Average lifetime Social Security donation???

I know, there's a website you can register with and find this out supposedly, but I feel I may be setting myself up for something if I register.
Just wondering if anyone knows what the average working stiff (and his employer) pays into SS over a lifetime.?
And millions pay in their whole life, then die before they can collect anything back.

SS should be payable on demand in full at retirement age. If someone wants to retire at sixty and take what they paid into the "Trust Fund" there should be no reason to deny them their claim.

Last article Ive seen shows about 800k(inflation adjusted) for an average income couple, though I think that's including the half paid by the employers(if your self employed you get to pay all of it). Older generations, the ones that have been collecting for a while already will get back more than they paid but not by much. Medicare however, nobody is getting more than they paid in benefits unless they die early.

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-...d-social-security-what-you-paid-what-yo/

Youd think so but pensions and SS are just legalized pyramid schemes and they'd collapse if people took their money in lumpsums. Thats why people need to have their own retirement accounts seperate from SS or pensions so you can always get your money back..well most of it after you pay the tax penalties for early withdrawals.

And then they want part of it back cant imagine what theyed tax you on a lump sum

It's a good idea to check you SSI statement at least once a year. If for nothing else to ensure whomever you are working for has paid in the correct amount in your name. Mistakes can and do happen.

The SSI will send you statements several times prior to your retirement age dates, showing your lifetime total earnings, and SSI and Medicare paid and when and if you reached the maximum. If you are self employed your whole life the amount will be double what those are for W-2 earners. Employers pay the same as the earners. You will also get an estimate of what your monthly stipend will be up to that point and what it would be if you qualified for disability payments instead of regular payments, (almost always higher). For W-2 earners the average recipient gets all the money they paid in within about 6.5 to 8 years. The main reason for that is that lower incomes have higher percentages then higher incomes and when you retire your early years are inflation adjusted upwards to the current time.

Bryce

Amen

There are many options for us to utilize for saving funds we can use earlier in our lives and also transfer if, when and as needed. Several successful persons I know are using the monies they saved in retirement and not collecting SSI until they are 70. That gives them an 8% raise every year passed age 62 or 65 and that gives them a very good stipend after they reach 71 or so.

Bryce

SS also pays you medical bills once you retire or start taking benefits. So far for me both hips a plugged artery in my neck, then back surgery and recently a stent. Just my medical bills were over 250K and I still get a check. Yes they are going to take out $144.00 per month in 2020 to cover my med bills if needed. Yes I could have done better in mutual funds thru American Funds. I may not be 100% correct in the above but close. Try and buy health insurance now for your age over 66 and two months for $144.00 per month. My wife's cost is $1000.00 per month for health insurance with a high deductible. Just my two cents worth

Don’t forget Social Security also pays widows and young children when a young parent dies, and also pays income for total disability. SS is more like insurance than a pension.

Don’t confuse Social Security with Medicare. Two different products. Medicare Part B can be deducted from Social Security. My wife is Medicare eligible but has not started her SS benefit. She pays her Part B Medicare premium by check every quarter. She will be 70 next June, and it will then be deducted from her SS when she starts her max income.

Medicare and SS are not the same program. Medicare came about much later.

I'm way too young to worry about such things.

I'm a retired State of Alaska employee. Thank goodness the State of Alaska pulled all its employees out of SS in 1986. Federal government required State to take out of our checks every month the amount that would have gone into SS. Our Government can't stand letting you keep your own money. Nor does it consider you smart enough to make your own investments for the future.

Net result was that every dollar I would have paid into SS from that time until I retired went into an annuity account. When I retired, I had a ton of money accrued that I was able to just roll over into my own choice of accounts. I have done WAY better this way than I would ever have done had I been forced to remain in the SS system.

Since I had my 40 paid up quarters BEFORE the St of AK bailed from SS, I still get a token SS check now, but it's less than $200 per month after Medicare premiums are taken out.

SS is basically a Ponzi scheme...

Pete

Social security is a ponzi scheme and social security disability is welfare. I know some folks are truly disabled but, in my experience, most of them could get a job. Wal-Mart greeter or something.

I've been paying in for about 36 years now. I have no idea what I've paid in so far. I expect to see nothing back. It's a Ponzi scheme run by the government. Thanks FDR! Typical libtard, taking and taking from the people that earn it and giving it to the people that don't. They were never supposed to be able to touch that money. That was the deal when it first started. The government was supposed to keep their mitts off. However, they have robbed it so many times now their is nothing left. Think about it. There should be a huge surplus if anything. How many people pay into it for 50 years, collect for 15 or less than pass away. If they didn't give it to every jackwagon with a hangnail and all the others that haven't put squat into it, things would be fine. Look at the first word. "Social". Typical socialism at work. Take all your money, give it to everyone else so now everyone will be the same amount of poor.

The statement you receive from SS has your total "donation" and your employers.

I'm collecting, so the important thing is you workers keep working. lol

Where has the cost of living gone in the last 50 years when was the last SS raise you heard of?

The government takes 15.5% of what you earn as a social security/medicare tax, half from the workers pay and half from the employer. Make no mistake, the worker is really the one paying it. The maximum taxed income rate for 2019 is $132,900. That means someone making this amount this year pays $20,599.00 into the SS system this year. And, if you make more your benefits are reduced significantly.

Do the math,if you put that money in a IRA account for 45 years you would get at least double your SS check/month.

Pretty sure there was one announced on the last 6 months.

I started drawing my SS when I was 63 not that much after about 60% taken away for State retirement pension.
Decided to draw early and take less after having a heart attack at age 55 I was maxed out with my retirement benefit .
The lady at SS office did all of the numbers and the money that I would draw for the years of early SS benefits it would take 17 years to get it if I waited until full SS age.
And who knows how long you will live, decided to retire and do some fun things I still work 3 or 4 days a week if I want to.
I have a job that I am off during the winter months unless I want to work, during the summer I work 4 days a weeks mostly.
It all boils down to do you want to work until you can't enjoy your retirement, or find something part time and enjoy life.
I also know not every body can live off SS and have to work to keep bills paid

The Social Security Trust Fund is invested entirely in U.S. treasury securities. Last year the U.S. Treasury Securities paid 2.92% interest to the Social Security Trust Fund. That's a little below the long term average, but still not impressive as an investment return. Google the long term market returns. The SS trust is scheduled to run out of money at around 2035 as of this year. That's unless lawmakers find a way to keep it afloat longer, that means millennials will need to be taxed a LOT more to keep things afloat. The rest of us too. Double would be a big understatement. I wish public schools would begin teaching math skills and prepare kids for real life. End of my rant. meanwhile, everyone have a Merry Christmas and Happy Holiday!!

They just keep pushing back the age you can first collect to help balance things out.

I have been self employed pretty much my whole life. If I live as long as my parents did I will pull out far more than I ever put in. Of course to live on that amount I'll have to move to a third world country! LOL

Many people get all their money back within a few years of retirement.

Many would not save a dime for retirement on their own.

I think it may be safe to change the word "many" for "most".

If I work until my full retirement age of 67 the maximum I can draw is $3011 a month. If I keep contributing as much as I do in my name, it will take me more than ten years to recoup just the original investment. Will I live until I'm 77? The average male life expectancy is 78.69 in the US.

Just think of the economic boom this has helped create with millions of retirees spending trillions they may not have had and how much employment their monies create. Almost 100% into the economy directly.
Compare the spending and life style of the millions of elderly today compared to 75 years ago?
Bryce

Rather than calculate your odds based on the general population, add the ages of your parents when they died ( or if still alive do the math on their parents), divide by two and that is your likely lifespan. Subtract or add for lifestyle issues.

Carl, my parents aren't all that old yet, early 70s, My relations are all over the place as far as age of death.



Compare the sending and lifestyles of the young 75 years ago. The economy has changed and it has zero to do with SS., Social security is a redistribution plan, those who make less get a better return on investment.

SS is no different than Income tax, or unemployment insurance. Gov. programs redistributing wealth.

I see what you are saying. You take trillions from workers so they can't spend it boosting the economy and give it to another group to spend and boost the economy. Definitely good for the the economy.

They'll just waste it then become a burden on society when they're old and sick and broke.

That's right the old and sick and broke people are not a burden because the government takes money from workers so that they are not a burden on those workers.

I wonder how many more of us would be paying to support our parents if it weren't for their Social Security.

Something like that only everybody pays and no one gets a free ride.

How many in the last 50 years was the point SS for what you could get back is a pretty good deal. I’m more concerned we don’t pay enough to keep it going.

I’m talking what is paid in tax, not paid out COLA

The workers get back what was taken and then some. If not why is everyone saying it will go broke in xxxxx? Not saying it may have been the best choice but it is what we have and it works for millions and millions of people and not just in the USA. We will see how the millions of families that plan to retire on their IRA savings will do compared to those with pensions. Both have SSI but some will do much better than others. Most federal employees have their own retirement system which they pay into and they are not eligible for SSI nor are the wages or income earned while a federal employee usable in establishing a stipend base.

Also if we look at SSI the rate we pay is about 5% as the remainder goes to Medicare so for many workers the return on their 5% is very, very good in comparison and collected and distributed as it is it is an economic booster.
The high and very high income persons have a very, very small percentage of their income in the form of SSI collections.
This link covers some issues that some or many may have.
https://www.aarp.org/work/social-security/info-2015/myths-of-social-security.html
Bryce

Bryce it is a Ponzi Scheme. The payout to the retirees in 2019 comes from taxes( 12.4%) on the workers of 2019. There is no economic benefit to the overall economy by shifting this money from one group to another .

The reason why it will go broke is because the money isn't invested and is a pay go system. It's been destined to fail since day one without tax and age increases.

I can guarantee it that if I was able to invest the money me and my employer have paid into SSI the last 30 years plus what I'll pay in the next 15 I'd be a millionaire or darn close to it. And being a single father if I kick the bucket my children would be able to get the balance of my investments.

As it is if I die tomorrow they are pretty much screwed except the one who will be a minor for a few more months.

The Social Security Retirement contribution is 6.2% for the employee and 6.2% for the employer, a total of 12.4%. Substantially more than about 5%

Life insurance is even stupider-your betting that your going to die soon and they're betting your gonna live longer.

It may well not have been the best choice, but there was no one with a better plan and it is by far the most successful social program in the history of the world for well over two generations, which is a long time when we look at human life spans, cultures and societies. Because it is a social program many don't like it and that is your choice. I find aspects of it troubling but it is the system we have and just because I don't like something does not mean I am not going to find out how it works best for me and my family.The fact that it earns a low return but is very safe is the basis for it being a stable program for mostly lower income earners who would have very minimal retirement income even if they saved 5 % of their earnings or more. The system provides benefits for those with lower means which is the social aspect of the program, especially the Medicare aspect of the program. Health care providers would have to charge higher income earners significantly more then the do now if there were no funds from lower income earners to pay the costs or they would choose to not get care at all and thus we all pay more as there are fewer customers.
Without SSI and Medicare there would be a huge shift in millions of families of how their discretionary funds would be spent, having to provide funds for three generations while they are working, youth, themselves and their elderly parents. I don't see a lot of families with those levels of income being able to handle those costs fully or even partially.

Bryce

Life insurance is voluntary.

A death benefit is tax free money. Nobody has ever sent their death benefit back to the company and asked for their premiums. I am glad my wife and I have ours, and it is mostly paid up.

The original intent of SS was to do two things for the worker. Provide a lifetime disability benefit if the worker was disabled during their working years. If the worker was able to work until retirement, SS would provide a retirement income for life.

Unfortunately, legislators couldn't keep their hands off the money that was rolling in and nabbed some of it for their little pet projects. Some examples are paying SS disability benefits to people who have never paid into it. Paid college tuition for a disabled worker's children. Saw a woman who was on disability because of obesity. The same woman's 10 year old son was drawing SS because she said he suffers from depression.

You would probably be better off financially if you invested your money in a bank, stocks, real estate, etc. Problem is, most people don't have the discipline to do that.

Too anyone who finds fault with Medicare, I ask you, would you be willing to pay my medical bills if I paid you twice the amount I pay Medicare? Enough said. Thank goodness for Tricare and Medicare.

PS: I need hernia surgery and cervical surgery pretty soon. Two cancer surgeries last year, and a long list of surgeries before that. Heart is now OK since being shocked back into rhythm two years ago.

My Dad just died a month ago or so at 93. He lived a good life! But, when he was a young man, men worked for $1 a day. Compare what he earned during his lifetime to the cost of medical care today. The assisted living facility he died in was costing $4500/month.. At the wages he earned through his lifetime, there's no way he could afford anything at the rate of inflation. Without assistance, old folks today would just be put to death, like the Demoncrats would like. For the working class of Republicans, that is.

Do you really think that you only pay 5%? As an employer I pay a bit more than 1/2 of the SS/Medicare deduction, like all employers that money comes from what the employee makes for me while that employee works for me. In other words it comes out of what I can pay that employee.

AARP is in the business of SELLING SUPPLIMENTAL MEDICARE INSURANCE.

If you are self employed, you get to pay the employer and employee side of FICA.

I'm not sure if I have been responsible and disciplined or just lucky.
I will start receiving my military retirement in about 4 years, plus I have been contributing 10 percent to my 401K and a modest amount to a Roth IRA.
And since I don't intend to stop working until I am no longer capable, social security should be just gravy.
I have been blessed with good health which has helped me to get to this point.
If you are young, get started on helping yourself.

No you pay 7.62 but about 6 for SSI which is not far from 5%. To many that seems like a lot and they don't want to pay that, but in reality most people don't save that much per year in their life time. If you want to find out how well the average USA couple is doing financially for retirement just spend some time talking with some financial planners and they will help you understand the potential train wreck coming down the road as many are not saving enough and if SSI does need to change there will be some real changes in life styles. The option many are choosing is to find work that they can physically and mentally do until they are in their 70s. A service centered economy allows for much more employment like that.
The link below gives some idea of the amount saved by people in different age groups.

https://www.thebalance.com/average-...155888#average-savings-for-60-somethings
Bryce

Bryce the worker pays 12.4% The rest is accounting flim flam. In reality the wage worker does not even send the IRS money. The employer does. Us self employed cut checks to the IRS.

To visualize this think about the two commissions that come out of a deal at a Canadian Auction that in reality the trapper pays.

employer,matches,the,,amount,,,,taken,,,out,,,of,,,my,,,,check,,,,for,irs

Maybe the government should make business contribute 100% of your ssi. Then you guys could claim you are paying 0%.

IF SS holds and my wife and I both retire at about 62, I shouldn’t have to touch too much of my retirement to live comfortably. Everything will be paid off before I retire, so she can take her cruises and I can take my turkey trips. Of course if the Stock Market crashes I’ll be working until I die, lol.

I got a $28 raise on my SS for 2020 lol!!

This is simplifying based on just flat dollars, no interest or other adjustments. If a person makes 30,000 a year for 35 years, they will make $1,050,000 in their lifetime. 6.2 percent is $65,100.00. Employer pays in the same. On the first $10,272 per year they will receive 90 percent, from $10,272 to $61,884.00 per year they will receive 32 percent. So, $10,272 X .90 = $9,244 + (30,000 - 10272) X .32=$6,313. 9,244+6313=$15, 557 Annual Social Security benefit per year at full retirement age. It would take a little over four years to receive as much as they paid in. 8 and a half years if you figure in the employer portion.
Considering the fact a very very small percentage of people can save money, and pensions are a thing of the past....maybe social security isn't such a bad thing.

Ohh..the multiplier in excess of $61,884.00 is 15 percent. I think these numbers are 2016 or 2017 numbers and they are adjusted annually, but it gives you a rough idea.

Thank you Bryce and a few others that took the time to actually verify your facts instead of just coffee shop talk.

The sad part of this is, is the rules are so strict on how much you can earn that it's really hard to find some employers willing to hire you to do "menial" job for only a couple hours a week. Then if your employer gives you a raise you gotta figure it all out again. Make to much money one month and they're all over you like flies on poop.
Try to get them to deposit your check on time some months is like pulling teeth on a tiger.

My facts are verified, there are a lot of people who make more than $30,000 and who is only going to work for 35 years. I quantified in my posts that it benefits the lower wage earners more than upper ones. It's a transfer of wealth otherwise the the return multiplier would be the same for every dollar made not a decreasing scale.

If you go Wildcatdads formula if I make 10,000 a year I'll receive 9,244 dollars a year in SS. If it wasn't a wealth redistribution scheme a guy that makes 30 a year would get three times as much. It would be logical as he paid in three times as much.

The employer has to get enough value from the efforts/labor of the employee to kick in from the employees efforts. Otherwise, if the employer did not have to pay his\her share they could pay the employee more money, 15.3% more money if no one had to pay SS or Medicare. That for a lifetime, compounded annually at the long term market average would be a lot more for most.

SSI does not transfer as much wealth as many claim that it does as the caps are far, far, below what most would consider wealthy persons make. Wealthy receive Medicare benefits etc. and those are not weighted based on income. If having more money in ones pocket is that much better, how come then that most nations with no SSI etc. have so many poor people and most of the wealthier and developed nations have even more social programs then we do here in the USA.

Bryce

If SS doesnt transfer wealth why is it ROI is higher on the first 10,000 in earnings. If it doesn't transfer wealth why force the employer to pay their half?

You are right that it doesn't affect the "wealthy" as much because of caps and no SS on capital gains. Could be part of the reason they are wealthy is they get to keep their money. Don't worry though, if the Dems have their way they'll get rid of caps and tax capital gains.

It's a wealth transfer from the middle and upper middle class. Plus those wealthy business owners that are forced to pay their half in the employees name.

Why is it those wealthy nations owe so much money?

I wouldn't get to excited on that, I believe we are now past 100% of GDP in federal debt and that's not counting unfunded liabilities.

The nation's that Bernie and AOC champion pay a tax rate everyone in the USA would go to war over and have a standard of living well below ours.

I think the term that SS is going to be "broke" is a bit of an overstatement. Will they be able to pay out what they're telling you on your current annual statement if things continue as they are, probably not, last I heard that it would be 70% of what they're telling individual people after the target date when they're "broke". Will they still be money coming to the people who get SS, yes but it will probably will be reduced because there will be still workers and employers paying in (yes, its a modified ponzi scheme). Finster will get some SS even if he thinks he won't. It is disconcerting that we haven't heard much any "fixes" for the last decade or so, just the opposite, how to spend more in redistribution on steroids. It doesn't really affect the political class and their allies.

I think Medicare and Medicaid have a more tenuous future than SS. Two "not-for-profit" health care systems basically rule my state, along with the pre-existing "good ole boy (and girl) political class. These health care systems are accountable to no one except their own incestuous boards. As long they don't violate state or federal law, no one asks them much. And they basically can set their own rates or at least the rates that the unholy cabal of private insurance and fed gov say that they will pay. And I don't think that will change much even if Bernie and Liz get their "Medicare for All"!

And we don't? We are probably the most capitalistic of the wealthier nations and we carry a lot of debt. Social programs as many of you state transfer wealth, that does not mean that social programs are the main reason we have 20 trillion of debt. We are heavily in debt because we fee we are entitled be we low income, middle or high. There is a subsidy or credit for all as we are not tolerant of having someone else get something without us getting something in return.

Bryce

There won't be fixes to SS or Medicare/caid. It's the third rail of politics, try to touch it either way and your dead politically.

Bryce- I'm not sure what you're referring to here because the people working for my agency certainly are paying their paycheck share of SS and its stressed by our agency HR people that SS is one of the legs of retirement for us. We have 3 "parts" for retirement funding.

The first is a federal annuity (aka pension). Its based on the years of service, basically 1% of your averaged top 3 earning years for each year of service. I think after 30 years that gets bumped up to 1.1%. For someone who starts young as a federal employee, this annuity can be a noticeable part of their retirement funding. For someone like me who came late to the game, it will be nice but not a major portion of my post-retirement revenue stream.

The second leg is the federal thrift (aka a 401k) plan. The government matches 1 to 1 up through the first 5% put into the plan by the employee, after that the employee is on their own. There's a certain amount of "catch up" contribution that an employee can put into federal thrift after the age 50, I'm not really sure what that is now because that will never be me--having that much un-tapped money to put in. I'm quite happy with my return with my fed 401k. I know Steven 49er will be seeing red (he probably knows this already) but the federal thrift isn't limited to investing in the "G Fund" (U.S. treasury notes) as SS is. We have a wide selection and I have done well with my "life cycle" fund.

The third leg is regular SS. I don't plan to work until my full retirement age for the feds but hoping not to tap into SS until then. I may do some of the things I do now but writing my own contracts with specific organizations and be self-employed. As long as that contract is not with the federal government (or other types of government), I don't have to follow their various Byzantine and/or pc-correct rules. I believe "free association" is a good thing, just not there yet or not frustrated enough to severe the rope. We'll see what the next few years bring...

I was referencing the people I worked with part time after my first retirement. They worked for the UW Extension system as county agents with federal support from and their income was not eligible for SSI. neither were those that worked for the NRCS which is part of the USDA. That may have changed. Many were able to retire early and take on other employment and some long enough to get 40 quarters (10 years) and have some SSI as well.

Bryce

Yeah, there seems to be a noticeable amount of that, retiring from a gov agency (not just feds, at least here in SD) and going back to work for them part-time. Not me, once I done with them, I will be gone, along with their rules that I would have to follow if still affiliated with them. I was lucky enough to be able to turn down taking an on-line interactive "micro-agression" sub-course tangent in our requited sexual harassment training this year. Maybe next year it will be mandatory...

The nations with no SSI and the most poor people have an elite Socialist ruling minority class that keeps the working proletariat ground under their heel, subservient and in poverty until death. Countries like Nicaragua and Guatemala that are and have been ruled for years by the Socialist Sandinistas. Or the current government in Russia, they have a pitiful social system that is responsible for draining money away from the working class and feed the bloated pocketbooks of a few Socialist elites. Sorry, there is no perfect ideology.

Buy from them if you're anti-gun. AARP wants only police, military, and government agents to be armed. Not a friend of gunowners!