See anything wrong with this Facebook post?
- Social Security is self-funded by workers and employers. It is not part of the federal budget process and thus nothing to do with other spending – and it is critical to keep it that way as originally designed
- We can’t actually “afford” any spending while we are running trillion dollar deficits
- “Deserve?” Why do elders deserve anything more than younger Americans, especially given they had a lifetime to plan for their future
- Social Security is about 21–22% of total federal outlays. Center on Budget and Policy Priorities+2USAFacts+2
Medicare: about 14% of total federal spending in 2024. USAFacts. Combined (Social Security + Medicare): roughly 35–36% of total federal spending. Unlike SS, Medicare does use general revenue for funding.
All foreign aid spending equals about 1.5% of federal spending.
With 365 days in FY 2025, the average daily spending by Social Security is $4.38 billion per day ($1.6 trillion ÷ 365 ≈ $4.3836 billion).
Of course we know, the revenue into the Social Security trust is not sufficient to sustain this level of disbursement.
QUINNSCOMMENTARY 
I don’t have time to research, but had long heard that many countries had/have a higher level of retirement, especially at the lower end. (Plus medical).For myself, I am very satisfied because, with a state job (electrician) I had a lower than average salary with a better than average pension, which, with SS, leaves us comfortable(ish). We also lucked out, frankly, on timing when we downsized our home, which paid us out of debt* and gave us a small nest egg. This wasn’t true for most of my eight siblings who, like our father, retired in debt with only SS. For many (most) people, it is just not possible to ‘prepare’ for retirement.
Brief aside, maybe you could program a spell checker with audible alarm whenever you type ‘uniform’.
*except for reasonable mortgage.
LikeLike
I agree with almost everything you say all the time. You describe Social Security as not being part of the federal budget but later say SS accounts for 21% of federal outlays. I think th
LikeLike
Technically it is a expense of government because the trust is an accounting tool to isolate funds, but the trust and SS funding is not part of the budget process and it is not legal to use general revenue to fund SS.
LikeLike
Al Lindquist
always funny to hear someone talk about “ignorance” and “uninformed” who, no doubt, fell for all the lies that began on 1/21/21 and of course the lies to the birthing of our Unaffordable Care Act—talk about ignorance!
part of our problem, in my opinion, is what I call the old fart liberals–the lefties who see no reason to make structural changes for our children and grandchildren–when I hear we need to keep it the way it was originally designed I wonder why–this is a country of innovation and change–from Netflix to AI we can point to the past and the present and see massive change.
the old fart liberals look to problems we have and just want to keep doing things the way we did in 1935–no reason to make changes–let’s keep on doing what we are doing even if financial Armageddon could be 7-8 years down the road–
read in WSJ today that Vanguard will be adding an annuity option to 401-k plans which is a fine idea in my opinion and looks like other large financial institutions will be, or have been, adding this innovation to current plans.
Liked the pie chart and factual information provided by the article.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The annuity option is a good idea, but the plan sponsors will be the ones who have to add it. Let’s hope they do.
LikeLike
“read in WSJ today that Vanguard will be adding an annuity option to 401-k plans which is a fine idea in my opinion and looks like other large financial institutions will be, or have been, adding this innovation to current plans. … The annuity option is a good idea, but the plan sponsors will be the ones who have to add it. Let’s hope they do. …”
Sorry, only the uninformed would support embedding a guaranteed income feature (annuity insurance contract) within a target date fund series, such as Vanguard is proposing. The TDF is already opaque, not at all transparent.
More importantly, the TDF is almost always uses as the Qualified Default Investment Alternative (QDIA) – the default option where individuals don’t have any idea nor any desire to select their own investments.
Simply, embedding an opaque feature in an already opaque investment option adds to the mistake. This is typically done starting at age 50, by changing the allocation in the target date fund, to take some of the equity investment and some of the bond investment, and use it to purchase an increment of annuity. Continuing for the next 15 years, such that by the time the individual reaches age 65, 15% – 25% – 33% of all assets have been used to purchase an insurance contract.
So, what’s wrong with that?
First, it is just one form of annuity. By definition, it won’t be best for a highly diverse workforce, with highly diverse account balances and needs.
Second, given historical take up rates for guaranteed income product, only 5% – 10% will actually annuitize, commence monthly payouts. The remainder will forego annuitization, deciding against the guaranteed income/annuity, meaning that they paid insurance premiums for 15 or more years and got nothing for it.
Third, the plan investment fiduciary has to decide what option to offer, and there is no way they can identify the one, the very best option, for every participant … because there is no such thing.
Fourth, fifteen years from now, during the period of incremental purchase, there will be a lot of other annuity contracts, many with superior features or lower fees, however, the plan and the participants are stuck with the annuity already purchased – unless they distribute the annuity to an IRA and the individual goes through the expensive process of a 1035 exchange.
Fifth (and I could go on), every annuity under consideration is already available as an individual annuity in the marketplace, all you have to do is roll over assets to an IRA and make the purchase – why would we want employers to make this decision, and stick everyone in their choice.
Why would Vanguard and others take this action. It is called fees, revenues, profits.
LikeLike
Tell me a lie I fell for.
How do you know what I believe? For the record, I knew exactly what the ACA could and could not do, what was fact and empty promises. How did I know that? Because a designed and managed health plans for nearly 50 years.
And guess what, I’m pretty good at identifying most of the documented 34,000 lies we have recently been exposed to. You know, like China will pay the tariffs or there will be a great new health plans (that goes back to 2016). Or, if the government gives people the cash they can “negotiate” better health care and health insurance on their own. TELL ME you believe that.
LikeLike
Al Lindquist
is an “empty promise” a lie–of course you warned folks of the lies being told and you knew they were lies because you are informed and designed health plans–I would love to see something you wrote back then warning us about the $2,500 and keeping our doctor, and it was all a way to sell the program. Not easy for you no doubt as this was step 1 for the Medicare for all folks.
Did you fall for the Russian collusion crap and the Steele dossier hoax? I bet you did and why not when one uses Hitler–gestapo–Nazi on a regular basis.
What about the invasion by illegals which was categorized as a “deep fake”? Did you believe the border was closed–you wrote about that fabrication? Didn’t you buy the line that the illegals were good for the country–I think Jack put that to rest.
I never saw the article about the president being demented so I assumed he was fit to run again and the liars were folks like me who from the beginning knew the corpse had issues–not his fault, but telling me he was in great shape is a real truth issue.
Show me your article about Hunter and his computer and how the 51 signees were lying to us when they felt it was Russian collusion.
I am always amused by folks who see lies and ignorance in others but fail to include themselves. To the lefties illegals were great and some of us were were bigots and racists until 2 governors moved them to the northeast.
Does Trump lie and exaggerate?? ABSOLUTELY!! Tariffs are paid for by consumers–Biden is not responsible for all the evil and Trump for all the good–bombing boats from Venezuela because they supposedly have drugs pales in comparison to the pardon of the former president of Honduras a known and convicted drug trafficker. NIH cutbacks are not conducive to science and research which is what our tax dollars should be supporting.
Let us know if a family member gives you a Trump watch for Christmas. I know you must appreciate value.
LikeLike