Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

Tell me how Social Security can be sustainable?

When Social Security was made into law in 1935, average life expectancy was 57.5 years. NO benefits would be paid out to anyone until they reached 65 years.

Now,. with life expectancy up to 73 years, shouldn't there be a sliding scale to have someone born today not be able to collect until they are around 81 or 82??? Just asking...

Update:

No one is answering the part about the slding scale...and should that be retroactive...say with an actuarial table set up for everyone???

9 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    It's not sustainable, regardless, they have taken our money all along the way. So, I suggest they stop pouring our money into illegals and career welfare families and take care of what they have been paid to do. I'm just saying. . . .

  • It's certain to fail because it's a Ponzi scheme. There is a reason they are outlawed.

    The Liberal "solution" is to eliminate the cap on SS taxes, but the people who pay 13K a year now are losing over $3 million in their lifetime (check an investment calculator and remember most successful people are self employed so they pay 12.4%) and collect 2K from age 67. Somehow, the Left finds that this is NOT fair. I wonder who taught them math. By lifting the cap, it will be a Trillion dollar tax to people who pay virtually all of the taxes now (and this includes millions who make less than 250K). I wonder if they'll realize that we will eventually get to a point where it's not worth the effort.

  • 4 years ago

    the subject isn't Social protection as a central authority coverage software. the subject is Social protection as an open cookie jar the place each physique in congress can positioned their hand in on each occasion they want cookies for his or her very own, and their friends, mouths. What we want is a screw-on lid for the cookie jar, and an alarm that screams like Hell whilst it is tampered with, and somebody with a huge hammer waiting in the kitchen to break those thieving palms groping for those cookies... To have invested SS into the inventory industry some time past might have wiped sparkling it out, and left retirees with not something. this is the worst plan there is. I certainly have friends who've lost their finished 401k investments using inventory industry crash of 2008, yet they nevertheless have their SS.

  • ?
    Lv 5
    1 decade ago

    It can't. It is a Ponzi scheme legalized by the government. Eventually it will fail.

    It is the classic Ponzi scheme in every sense of the word. You pay the oldest investors with the newer investors money. It is illegal everywhere else in this country.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    Obama could just de-fund it and cut benefits like he did with Medicare. Let the old people starve as Obama's new world order is with the youth.

  • ?
    Lv 6
    1 decade ago

    I don't expect to get social security when I become a senior. I'm paying into a broken system, and it makes me sad to think about it.

  • 1 decade ago

    SS is a giant Ponzi scheme. It cannot be sustainable. I am in favor of phasing it out.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    It can't. I would rather have the money I am paying in to be able to invest myself and not have to count on the inept government for anything...period.

  • 1 decade ago

    if congress stopped using the funds paid in by workers for other expenses.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.