Do you think that Social Security benefits should be able to be passed on to familiy members?

Question

I think it should. Americans pay for Social Security out of their earnings for most of their lives--that money shouldn't go back to the government just because that person happened to have a shorter lifespan, should it? The number of years that they (or the spouse, next of kin, etc.) should continue to get Social Security should be in proportion to how many years that they worked and how much money they put into the system. Otherwise, there seems to be an incentive for the government to keep lifespans as short as possible. The life expectancy in the US is already getting shorter and lags behind many other countries these days. Do you agree?

Answer 1

''should be passed on to family members'' father is not feeling well?

Answer 2

Everyone wants their freebies from the government don't they?  Yet we complain about our taxes.  Go figure.

EDIT> Hey, I didn't specify any party or candidate did I?   You assume so much.  Neither party or presidential candidate is any better on this issue, and Congress is just as bad or worse.  The majority of people are getting more from the government than they put in and they want their freebies, but complain about the federal deficit and taxes.  People then try to point at the war in Iraq, but that is a small portion of the roughly 50% deficit we have in the US this year.  Most of it is due to all these free programs such as bailing out the mortgage industry and irresponsible people who didn't make their house payments or secure intelligent mortgages.  Congress continually rapes the social security fund to pay for other gimmies and refuses to pass a law prohibiting just that.  Then we have all the people who abuse the disability portion of Social Security, like one family I know that have both adults on federal disability and three kids all on disability for ADD, or the guy who used to come into a gun store I worked at part-time who was on full disability for what he called autism, but he was fine to drive, could carry on a normal conversation, and shoot competitively?  People want their free lunch, but complain about the cost.  Now we have politicians who want to expand loan programs for people who want to purchase homes, which is a big part of what got us in this mess to start with, expand loans and grants so "all kids" can go to college, and have a federally funded health care system.  Where do folks think the money for this will come from???  There is no grove of money trees anywhere, and the tooth fairy doesn't exist (sorry to burst anyone's bubble out there).  It comes from taxes.  Taxes on the workers out there trying to make a living (and one candidate for President wants to raise taxes on gasoline, coal, oil, and natural gas), and increase taxes on the people and companies that provide jobs and benefits for workers... all in the name of fairness and social equality.  They plan to steal from Peter to pay Paul, and people gobble up their political rhetoric like it is candy.  People need to wake up, and quick, because our economy is on the verge of collapse, and higher taxes and more social programs is the straw that will break the camel's back.

And the US ranks 45th out of 195 according to the United Nations at 76.4 years, which is almost 10 years higher than the world average, and only 6 years less than the best, which is Japan.  The other post is correct.  Americans live very unhealthy lifestyles.  Also, England, Canada, Germany, and other nations with these so-called fantastic social health care systems don't fair much better, and only getting an extra year or two.  However, these nations also have very different lifestyles than we in the US, which is what accounts for the difference.

Answer 3

Read the words Social...Security.

It's not a retirement or pension plan. Most people get out more than they put in. That's why it's going broke.

Answer 4

You are wrong....life expectancy is continuing to grow...people are living longer and longer....thanks to modern health care....and yes, i do believe spouses deserve it...but don't be misinformed they can only claim one...whoever is highest...I for one...am not counting on social security as a retirement blanket...I'm saving now for later

Answer 5

Social Security is a government program that is something like income insurance only it isn't run as well.  Insurance companies have similar programs called annuities.  Benefits are the proceeds paid by such programs and are normally set by how much is paid in and can be received according to specifications in the written policy.  When social security was started there was no period where funds built up before funds were paid out. Eligibles started receiving benefits immediately.  It was at that time only paid to retirees who were 65 years of age.  Some congress people want to privatize a portion of the ss fund so it can make a profit and again be financially healthy.  They only want to privatize 3% of the fund in the stock market which has been the best earnings instrument ever over and over again.  Social Security should not replace pension funds or annuities it is only supplimental.

Answer 6

this is a complex issue and not simple answer as each person's situation is different.  i saw one poster who said it was not a retirement plan, i think nathan, but it is.  and it is mandatory for all workers.

Social Security is part of the retirement plan of almost every American worker. If you are among the 96 percent of workers who are covered under Social Security, you should know how the system works and what you should receive from Social Security when you retire.

When you work and pay Social Security taxes, you earn “credits” toward Social Security benefits.

The number of credits you need to get retirement benefits depends on when you were born. If you were born in 1929 or later, you need 40 credits (10 years of work).

Your benefit payment is based on how much you earned during your working career. Higher lifetime earnings result in higher benefits.

http://www.socialsecurity.gov/pubs/10035...

we are allowed no choice but to pay into this plan, while Federal employes are exempt and have their own private plan,  much like Bush has advocated for all citizens.

the problem is, that is you make it optional, many woold elect to pariciple and would be left without funds when they do retire and will have no income.  so i believe some provison for mandatory saving is included into any purposed plans such as this.

i believe that if at the time of a person's death, that the have a balance in their account, this money should be passed to beneificiaries,  it is their money and they should be able to designate it.

however, if a person has used their money and have taken more due to illness, then there is no balance that could be passed on.  that would seem to be the fair solution to me.

Social Security was started by FDR in his new deal adminstration and was never meant to be what it is today and it is in need of revsion to a more realist retirement for those worker who have been forced to contribute to it all their working years.   they would have receive much more return on their money than the government can provide.

Answer 7

Phase it out as equitably as possible.  Don't try to expand it in any possible way.  Quit spending so our grandchildren can save.

Answer 8

The life expectancy in the US is already getting shorter and lags behind many other countries these days. Do you agree?

Life expectancy is short in America because people eat fast food all the time and take pills for everything under the sun.  They smoke like h**l and drink too much beer and do drugs.  It is their own faults for the short life.

Answer 9

Yep, social security needs to be done away with.  I've already resolved myself to the fact that in 45-50 years when I can retire, there wont be any money left for me, but here I am, paying into it.  Why should I pay for social security now, when I am not going to be seeing anything back?  I would much rather have that money available to me to invest how I feel best.