6 ms·

Thats true I definitely don’t know all the details of SS, just that it makes up an obscene amount of my yearly taxes (13%). So would you pay into the trust if i

Thats true I definitely don’t know all the details of SS, just that it makes up an obscene amount of my yearly taxes (13%). So would you pay into the trust if it was optional? Why can’t I defer my SS payments by paying an equal amount into my 401k? If the purpose is to prevent society having to support elderly workers who failed to save anything that would also tick the box, but then the govt wouldn’t get to touch the money.

dragonwriter 4y ago
> So would you pay into the trust if it was optional? Maybe not, but then again, I've been working most of my adult life for an employer of the kind that can be exempt (but which is opted-in) from SS. > Why can’t I defer my SS payments by paying an equal amount into my 401k? You can't opt out of the defined-benefit safety-net retirement backstop by putting more money into a no-guaranteed-benefit personally-directed retirement plan because... of the whole point of having a backstop. > If the purpose is to prevent society having to support elderly workers who failed to save anything that would also tick the box No, it wouldn't.
- ericmcer 4y ago
  Maybe we have different outlooks then. I would view my personal savings, assets and 401k as a sane guaranteed retirement plan, and having 0 savings but trusting the government to take care of me as a not-guaranteed plan. Not only is money I am taxed for social security gonna get way shittier returns than a 401k, I am hesitant to believe social security will look the same way it does today when I am retirement age in ~35 years.
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    > 401k as a sane guaranteed retirement plan 401k's do not have any guarantee, even in theory. You absolute should have some retirement plan outside of social security (which is, after all, just a backstop for that failing.) > I am hesitant to believe social security will look the same way it does today when I am retirement age in ~35 years. Well, I’m old enough that I've been hearing that refrain for more than 35 years, and have seen the math on the necessary changes to bring revenue and benefits in to line even if no action is taken before trustnfund exhaustion, and I haven't seen any sign that the radical damages some people try to use the threat of trust fund depletion to gain support for will become politically viable, so I am relatively confident that SS will remain in a recognizable form well into the future.

dragonwriter 4y ago

> So would you pay into the trust if it was optional? Maybe not, but then again, I've been working most of my adult life for an employer of the kind that can be exempt (but which is opted-in) from SS. > Why can’t I defer my SS payments by paying an equal amount into my 401k? You can't opt out of the defined-benefit safety-net retirement backstop by putting more money into a no-guaranteed-benefit personally-directed retirement plan because... of the whole point of having a backstop. > If the purpose is to prevent society having to support elderly workers who failed to save anything that would also tick the box No, it wouldn't.

ericmcer 4y ago
Maybe we have different outlooks then. I would view my personal savings, assets and 401k as a sane guaranteed retirement plan, and having 0 savings but trusting the government to take care of me as a not-guaranteed plan. Not only is money I am taxed for social security gonna get way shittier returns than a 401k, I am hesitant to believe social security will look the same way it does today when I am retirement age in ~35 years.
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  > 401k as a sane guaranteed retirement plan 401k's do not have any guarantee, even in theory. You absolute should have some retirement plan outside of social security (which is, after all, just a backstop for that failing.) > I am hesitant to believe social security will look the same way it does today when I am retirement age in ~35 years. Well, I’m old enough that I've been hearing that refrain for more than 35 years, and have seen the math on the necessary changes to bring revenue and benefits in to line even if no action is taken before trustnfund exhaustion, and I haven't seen any sign that the radical damages some people try to use the threat of trust fund depletion to gain support for will become politically viable, so I am relatively confident that SS will remain in a recognizable form well into the future.