The military is necessary. Still, for every dollar the military spends wisely they waste $1000.
US infrastructure crumbling. Biden just passed a $2.2 TRILLION infrastructure bill that's like 80% not infrastructure. It will spend more on electric cars than on roads, bridges, ports, airports, and waterways combined.
Why do we need a national weather service? Weather is literally local by definition.
Regulatory agencies are necessary but still full of waste. A private company could do the same job for much less.
Your characterization of the infrastructure bill is wrong. And the funding for electric cars is all about charging stations, which clearly is infrastructure. And it's not more than all those other things combined. Not even close.
EV Charging: $7.5 billion
Roads and Bridges: $110 billion
Ports and Waterways: $17 billion
Airports: $25 billion
If you don't understand why we need a national weather service, you don't know much about anything.
Yes, there is lots of waste in government. I've seen lots of Democrats and Republicans run on a platform of cutting waste. Unfortunately, they usually lose.
You also left out the $174 billion investment in the EV market... So your correction is wrong as usual.
Also, here's a hint for you. Americans NEVER saved enough for retirement, even before there was any such thing as Social Security.
When I was a child (well, under 30, anyway) I thought exactly like you do on this topic. Forget Social Security! Just give me the money - I'll invest it as I choose and be much, MUCH better off. And that would have been true. I would have invested it well and been much better off.
The problem is that most Americans wouldn't. And then we'd be back to letting millions of seniors starve because they were not wise enough to save earlier in life . . . or bailing them out using taxpayer funds.
Here's another hint for you. Look up what happened to the poverty rate of senior citizens prior to the advent of Social Security and after Social Security came into effect.
That's like saying we need to give food stamps to everyone because only SOME people need them.
it's tricky. whether you start the SS payments at 62 or 67 or 70. Huge variation. But if you can wait, your checks get much larger:
The maximum benefit depends on the age you retire. For example, if you retire at full retirement age in 2022, your maximum benefit would be $3,345. However, if you retire at age 62 in 2022, your maximum benefit would be $2,364. If you retire at age 70 in 2022, your maximum benefit would be $4,194.""
So a person who lived off of $11,475 every month of their adult life would get a $4,194 check.
That's not tricky at all. Even in the rosiest of scenarios Social Security won't replace your income. Expenses may decrease after you retire assuming you don't go anywhere or do anything but they won't decrease by 75%.
Obviously people making over $100k can afford to save on away from SS if they want to keep their lifestyle into retirement. SS isn't supposed to replace your income.
Your characterization of the infrastructure bill is wrong. And the funding for electric cars is all about charging stations, which clearly is infrastructure. And it's not more than all those other things combined. Not even close.
EV Charging: $7.5 billion
Roads and Bridges: $110 billion
Ports and Waterways: $17 billion
Airports: $25 billion
If you don't understand why we need a national weather service, you don't know much about anything.
Yes, there is lots of waste in government. I've seen lots of Democrats and Republicans run on a platform of cutting waste. Unfortunately, they usually lose.
You just said there's $152 billion set aside for infrastructure in $1.2 TRILLION infrastructure bill and you think you're helping your case? LOL!
The National Weather Service has over billion dollar budget. It is absolutely certain that the tax payers aren't getting a billion dollars worth of service from it.
No. I was only showing that the EV provisions were much smaller than the items you named.
So a person who lived off of $11,475 every month of their adult life would get a $4,194 check.
That's not tricky at all. Even in the rosiest of scenarios Social Security won't replace your income. Expenses may decrease after you retire assuming you don't go anywhere or do anything but they won't decrease by 75%.
Obviously people making over $100k can afford to save on away from SS if they want to keep their lifestyle into retirement. SS isn't supposed to replace your income.
What do you mean SS isn't supposed to replace your income?? The entire basis of retirement calculations is determining when you can afford to quit working and maintain your standard of living.
Over half of retirees rely on Social Security as the majority of their income. Many millions rely on it for 100% of their income.
Most people live above their means. 100k is a relative number as well. 100k in San Francisco wouldn't buy you a tent.
Your characterization of the infrastructure bill is wrong. And the funding for electric cars is all about charging stations, which clearly is infrastructure. And it's not more than all those other things combined. Not even close.
EV Charging: $7.5 billion
Roads and Bridges: $110 billion
Ports and Waterways: $17 billion
Airports: $25 billion
If you don't understand why we need a national weather service, you don't know much about anything.
Yes, there is lots of waste in government. I've seen lots of Democrats and Republicans run on a platform of cutting waste. Unfortunately, they usually lose.
You also left out the $174 billion investment in the EV market... So your correction is wrong as usual.
You are the one who is wrong. There was no such $174 billion for EVs in the bill. You are probably confusing the infrastructure bill with the BBB bill, which didn't pass.
Also, the items I listed above are new spending in addition to the $650 billion in previously-authorized spending for roads, bridges, and other infrastructure. An example is $300 billion for the highway trust fund. That's how you get to $1.2 trillion. Pretty much all of it was stuff that everyone agrees is infrastructure.
Obviously people making over $100k can afford to save on away from SS if they want to keep their lifestyle into retirement. SS isn't supposed to replace your income.
What do you mean SS isn't supposed to replace your income?? The entire basis of retirement calculations is determining when you can afford to quit working and maintain your standard of living.
Over half of retirees rely on Social Security as the majority of their income. Many millions rely on it for 100% of their income.
Most people live above their means. 100k is a relative number as well. 100k in San Francisco wouldn't buy you a tent.
I don't understand your argument. Of course SS doesn't replace your income 1:1. But it does replace your income to some degree. No one thinks it is a 1:1 replacement. SS itself says it's typical for SS to replace 40% of an income.
You just making a straw man argument? I think you've lost the plot on this one.
What do you mean SS isn't supposed to replace your income?? The entire basis of retirement calculations is determining when you can afford to quit working and maintain your standard of living.
Over half of retirees rely on Social Security as the majority of their income. Many millions rely on it for 100% of their income.
Most people live above their means. 100k is a relative number as well. 100k in San Francisco wouldn't buy you a tent.
I don't understand your argument. Of course SS doesn't replace your income 1:1. But it does replace your income to some degree. No one thinks it is a 1:1 replacement. SS itself says it's typical for SS to replace 40% of an income.
You just making a straw man argument? I think you've lost the plot on this one.
Many people think Social Security is a stand alone retirement plan. When they reach retirement and find out it isn't they are screwed because they didn't save anything.
You also left out the $174 billion investment in the EV market... So your correction is wrong as usual.
You are the one who is wrong. There was no such $174 billion for EVs in the bill. You are probably confusing the infrastructure bill with the BBB bill, which didn't pass.
Also, the items I listed above are new spending in addition to the $650 billion in previously-authorized spending for roads, bridges, and other infrastructure. An example is $300 billion for the highway trust fund. That's how you get to $1.2 trillion. Pretty much all of it was stuff that everyone agrees is infrastructure.
I don't understand your argument. Of course SS doesn't replace your income 1:1. But it does replace your income to some degree. No one thinks it is a 1:1 replacement. SS itself says it's typical for SS to replace 40% of an income.
You just making a straw man argument? I think you've lost the plot on this one.
Many people think Social Security is a stand alone retirement plan. When they reach retirement and find out it isn't they are screwed because they didn't save anything.
well ok 'many' people may think that, but 'most' understand SS is meant to replace part of your income so you don't live in abject poverty or have to move in with your kids in old age. Or have to work until you die.
Many people think Social Security is a stand alone retirement plan. When they reach retirement and find out it isn't they are screwed because they didn't save anything.
well ok 'many' people may think that, but 'most' understand SS is meant to replace part of your income so you don't live in abject poverty or have to move in with your kids in old age. Or have to work until you die.
Well "most" may "understand" it but they don't seem to be putting it to practice as the majority of retirees rely very heavily on SS.
well ok 'many' people may think that, but 'most' understand SS is meant to replace part of your income so you don't live in abject poverty or have to move in with your kids in old age. Or have to work until you die.
Well "most" may "understand" it but they don't seem to be putting it to practice as the majority of retirees rely very heavily on SS.
yeah but it's a bit of a myth that there's a 'retirement crisis.' when you ask people if they are satisfied with their retirement the great majority are. I think SS has a huge amount to do with that - a guaranteed income they never have to think about twice and that adjusts for inflation. Gallup asks every year if retirees have enough money to retire comfortably and the great majority of them do. I don't see why that would change, with a great stock market decade and SS going up by large amounts due to its inflation adj.
So whatever the country is doing seems to be working pretty well. SS is a giant part of that satisfaction. Sure, fix it up but the basic concept of an inter-generational contract (the younger people supporting the older people) is a good one.
//////////
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The vast majority of U.S. retirees report having enough money to live comfortably; 80% say so today. At the same time, far fewer nonretirees, 53%, expect to have enough money to live comfortably when they retire. The economic fallout from the coronavirus has done little to alter these views, especially in comparison to the much more notable downturn in nonretirees' expectations during and immediately after the 2007-2009 Great Recession.
Four in five retirees in the U.S. say they have enough money to live comfortably, but far fewer, 53%, of nonretirees think they will too, when it comes time for them to retire.
