Social Security Benefits

Many pros and cons arise with this option of Social Security reform. With other options the government takes the risk, but with privatization it is a personal risk. When account holders reach retirement they are able to withdraw from the account and use the money as they see fit. Government does not control the amount or what the account holders use the money for, leaving recipients with the choice to spend as much of the money as they wish and as quickly as they want. With no control over the usage of savings, this defeats the purpose of Social Security as a “safety net”. The biggest downfall to this reform is the transition period. Not only would the transition be a high cost, but those that are closest to retirement could be left with smaller savings in their private account. If young workers create private accounts then they are not supporting current retirees, and they are not receiving what they should be (Mitchell 2011). Another concern is that not all recipients will end up with a fair amount of earnings in their account. Such

We could save the Social Security Program, if we engaged in some simple changes. There could be some slight changes in the retirement age area and in the Taxes area. According to the Article "Modest Changes Could save Social Security Program" written by Stephen Ohlemacher, he clearly stated that employees are 100% grantee for an full retirement benefit package once the hit the age of sixty-six. It will later rises to the age of sixty-seven for elders that was born in 1960 or later. In addition, employees are able to receive an early retirement at the age of sixty-two, although their retirement benefits would have been reduced (Ohlemacher). Some changes we can apply to the retirement age, is that we could slightly increase the retirement age until it reaches seventy in the year 2027, which would eliminate some shortfall in the program. Secondly, there should be a three-year increase in the early retirement age,

Currently, the United States is contemplating at a forthcoming Social Security crisis. If changes are not forged, the Social Security system will not be able to keep up with the demanded payouts and is estimated to empty the trust fund around the year 2037. In this paper I will review a brief history of the Social Security program, touch upon the eligibility requirements, discuss what economists believe about the future of the Social Security Program, and finally state the Pros and Cons to the proposed raising of the age requirement for minimum payout.

Social Security has been a very beneficial government program for elderly people, and those whom they support, when being an active member in the workforce is no longer an option for reasons such as old age, disability, or death. Destruction of the program, or worse, lack of the aid, would be catastrophic. Without it, it could leave many senior citizens that can no longer

It’s a matter of either losing all that you have worked for and live in poverty when retired or allowing your hard earned dollars to grow and have a secure comfortable retirement. I believe that Social Security is a doomed Government Program and that Privatization of Social Security would allow for a more secure retirement plan for all Americans. Social Security was first created to help aging Americans in their senior years so they would not end up in poverty. Social Security was signed in as law on August 14, 1935 by President Franklin D. Roosevelt and was fully operating by 1940 (SSA). Originally a retirement program, but Social Security now includes survivor benefits, disability benefits and Medicare and all together is the largest

Privatization of the United States Social Security system could actual be more efficient than the publicly operated system. Chile switched its public retirement system to a privately ran system to a less expensive system that has been fairly successful (Bosworth). Social Security privatization is overall a better option because it will increase the rate of the returns of its recipients. American 401K invested in US treasury bonds received between a 1.9% to 4.2% rates of returns while the average person born in 2004 will receive a rate of return of 1.7% (Bosworth). These bond options are as stable as a regular Social Security option is because both are provided by the government but a privatized account allows workers to pick higher yielding accounts. Privatized accounts allow for workers to also invest in the stock market at a higher risk reward basis. Survivor benefits from the death of a family member who paid into Social Security received from 75% to 71.5% for at least 10 years (Survivors Planner). This is the main flaw of the current Social Security system is that the result of an early death, the worker's family is at a significant disadvantage economically as well as emotionally. This lead to the main argument brought up by Barry Bosworth chair of international economics and Gary Burtless chair of senior fellow economics that the privatization of Social Security

It’s a matter of either losing all that you have worked for and live in poverty when retired or allowing your hard earned dollars to grow and have a secure comfortable retirement. I believe that Social Security is a doomed Government Program and that Privatization of Social Security would allow for a more secure retirement plan for all Americans. Social Security was first created to help aging Americans in their senior years so they would not end up in poverty. Social Security was signed in as law on August 14, 1935 by President Franklin D. Roosevelt and was fully operating by 1940. Originally a retirement program, but Social Security now includes survivor benefits, disability benefits and Medicare and all together is the largest

After its passage on August 14, 1935, Franklin Delano Roosevelt regarded the Social Security Act as “a cornerstone in a structure which is being built but is by no means completed” but whose purpose is to “take care of human needs and at the same time provide for the United States an economic structure of vastly greater soundness.” The very opposite of soundness, however, was achieved. Today, looming deficits and abuse of the program have left it the focus of many debates. At their conclusion, the discussions generally only point toward making it more difficult to receive the money you put in, back, and raising taxes drastically on those still working to provide benefits for the disproportionate amount of retirees. Its problems are vast, but a permanent solution has yet to be decided. Far less discussed, however, is if the program itself is worth saving. Because of

Many politicians have utilized the privatization of social security as a political platform. For example, former President George W. Bush has had 47% of Republicans that has voted in support to privatize the system. Presently, the payments received from the Social Security system grants monetary payments to the millions of Americans that are either retired or the family members of the retired and disabled for deceased workers. The federal government is held responsible for collecting these payments. Back in 1935, the social security system was formerly known as the Old Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI). During this time, it only took seventeen contributions from workers to pay one retiree. In comparison to now, a quarter of the employed U.S households that has contributed into the Social security funding

Today, the certainty of receiving sufficient benefits solely from Social Security for a quality standard of living after retirement is indefinite. Baby boomers—individuals born post World War II between 1946 and 1964—are beginning to claim their benefits, and given what I have learned in class, the number of individuals entering the workforce is inadequate to sustain such a large population, thus such generation will consume

I believe our current social security system should be replaced by a mandatory private pension system. If it is not gracefully transitioned from the way it currently is then it will unfortunately disappear altogether in an abrupt fashion. A replacement will alleviate this issue and replace it with a viable option that can sustain itself.

     Privatization is the most controversial argument in this sector of government. Many citizens believe that they should be allowed to make investments on their own rather than having the government perform this for them. These people believe that by doing so they have more control over their future and more autonomy from the government. Furthermore, they stress that privatization will increase competition, which is the basis of our free market capitalistic society. Many other communities in accord, feel that by investing privately what they are now paying in Social Security would raise economic growth and increase retirement incomes. For the past several decades, the average yield on private stock has excited inflation by seven percent compared to treasury bonds that only exceeds inflation by 2.3 percent. Alternatively, all plans to privatize social security come with an adverse effect. Most noticeably, is the tax increases which are necessary to make

According to the Social Security Administration “The future is uncertain in many respects, and on new information, projections of the financial status of the Social Security program vary somewhat over time. What is virtually certain is that the benefits that almost all Americans become entitled to and most depend on will be continued into the future with modifications deemed appropriate by their elected representatives in the Congress” (Goss, 2010). With that said and the funds in the system depleting the issue now becomes what is the solution/reform for this issue and who will pay? Or where will the funding come

Social Security is one of the largest domestic federal programs with the largest source of income for most retirees, and is relied by the most vulnerable people of society. However, the program is financially unstable for the upcoming decades to come. Estimates show that Social Security will be to pay Americans’ full benefits for the next 20 years, but after 20 years, future generations could be in trouble, and Social Security will not be able to provide benefits towards the American people. Specifically, according to a news article by, National Affairs, written by, Andrew Biggs, “A New Vision for Social Security”, “It is therefore incumbent upon today's policymakers to address Social Security's fiscal problems and to ensure

Planning for retirement should not be based on Social Security alone, but rather by saving portions of personal earned wages and putting finances into long-term investments. Depending on Social Security as the only income after retiring is an unsafe and undependable way to prepare for retirement. People who contribute to Social Security are mandatorily putting money into the Social Security Reserve; this money is used for older generations that will file for these benefits before the younger people working, in the early 21 century, ever receive a chance. Money controlled by other’s hands will never be a guarantee for a secure future, yet money saved by an individual to put toward personal goals will reward greatly. By taking the time to