• What's Blast-O-Matic?
  • Submit your own site!
  • Join the Team!
  • Webmaster's Special!
  • Webmaster Login

    Domains Domains Domains
    FREE BLOGS
    Low Low COST LEGAL SERVICES
    90% Pay-out Compensation a Force Binary No Flashing!!!
    Free Search Engine
    Blast-O-Matic provides you with the most powerful AD submission system in the world - and best of all, it's FREE! Not just another Ad submission either! No other AD submission service can compare to the "high-tech" / "high-touch" service you receive from Blast-O-Matic. Most companies charge a fee to provide you with an inferior service! The following is a comparison of a few of our "competitors" prices as of January, 2004:

    Service

    Cost

    Received

    Submit Cheap $25 Out of Business
    Submit Wolf $95 Software
    Mega Response $39 1 year
    123 Link $99 6 subs
    Ace Promote $129 12 subs
    Blast-O-Matic

    FREE

    Unl. Subs
  • Welcome to the Internet's premier Ad submission service web site, Blastomatic, #1 throughout the Internet. Blast-O-Matic has developed a viral system that combines AD submission with a confirmation of your data prior to submitting, there-by eliminating the aggravating false submission, spamming, and email bombing associated with all the rest of the AD submission services. We also offer free AD systems on our other servers if you are looking for an excellent lead generator. Contact me for more information on how you can get one of these new lead systems for your self or business. By the way, our new lead sites also come with a free autoresponder system and a lead control panel to help you manage the leads this system brings in. This is one powerful marketing system! Search engines are the latest craze, because that's where most of a web site's traffic comes from! Over 48% of your site's traffic comes from people looking for what you have in the search engines. But only the top 20 in any type of search will draw the traffic. You don't have to think very far to realize that you will probably never reach those heights in the search engine wars. However, all is not lost. The next big source of traffic is good news. Links from other sites represent about 20% of site traffic. This is where link sites, Guest books, Web Boards and Classifieds come in. Our Blast-O-Matic service submits to all the links, Guest books, Web Boards and Classifieds on the Internet. This represents over 12 million links to your site and can represent a major increase in site traffic in the short run. If you continue to use this service every 30 or so days, you will get more traffic and more traffic is good, right? We have also addressed the problem of false and erroneous submissions by putting our subscribers into the equation. You may have noticed that most other link/search engine submission services charge a sizable fee for their service. We do not charge you a fee to help you achieve the desired results regarding your marketing efforts and using our Blast-O-Matic system. This also assures that our system gets little if any unscrupulous submissions and false email addresses, both saving you time, money as well as making a mentor available to help you. Allowing your visitors to leave a link from your AD system to theirs is also a great way to build traffic. Giving them a Links Page and autoresponder is one of the best ways to develop a loyal subscriber. We have both services. Anyone can get a free submission system from us which includes an autoresponder lead control panel and as one of our subscribers you get the lead details from anyone setting up a free submission system. We have discussion and Support Forums! Get your marketing questions answered by successful webmaster, share your experiences and show off your expertise, learn Internet marketing tips and tricks, or just start a general discussion. We guarantee that every question will be answered. We also have a weekly live broadcast you can interact with to listen to and learn first hand from the pros. Contact me to find out how you can get in on the calls. You'll probably also want to subscribe to our newsletter. If you do, each month we'll send you a concise report detailing proven traffic-building strategies that you can put to use and profit from immediately. Welcome to EVAN DESSASAU Blastomatic site.Your very own Advertising Machine, Blastomatic, submits more ads than any other site and it is free! One exception, the Flag ship that makes Blastomatic possible, Veretekk. It has the Hammer that submits an incredible 12 million ads and also saves your ads so pounding out those ads only takes a few minutes a day for only. Spread your link all around the world by utilizing all the top ffa link submission services, classified ad services and ad boards. Blastomatic's ad posting is an effective and fast way to post your ad all over the planet. Testing of headlines, traffic generation and a boost in link popularity, are 3 of the main benefits of posting your
    Feeds for Van Dessasau's BlogFather Feed [This RSS feed is published by Van Dessasau. ]

    1. 5 myths about Social Security|Recent Articles by Liz Pulliam Weston
    5 myths about Social Security|Recent Articles by Liz Pulliam Weston ...Free webpages from free-net.com>


    New Document 5 myths about Social Security - MSN Money
    Dow-8.99down-0.09%
    10,143.81
    Nasdaq+6.06up+0.27%
    2,223.48
    S&P+3.07up+0.29%
    1,076.76
    Liz Pulliam Weston

    The Basics

    5 myths about Social Security

    System reform is a hotbed of controversy. But to move ahead, we've got to identify the myths, toss them aside and refocus on realities.

    By Liz Pulliam Weston

    You can't write about Social Security and not get flooded with angry e-mails representing all points of the political spectrum. From those who dub it "Socialist Insecurity" to those who hold their checks to be an inalienable right, people often have passionate and firmly held beliefs about the system.

    Unfortunately, sometimes those beliefs are based on myths. In the interest of more honest debate, let's review some of these legends.

    Looking for the cash hoard

    Myth No. 1: There is no Social Security trust fund. You may have heard this assertion so often that you'll be surprised to learn that there really IS a Social Security trust fund that collects our payroll taxes and invests the surplus. It's called the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance and Disability Insurance Trust Funds.

    What isn't in the trust fund is a big hoard of cash.

    Three-quarters of the money that's collected in Social Security taxes goes right out the door again in the form of benefits to Social Security recipients. The surplus that isn't needed to pay benefits is loaned to the federal government to pay for other programs.

    In return for this loan, the trust fund gets IOUs in the form of special-issue, interest-paying Treasury bonds. The interest isn't paid in cash, however; the Treasury issues the fund additional bonds for the interest amount. In 2006, the fund was credited with more than $102 billion in interest; the total value of the securities is about $2 trillion.

    Critics often deride these bonds as "a bookkeeping entry" or a fiction, but they're real obligations of the U.S. government, said Steve Goss, Social Security's chief actuary. In the past, they've been cashed in when Social Security or its sister program, Medicare, temporarily ran low on funds. The last time was in the early 1980s.

    "They're backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government," Goss said. "They're every bit as real . . . as any savings bond or Treasury bond any individual might hold in society."

    The problem, of course, is that the government now owes the trust fund so much money -- and relies on its surplus so heavily -- that real problems will be created when it comes time to cash in those IOUs. Uncle Sam is going to need to find another source of income to replace the surplus (or cut spending, or borrow money from somewhere else), plus come up with cash to pay the bonds it's already issued.

    Myth No. 2: Congress doesn't pay into Social Security, so it doesn't care about fixing the crisis. The idea that U.S. lawmakers don't pay into Social Security is 25 years out of date. Before 1984, U.S. representatives and senators -- like all other federal employees -- weren't covered by Social Security and didn't pay into the system. Congress passed a law in 1983, which took effect the next year, requiring all of its members (and all federal employees hired after that year) to participate in the system.

    This myth is often accompanied by the assertion that Congress participates in a private pension scheme that pays them their salaries for the rest of their lives. In fact, the Civil Service Retirement System, which covered federal employees in earlier decades, was closed to new participants after 1983. The pensions available under this old system depend on the federal worker's pay and tenure with the government, but by law can't exceed 80% of the final year's pay. Benefits paid under the system are reduced by the amount of Social Security the participant receives.

    The reason Congress hasn't fixed the Social Security crisis is politics. The most likely solutions -- raising taxes, cutting benefits, establishing private accounts or some combination of the three -- all face strong opposition. In addition, the people currently receiving benefits are represented by one of the strongest, most politically connected lobbies in existence: AARP. The 20-something workers who likely will pay the cost for congressional inaction don't have nearly the same clout.

    Video on MSN Money

    ER cash © Comstock/Jupiterimages
    Social Security solutions
    A debate on addressing Social Security in this country, with Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal; Robert Reich, a UC-Berkeley professor; and CNBC's Larry Kudlow.

    Life expectancy and disappearing assets

    Myth No. 3: Age 65 was picked as the retirement age because, when Social Security was started in the 1930s, most people were dead by then. The average life expectancy for a baby girl born in 1935 was about 63 years. For a baby boy, it was about 59 years.

     1 | 2 | next >

    Rate this Article

    Click on one of the stars below to rate this article from 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest). LowRate it 1Rate it 2Rate it 3Rate it 4Rate it 5High
    5 myths about Social Security - MSN Money
    Dow-8.99down-0.09%
    10,143.81
    Nasdaq+6.06up+0.27%
    2,223.48
    S&P+3.07up+0.29%
    1,076.76
    Liz Pulliam Weston

    The Basics

    5 myths about Social Security

    Continued from page 1

    But those statistics reflect the higher infant and child mortality rates of the times. If you survived childhood, you had a good shot of living beyond retirement age. Men who lived to age 30 in 1935 could expect to last another 37 years. Women at 30 had a 40-year average life expectancy.

    If you actually reached retirement age, your prospects for a relatively long retirement were good. Men who were 65 in 1935 could expect to live another 12 years, while women faced an average 13 more years. (Today, men of the same age can expect to live another 17 years, and women 20 years.)

    In fact, about half of the 30 state pension plans that existed in 1935, and many of the private pension plans, used 65 as a retirement age. Most of the others used age 70. Social Security's creators thought 65 was the more reasonable age and believed the system could be self-sustaining if they chose that age.

    Myth No. 4: Social Security will run out of money in 2041. Social Security will still be receiving payroll taxes from workers in 2041. What may have disappeared by then are the assets in the Social Security trust fund.

    Even that isn't cast in stone, however. The Congressional Budget Office in June 2006 projected that the trust fund wouldn't dry up until five years later, in 2046. The CBO used different assumptions than those used by the Social Security Administration, projecting faster growth in worker earnings, higher interest rates and lower inflation.

    Here's how the Social Security Administration projects the timeline:

    • In 2017, Social Security will begin paying out more than it takes in. For the first time, it will have to use the interest being paid on the securities it holds in order to meet its obligations.

    • In 2027, Social Security would have to start redeeming the securities themselves.

    • By 2041, Social Security would have cashed in the last security, and the system would have enough revenue to pay out only 75% of promised benefits. That percentage would drop over time if Congress failed to act.

    Demographics and add-ons

    Myth No. 5: Social Security wouldn't be having problems if foreigners weren't able to claim Social Security benefits. The number of checks sent overseas in 2002 totaled 404,640 -- a tiny fraction of the 53 million or so checks Social Security issues annually. Many of those folks may well be Americans who retired abroad. Social Security doesn't break down the overseas checks by citizenship.

    In any case, foreign workers who live in the United States have to work and pay taxes into the system for at least 10 years to qualify for Social Security benefits, just as U.S. citizens do.

    What will really hurt Social Security are two factors: demographics and the scope of Americans who are covered.

    In 1950, there were 16 workers for every person receiving Social Security benefits. By 2015, there will be only three workers for each beneficiary. Fifteen years after that, the ratio will be down to 2.2 to 1.

    Video on MSN Money

    ER cash © Comstock/Jupiterimages
    Social Security solutions
    A debate on addressing Social Security in this country, with Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal; Robert Reich, a UC-Berkeley professor; and CNBC's Larry Kudlow.

    Even that demographic shift wouldn't be such a disaster if Social Security hadn't expanded far beyond its original mandate of providing retirement benefits for workers. About 30% of Social Security's total benefits are paid to retirees' dependents and survivors and to disabled workers.

    Here's a summary of the add-ons over the years:

    • In 1939, five years after Social Security began, Congress added payments for the families of workers who died, and for retirees' dependents (such as stay-at-home spouses).

    • In 1956, Congress added disability benefits for workers.

    • In 1965, Congress established Medicare to pay health-care costs for seniors.

    • In 1974, Supplemental Security Income or SSI was established as a welfare program for low-income seniors and people with disabilities.

    Of these add-ons, however, only the first two -- disability benefits and payments to dependents, widows, orphans -- actually affect Social Security's bottom line.

    SSI benefits are paid out of the federal government's general revenues. Medicare is paid for with its own tax and has its own trust fund.

    Like Medicare, the disability insurance program also has its own tax and its own trust fund. But the disability fund's results are combined with that of the retirement system when Social Security insolvency projections are made, Goss said.

    Get the latest from Liz Pulliam Weston. Sign up to receive her free weekly newsletter.

    Preferred format:

    5 myths about Social Security|Recent Articles by Liz Pulliam Weston ...Free webpages from free-net.com>


    New Document 5 myths about Social Security - MSN Money
    Dow-8.99down-0.09%
    10,143.81
    Nasdaq+6.06up+0.27%
    2,223.48
    S&P+3.07up+0.29%
    1,076.76
    Liz Pulliam Weston

    The Basics

    5 myths about Social Security

    System reform is a hotbed of controversy. But to move ahead, we've got to identify the myths, toss them aside and refocus on realities.

    By Liz Pulliam Weston

    You can't write about Social Security and not get flooded with angry e-mails representing all points of the political spectrum. From those who dub it "Socialist Insecurity" to those who hold their checks to be an inalienable right, people often have passionate and firmly held beliefs about the system.

    Unfortunately, sometimes those beliefs are based on myths. In the interest of more honest debate, let's review some of these legends.

    Looking for the cash hoard

    Myth No. 1: There is no Social Security trust fund. You may have heard this assertion so often that you'll be surprised to learn that there really IS a Social Security trust fund that collects our payroll taxes and invests the surplus. It's called the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance and Disability Insurance Trust Funds.

    What isn't in the trust fund is a big hoard of cash.

    Three-quarters of the money that's collected in Social Security taxes goes right out the door again in the form of benefits to Social Security recipients. The surplus that isn't needed to pay benefits is loaned to the federal government to pay for other programs.

    In return for this loan, the trust fund gets IOUs in the form of special-issue, interest-paying Treasury bonds. The interest isn't paid in cash, however; the Treasury issues the fund additional bonds for the interest amount. In 2006, the fund was credited with more than $102 billion in interest; the total value of the securities is about $2 trillion.

    Critics often deride these bonds as "a bookkeeping entry" or a fiction, but they're real obligations of the U.S. government, said Steve Goss, Social Security's chief actuary. In the past, they've been cashed in when Social Security or its sister program, Medicare, temporarily ran low on funds. The last time was in the early 1980s.

    "They're backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government," Goss said. "They're every bit as real . . . as any savings bond or Treasury bond any individual might hold in society."

    The problem, of course, is that the government now owes the trust fund so much money -- and relies on its surplus so heavily -- that real problems will be created when it comes time to cash in those IOUs. Uncle Sam is going to need to find another source of income to replace the surplus (or cut spending, or borrow money from somewhere else), plus come up with cash to pay the bonds it's already issued.

    Myth No. 2: Congress doesn't pay into Social Security, so it doesn't care about fixing the crisis. The idea that U.S. lawmakers don't pay into Social Security is 25 years out of date. Before 1984, U.S. representatives and senators -- like all other federal employees -- weren't covered by Social Security and didn't pay into the system. Congress passed a law in 1983, which took effect the next year, requiring all of its members (and all federal employees hired after that year) to participate in the system.

    This myth is often accompanied by the assertion that Congress participates in a private pension scheme that pays them their salaries for the rest of their lives. In fact, the Civil Service Retirement System, which covered federal employees in earlier decades, was closed to new participants after 1983. The pensions available under this old system depend on the federal worker's pay and tenure with the government, but by law can't exceed 80% of the final year's pay. Benefits paid under the system are reduced by the amount of Social Security the participant receives.

    The reason Congress hasn't fixed the Social Security crisis is politics. The most likely solutions -- raising taxes, cutting benefits, establishing private accounts or some combination of the three -- all face strong opposition. In addition, the people currently receiving benefits are represented by one of the strongest, most politically connected lobbies in existence: AARP. The 20-something workers who likely will pay the cost for congressional inaction don't have nearly the same clout.

    Video on MSN Money

    ER cash © Comstock/Jupiterimages
    Social Security solutions
    A debate on addressing Social Security in this country, with Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal; Robert Reich, a UC-Berkeley professor; and CNBC's Larry Kudlow.

    Life expectancy and disappearing assets

    Myth No. 3: Age 65 was picked as the retirement age because, when Social Security was started in the 1930s, most people were dead by then. The average life expectancy for a baby girl born in 1935 was about 63 years. For a baby boy, it was about 59 years.

     1 | 2 | next >

    Rate this Article

    Click on one of the stars below to rate this article from 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest). LowRate it 1Rate it 2Rate it 3Rate it 4Rate it 5High
    5 myths about Social Security - MSN Money
    Dow-8.99down-0.09%
    10,143.81
    Nasdaq+6.06up+0.27%
    2,223.48
    S&P+3.07up+0.29%
    1,076.76
    Liz Pulliam Weston

    The Basics

    5 myths about Social Security

    Continued from page 1

    But those statistics reflect the higher infant and child mortality rates of the times. If you survived childhood, you had a good shot of living beyond retirement age. Men who lived to age 30 in 1935 could expect to last another 37 years. Women at 30 had a 40-year average life expectancy.

    If you actually reached retirement age, your prospects for a relatively long retirement were good. Men who were 65 in 1935 could expect to live another 12 years, while women faced an average 13 more years. (Today, men of the same age can expect to live another 17 years, and women 20 years.)

    In fact, about half of the 30 state pension plans that existed in 1935, and many of the private pension plans, used 65 as a retirement age. Most of the others used age 70. Social Security's creators thought 65 was the more reasonable age and believed the system could be self-sustaining if they chose that age.

    Myth No. 4: Social Security will run out of money in 2041. Social Security will still be receiving payroll taxes from workers in 2041. What may have disappeared by then are the assets in the Social Security trust fund.

    Even that isn't cast in stone, however. The Congressional Budget Office in June 2006 projected that the trust fund wouldn't dry up until five years later, in 2046. The CBO used different assumptions than those used by the Social Security Administration, projecting faster growth in worker earnings, higher interest rates and lower inflation.

    Here's how the Social Security Administration projects the timeline:

    • In 2017, Social Security will begin paying out more than it takes in. For the first time, it will have to use the interest being paid on the securities it holds in order to meet its obligations.

    • In 2027, Social Security would have to start redeeming the securities themselves.

    • By 2041, Social Security would have cashed in the last security, and the system would have enough revenue to pay out only 75% of promised benefits. That percentage would drop over time if Congress failed to act.

    Demographics and add-ons

    Myth No. 5: Social Security wouldn't be having problems if foreigners weren't able to claim Social Security benefits. The number of checks sent overseas in 2002 totaled 404,640 -- a tiny fraction of the 53 million or so checks Social Security issues annually. Many of those folks may well be Americans who retired abroad. Social Security doesn't break down the overseas checks by citizenship.

    In any case, foreign workers who live in the United States have to work and pay taxes into the system for at least 10 years to qualify for Social Security benefits, just as U.S. citizens do.

    What will really hurt Social Security are two factors: demographics and the scope of Americans who are covered.

    In 1950, there were 16 workers for every person receiving Social Security benefits. By 2015, there will be only three workers for each beneficiary. Fifteen years after that, the ratio will be down to 2.2 to 1.

    Video on MSN Money

    ER cash © Comstock/Jupiterimages
    Social Security solutions
    A debate on addressing Social Security in this country, with Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal; Robert Reich, a UC-Berkeley professor; and CNBC's Larry Kudlow.

    Even that demographic shift wouldn't be such a disaster if Social Security hadn't expanded far beyond its original mandate of providing retirement benefits for workers. About 30% of Social Security's total benefits are paid to retirees' dependents and survivors and to disabled workers.

    Here's a summary of the add-ons over the years:

    • In 1939, five years after Social Security began, Congress added payments for the families of workers who died, and for retirees' dependents (such as stay-at-home spouses).

    • In 1956, Congress added disability benefits for workers.

    • In 1965, Congress established Medicare to pay health-care costs for seniors.

    • In 1974, Supplemental Security Income or SSI was established as a welfare program for low-income seniors and people with disabilities.

    Of these add-ons, however, only the first two -- disability benefits and payments to dependents, widows, orphans -- actually affect Social Security's bottom line.

    SSI benefits are paid out of the federal government's general revenues. Medicare is paid for with its own tax and has its own trust fund.

    Like Medicare, the disability insurance program also has its own tax and its own trust fund. But the disability fund's results are combined with that of the retirement system when Social Security insolvency projections are made, Goss said.

    Get the latest from Liz Pulliam Weston. Sign up to receive her free weekly newsletter.

    Preferred format:

    5 myths about Social Security|Recent Articles by Liz Pulliam Weston ...Free webpages from free-net.com>


    New Document 5 myths about Social Security - MSN Money
    Dow-8.99down-0.09%
    10,143.81
    Nasdaq+6.06up+0.27%
    2,223.48
    S&P+3.07up+0.29%
    1,076.76
    Liz Pulliam Weston

    The Basics

    5 myths about Social Security

    System reform is a hotbed of controversy. But to move ahead, we've got to identify the myths, toss them aside and refocus on realities.

    By Liz Pulliam Weston

    You can't write about Social Security and not get flooded with angry e-mails representing all points of the political spectrum. From those who dub it "Socialist Insecurity" to those who hold their checks to be an inalienable right, people often have passionate and firmly held beliefs about the system.

    Unfortunately, sometimes those beliefs are based on myths. In the interest of more honest debate, let's review some of these legends.

    Looking for the cash hoard

    Myth No. 1: There is no Social Security trust fund. You may have heard this assertion so often that you'll be surprised to learn that there really IS a Social Security trust fund that collects our payroll taxes and invests the surplus. It's called the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance and Disability Insurance Trust Funds.

    What isn't in the trust fund is a big hoard of cash.

    Three-quarters of the money that's collected in Social Security taxes goes right out the door again in the form of benefits to Social Security recipients. The surplus that isn't needed to pay benefits is loaned to the federal government to pay for other programs.

    In return for this loan, the trust fund gets IOUs in the form of special-issue, interest-paying Treasury bonds. The interest isn't paid in cash, however; the Treasury issues the fund additional bonds for the interest amount. In 2006, the fund was credited with more than $102 billion in interest; the total value of the securities is about $2 trillion.

    Critics often deride these bonds as "a bookkeeping entry" or a fiction, but they're real obligations of the U.S. government, said Steve Goss, Social Security's chief actuary. In the past, they've been cashed in when Social Security or its sister program, Medicare, temporarily ran low on funds. The last time was in the early 1980s.

    "They're backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government," Goss said. "They're every bit as real . . . as any savings bond or Treasury bond any individual might hold in society."

    The problem, of course, is that the government now owes the trust fund so much money -- and relies on its surplus so heavily -- that real problems will be created when it comes time to cash in those IOUs. Uncle Sam is going to need to find another source of income to replace the surplus (or cut spending, or borrow money from somewhere else), plus come up with cash to pay the bonds it's already issued.

    Myth No. 2: Congress doesn't pay into Social Security, so it doesn't care about fixing the crisis. The idea that U.S. lawmakers don't pay into Social Security is 25 years out of date. Before 1984, U.S. representatives and senators -- like all other federal employees -- weren't covered by Social Security and didn't pay into the system. Congress passed a law in 1983, which took effect the next year, requiring all of its members (and all federal employees hired after that year) to participate in the system.

    This myth is often accompanied by the assertion that Congress participates in a private pension scheme that pays them their salaries for the rest of their lives. In fact, the Civil Service Retirement System, which covered federal employees in earlier decades, was closed to new participants after 1983. The pensions available under this old system depend on the federal worker's pay and tenure with the government, but by law can't exceed 80% of the final year's pay. Benefits paid under the system are reduced by the amount of Social Security the participant receives.

    The reason Congress hasn't fixed the Social Security crisis is politics. The most likely solutions -- raising taxes, cutting benefits, establishing private accounts or some combination of the three -- all face strong opposition. In addition, the people currently receiving benefits are represented by one of the strongest, most politically connected lobbies in existence: AARP. The 20-something workers who likely will pay the cost for congressional inaction don't have nearly the same clout.

    Video on MSN Money

    ER cash © Comstock/Jupiterimages
    Social Security solutions
    A debate on addressing Social Security in this country, with Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal; Robert Reich, a UC-Berkeley professor; and CNBC's Larry Kudlow.

    Life expectancy and disappearing assets

    Myth No. 3: Age 65 was picked as the retirement age because, when Social Security was started in the 1930s, most people were dead by then. The average life expectancy for a baby girl born in 1935 was about 63 years. For a baby boy, it was about 59 years.

     1 | 2 | next >

    Rate this Article

    Click on one of the stars below to rate this article from 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest). LowRate it 1Rate it 2Rate it 3Rate it 4Rate it 5High
    5 myths about Social Security - MSN Money
    Dow-8.99down-0.09%
    10,143.81
    Nasdaq+6.06up+0.27%
    2,223.48
    S&P+3.07up+0.29%
    1,076.76
    Liz Pulliam Weston

    The Basics

    5 myths about Social Security

    Continued from page 1

    But those statistics reflect the higher infant and child mortality rates of the times. If you survived childhood, you had a good shot of living beyond retirement age. Men who lived to age 30 in 1935 could expect to last another 37 years. Women at 30 had a 40-year average life expectancy.

    If you actually reached retirement age, your prospects for a relatively long retirement were good. Men who were 65 in 1935 could expect to live another 12 years, while women faced an average 13 more years. (Today, men of the same age can expect to live another 17 years, and women 20 years.)

    In fact, about half of the 30 state pension plans that existed in 1935, and many of the private pension plans, used 65 as a retirement age. Most of the others used age 70. Social Security's creators thought 65 was the more reasonable age and believed the system could be self-sustaining if they chose that age.

    Myth No. 4: Social Security will run out of money in 2041. Social Security will still be receiving payroll taxes from workers in 2041. What may have disappeared by then are the assets in the Social Security trust fund.

    Even that isn't cast in stone, however. The Congressional Budget Office in June 2006 projected that the trust fund wouldn't dry up until five years later, in 2046. The CBO used different assumptions than those used by the Social Security Administration, projecting faster growth in worker earnings, higher interest rates and lower inflation.

    Here's how the Social Security Administration projects the timeline:

    • In 2017, Social Security will begin paying out more than it takes in. For the first time, it will have to use the interest being paid on the securities it holds in order to meet its obligations.

    • In 2027, Social Security would have to start redeeming the securities themselves.

    • By 2041, Social Security would have cashed in the last security, and the system would have enough revenue to pay out only 75% of promised benefits. That percentage would drop over time if Congress failed to act.

    Demographics and add-ons

    Myth No. 5: Social Security wouldn't be having problems if foreigners weren't able to claim Social Security benefits. The number of checks sent overseas in 2002 totaled 404,640 -- a tiny fraction of the 53 million or so checks Social Security issues annually. Many of those folks may well be Americans who retired abroad. Social Security doesn't break down the overseas checks by citizenship.

    In any case, foreign workers who live in the United States have to work and pay taxes into the system for at least 10 years to qualify for Social Security benefits, just as U.S. citizens do.

    What will really hurt Social Security are two factors: demographics and the scope of Americans who are covered.

    In 1950, there were 16 workers for every person receiving Social Security benefits. By 2015, there will be only three workers for each beneficiary. Fifteen years after that, the ratio will be down to 2.2 to 1.

    Video on MSN Money

    ER cash © Comstock/Jupiterimages
    Social Security solutions
    A debate on addressing Social Security in this country, with Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal; Robert Reich, a UC-Berkeley professor; and CNBC's Larry Kudlow.

    Even that demographic shift wouldn't be such a disaster if Social Security hadn't expanded far beyond its original mandate of providing retirement benefits for workers. About 30% of Social Security's total benefits are paid to retirees' dependents and survivors and to disabled workers.

    Here's a summary of the add-ons over the years:

    • In 1939, five years after Social Security began, Congress added payments for the families of workers who died, and for retirees' dependents (such as stay-at-home spouses).

    • In 1956, Congress added disability benefits for workers.

    • In 1965, Congress established Medicare to pay health-care costs for seniors.

    • In 1974, Supplemental Security Income or SSI was established as a welfare program for low-income seniors and people with disabilities.

    Of these add-ons, however, only the first two -- disability benefits and payments to dependents, widows, orphans -- actually affect Social Security's bottom line.

    SSI benefits are paid out of the federal government's general revenues. Medicare is paid for with its own tax and has its own trust fund.

    Like Medicare, the disability insurance program also has its own tax and its own trust fund. But the disability fund's results are combined with that of the retirement system when Social Security insolvency projections are made, Goss said.

    Get the latest from Liz Pulliam Weston. Sign up to receive her free weekly newsletter.

    Preferred format:

    5 myths about Social Security|Recent Articles by Liz Pulliam Weston ...Free webpages from free-net.com>


    New Document 5 myths about Social Security - MSN Money
    Dow-8.99down-0.09%
    10,143.81
    Nasdaq+6.06up+0.27%
    2,223.48
    S&P+3.07up+0.29%
    1,076.76
    Liz Pulliam Weston

    The Basics

    5 myths about Social Security

    System reform is a hotbed of controversy. But to move ahead, we've got to identify the myths, toss them aside and refocus on realities.

    By Liz Pulliam Weston

    You can't write about Social Security and not get flooded with angry e-mails representing all points of the political spectrum. From those who dub it "Socialist Insecurity" to those who hold their checks to be an inalienable right, people often have passionate and firmly held beliefs about the system.

    Unfortunately, sometimes those beliefs are based on myths. In the interest of more honest debate, let's review some of these legends.

    Looking for the cash hoard

    Myth No. 1: There is no Social Security trust fund. You may have heard this assertion so often that you'll be surprised to learn that there really IS a Social Security trust fund that collects our payroll taxes and invests the surplus. It's called the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance and Disability Insurance Trust Funds.

    What isn't in the trust fund is a big hoard of cash.

    Three-quarters of the money that's collected in Social Security taxes goes right out the door again in the form of benefits to Social Security recipients. The surplus that isn't needed to pay benefits is loaned to the federal government to pay for other programs.

    In return for this loan, the trust fund gets IOUs in the form of special-issue, interest-paying Treasury bonds. The interest isn't paid in cash, however; the Treasury issues the fund additional bonds for the interest amount. In 2006, the fund was credited with more than $102 billion in interest; the total value of the securities is about $2 trillion.

    Critics often deride these bonds as "a bookkeeping entry" or a fiction, but they're real obligations of the U.S. government, said Steve Goss, Social Security's chief actuary. In the past, they've been cashed in when Social Security or its sister program, Medicare, temporarily ran low on funds. The last time was in the early 1980s.

    "They're backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government," Goss said. "They're every bit as real . . . as any savings bond or Treasury bond any individual might hold in society."

    The problem, of course, is that the government now owes the trust fund so much money -- and relies on its surplus so heavily -- that real problems will be created when it comes time to cash in those IOUs. Uncle Sam is going to need to find another source of income to replace the surplus (or cut spending, or borrow money from somewhere else), plus come up with cash to pay the bonds it's already issued.

    Myth No. 2: Congress doesn't pay into Social Security, so it doesn't care about fixing the crisis. The idea that U.S. lawmakers don't pay into Social Security is 25 years out of date. Before 1984, U.S. representatives and senators -- like all other federal employees -- weren't covered by Social Security and didn't pay into the system. Congress passed a law in 1983, which took effect the next year, requiring all of its members (and all federal employees hired after that year) to participate in the system.

    This myth is often accompanied by the assertion that Congress participates in a private pension scheme that pays them their salaries for the rest of their lives. In fact, the Civil Service Retirement System, which covered federal employees in earlier decades, was closed to new participants after 1983. The pensions available under this old system depend on the federal worker's pay and tenure with the government, but by law can't exceed 80% of the final year's pay. Benefits paid under the system are reduced by the amount of Social Security the participant receives.

    The reason Congress hasn't fixed the Social Security crisis is politics. The most likely solutions -- raising taxes, cutting benefits, establishing private accounts or some combination of the three -- all face strong opposition. In addition, the people currently receiving benefits are represented by one of the strongest, most politically connected lobbies in existence: AARP. The 20-something workers who likely will pay the cost for congressional inaction don't have nearly the same clout.

    Video on MSN Money

    ER cash © Comstock/Jupiterimages
    Social Security solutions
    A debate on addressing Social Security in this country, with Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal; Robert Reich, a UC-Berkeley professor; and CNBC's Larry Kudlow.

    Life expectancy and disappearing assets

    Myth No. 3: Age 65 was picked as the retirement age because, when Social Security was started in the 1930s, most people were dead by then. The average life expectancy for a baby girl born in 1935 was about 63 years. For a baby boy, it was about 59 years.

     1 | 2 | next >

    Rate this Article

    Click on one of the stars below to rate this article from 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest). LowRate it 1Rate it 2Rate it 3Rate it 4Rate it 5High
    5 myths about Social Security - MSN Money
    Dow-8.99down-0.09%
    10,143.81
    Nasdaq+6.06up+0.27%
    2,223.48
    S&P+3.07up+0.29%
    1,076.76
    Liz Pulliam Weston

    The Basics

    5 myths about Social Security

    Continued from page 1

    But those statistics reflect the higher infant and child mortality rates of the times. If you survived childhood, you had a good shot of living beyond retirement age. Men who lived to age 30 in 1935 could expect to last another 37 years. Women at 30 had a 40-year average life expectancy.

    If you actually reached retirement age, your prospects for a relatively long retirement were good. Men who were 65 in 1935 could expect to live another 12 years, while women faced an average 13 more years. (Today, men of the same age can expect to live another 17 years, and women 20 years.)

    In fact, about half of the 30 state pension plans that existed in 1935, and many of the private pension plans, used 65 as a retirement age. Most of the others used age 70. Social Security's creators thought 65 was the more reasonable age and believed the system could be self-sustaining if they chose that age.

    Myth No. 4: Social Security will run out of money in 2041. Social Security will still be receiving payroll taxes from workers in 2041. What may have disappeared by then are the assets in the Social Security trust fund.

    Even that isn't cast in stone, however. The Congressional Budget Office in June 2006 projected that the trust fund wouldn't dry up until five years later, in 2046. The CBO used different assumptions than those used by the Social Security Administration, projecting faster growth in worker earnings, higher interest rates and lower inflation.

    Here's how the Social Security Administration projects the timeline:

    • In 2017, Social Security will begin paying out more than it takes in. For the first time, it will have to use the interest being paid on the securities it holds in order to meet its obligations.

    • In 2027, Social Security would have to start redeeming the securities themselves.

    • By 2041, Social Security would have cashed in the last security, and the system would have enough revenue to pay out only 75% of promised benefits. That percentage would drop over time if Congress failed to act.

    Demographics and add-ons

    Myth No. 5: Social Security wouldn't be having problems if foreigners weren't able to claim Social Security benefits. The number of checks sent overseas in 2002 totaled 404,640 -- a tiny fraction of the 53 million or so checks Social Security issues annually. Many of those folks may well be Americans who retired abroad. Social Security doesn't break down the overseas checks by citizenship.

    In any case, foreign workers who live in the United States have to work and pay taxes into the system for at least 10 years to qualify for Social Security benefits, just as U.S. citizens do.

    What will really hurt Social Security are two factors: demographics and the scope of Americans who are covered.

    In 1950, there were 16 workers for every person receiving Social Security benefits. By 2015, there will be only three workers for each beneficiary. Fifteen years after that, the ratio will be down to 2.2 to 1.

    Video on MSN Money

    ER cash © Comstock/Jupiterimages
    Social Security solutions
    A debate on addressing Social Security in this country, with Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal; Robert Reich, a UC-Berkeley professor; and CNBC's Larry Kudlow.

    Even that demographic shift wouldn't be such a disaster if Social Security hadn't expanded far beyond its original mandate of providing retirement benefits for workers. About 30% of Social Security's total benefits are paid to retirees' dependents and survivors and to disabled workers.

    Here's a summary of the add-ons over the years:

    • In 1939, five years after Social Security began, Congress added payments for the families of workers who died, and for retirees' dependents (such as stay-at-home spouses).

    • In 1956, Congress added disability benefits for workers.

    • In 1965, Congress established Medicare to pay health-care costs for seniors.

    • In 1974, Supplemental Security Income or SSI was established as a welfare program for low-income seniors and people with disabilities.

    Of these add-ons, however, only the first two -- disability benefits and payments to dependents, widows, orphans -- actually affect Social Security's bottom line.

    SSI benefits are paid out of the federal government's general revenues. Medicare is paid for with its own tax and has its own trust fund.

    Like Medicare, the disability insurance program also has its own tax and its own trust fund. But the disability fund's results are combined with that of the retirement system when Social Security insolvency projections are made, Goss said.

    Get the latest from Liz Pulliam Weston. Sign up to receive her free weekly newsletter.

    Preferred format: