3 ms·
Basic stats: http://www.cbpp.org/archives/4-8-99socsec.htm http://www.cbpp.org/archives/4-8-99socsec.htm You can go a lot deeper on this. Even today, about 50%
by s_q_b 11y ago
Basic stats: http://www.cbpp.org/archives/4-8-99socsec.htm http://www.cbpp.org/archives/4-8-99socsec.htm
You can go a lot deeper on this. Even today, about 50% of seniors would be below the poverty level without Social Security.
That's mostly okay, because the majority of seniors have the major expenses covered by guaranteed benefit pensions, Medicare and private savings, usually in the form of a house.
But things would get pretty grim without the government programs.
- thinkmoore 11y agoWhose parents have a guaranteed benefit pension these days? As far as private savings, those disappear almost immediately in the face of a medical disaster. Things are pretty grim indeed without the government programs (Social Security and Medicare).
- s_q_b 11y agoMy grandfather has two guaranteed benefit pensions: one FBI and one as chief of local police. But you're right, they're vanishingly rare for anyone in the private sector under 80. Bankruptcy by medical disaster should be averted by Medicare and a supplementary plan, assuming it's late enough in life. Slightly earlier, and yeah, your savings can vanish.
- bradleyjg 11y agoWhat about assets? The highest median net worth cohort is households headed by those 65-69, second by those 70-74, third by 75 and older. (as of 2011) It's one thing to give welfare to older people who can't work to keep them off the streets and quite another to give them welfare so they can give lavish inheritances to their children.
- s_q_b 11y agoAssets are a great point. Much like lifting the cap on earnings tax, assets should factor into the payout equation, much like they affect student grants.