember your putting in, those retirirng now are taking out. Its a solvent money amount and not protected in any way.





I currently have 1 retirement from work, am working on 2nd retirement (New Job) have a Roth IRA Ive been saving into for 10 years. I completely retire in about 25 years and won't need ss and if projections are correct, I wouldn't get it anyway.
Reply:save as much as u can 4 ur retirement