ECON Social Security COLA largest in decades as inflation jumps

Doomer Doug

TB Fanatic
I'm so rich now Oregon dropped me from Medicaid. I have to pay the full Part B premium now. I will lose $100 out of last years monthly payment.


I doubt I will even get any health care at all.

I got screwed on my cataract surgery and the delays are 4 months now with brown turning the pure bloods into hitler's Juden.

I can't opt out of paying the part b either, even as they deny me health care et al as an unvacinated. :vik:

I will pay for zero health care I think. Brown's new mandate for health care workers takes effect on the 18th and my eye doctor quits 3 weeks later and is moving out of state. Kaiser fired 2000 non vacinated last week.
 
Probably going to piss some off. The Social Security, Disability, welfare, food stamps, Sect 8, etc for born in America Americans is probably just a small fraction of the graft through foreign aid, and domestic programs like solar and refugee subsidies. I can't waste my energy getting pissed off at other Americans. This 5% is just going to fool a bunch of idiots in to thinking the present govt is looking out for them. And our enemies domestic are going to play that angle all they can.
 

Melodi

Disaster Cat
"Unless things get so bad that people are willing to ignore fragile elderly and disabled people sitting on blankets with a tin cup"

Wasn't that long ago that families took in their elderly and disabled to care and provide for.

The Churches had extensive programs to help the borderline cases even if they weren't members. It went far beyond the "meals on wheels".

Once upon a time neighbors, friends and other good hearted people cared for and worked with those in their areas that needed the help.

Somewhere along the line we went from caring about people to them being a "burden" to be shoved off and ignored.

A good number of the homeless have major mental or drug use issues. Once upon a time the government had institutions and programs to help these folks, but at a point in time closed them down and ended the programs. Transferring the problems to the street where they don't even enforce the laws for violence, hygiene or property rights.

Like all government programs, Social Security was full of good intentions, but when enacted was shortsighted and poorly executed. It sure didn't help that during Johnson the "trust fund" (lol) became a pool of free money for the politicos. There is trillions in IOU's that the government OWES social security.

Also didn't help when Congress raised the taxes on those earning Social Security (Biden voted for the increases twice!).

Sad thing is that the gooberment will soon get so desperate for mo money, they'll make a way to rob the 401K's, IRA's, Roths and pensions from those who earned them through working to give to those they deem "need it more". After all they believe in equal outcomes, not equal opportunities - the old "it isn't fair" mantra they use all the time.
These days many frail elderly people have outlived their families (families are smaller) also plenty of people in the "Good Old Days" simply starved to death (my Mom and Old As Dirt had a lot of stories along that line especially in the 1930s) and another major point was:

Not nearly as many people lived into advanced old age.


There were always a few people, once you get agriculture you will inevitably get the occasional Roman Senator or Egyptian pharaoh who lived to be 90 or 100. But most people passed away by around age 70 if they survived childhood and the issues of war and childbearing.

Some of this IS caused by societal changes both physical and legal, for example as recently as the Great Depression it was common for families to informally adopt fragile elders as an "auntie or and "uncle." But today if you tried that on any more symbolic basis, if you tried to move them into your spare room social services would like come to a knocking at your door.

The same is true with all the rules and regulations around organizations like churches or community groups providing informal charity, unless they want to build, fund, and comply with all legal mandates to open a nursing home, they can get into trouble very quickly.

I have had close friends nearly (or actually) arrested just distributing food to people (as recently as last week - a warning they were not arrested).

Again, with younger "old" people, if they are not disabled (like me) they can usually get some sort of income and work a doing something; if an employer will hire them. Some things could be modified but in the US are not (usually) for example in Europe Cashiers sit down, you do see people as old as 80 working in supermarkets. But then most people bag their own groceries, with one or two employees there to help people like me or the fragile elderly.

So this is a complex problem, but yeah a lot of people did end up either quietly starving in their home homes or essentially on blankets with tin cups. A lot MORE families were able to take in elders than can do so today, but only if they lived close by to start with.

We tend to view "the old days" through a misty lens that almost always makes "today" look terrible and the past look better. Humans have always done this, but it has gotten especially bad in the West as families shrank in size and little children didn't hear nearly as many "tales" from grandparents, great-grandparents, and grand-uncles/aunties as they used to about what it was REALLY like when they were a child.

But then our entire society seems to be heck bent on erasing all sense of history and the past, but this post is long enough without going into the consequences of that - you can see that all over the board with articles on everything from Woke to education.
 

CaryC

Veteran Member
Yeah back in the day parents moved in with their kids.

Probably did the baby sitting, while the kids worked the fields and garden.

However it should be noted that the kids meant one of the 12-15 kids that they had. And those were the ones that survived.

However between the time of my 3X G Grandmother where it is recorded who she lived with, and my grandfather things changed. Only 6 kids. And those 6 did not live around here, my grandparents home. They had moved off for jobs.

SS under Roosevelt was the only thing they had, as sharecroppers there was no savings. They needed every penny to get by. And they got to live by themselves until they died, in their own home. 'Course by the time that happened most had moved back because they too had retired. And would not be in any condition to take care of their parents.

We can talk personal responsibility, and SS is to help, not be the only thing, but that is all you got, you ain't got much.

And this raise wouldn't be coming unless prices are already going up, and we're paying for it, now, but won't get the COLA (they call it COLA for a reason) till Jan. and what will the prices be then?

I've been paying SS since I was 12.
 

Bps1691

Veteran Member
These days many frail elderly people have outlived their families (families are smaller) also plenty of people in the "Good Old Days" simply starved to death (my Mom and Old As Dirt had a lot of stories along that line especially in the 1930s) and another major point was:

Not nearly as many people lived into advanced old age.

There were always a few people, once you get agriculture you will inevitably get the occasional Roman Senator or Egyptian pharaoh who lived to be 90 or 100. But most people passed away by around age 70 if they survived childhood and the issues of war and childbearing.

Some of this IS caused by societal changes both physical and legal, for example as recently as the Great Depression it was common for families to informally adopt fragile elders as an "auntie or and "uncle." But today if you tried that on any more symbolic basis, if you tried to move them into your spare room social services would like come to a knocking at your door.

The same is true with all the rules and regulations around organizations like churches or community groups providing informal charity, unless they want to build, fund, and comply with all legal mandates to open a nursing home, they can get into trouble very quickly.

I have had close friends nearly (or actually) arrested just distributing food to people (as recently as last week - a warning they were not arrested).

Again, with younger "old" people, if they are not disabled (like me) they can usually get some sort of income and work a doing something; if an employer will hire them. Some things could be modified but in the US are not (usually) for example in Europe Cashiers sit down, you do see people as old as 80 working in supermarkets. But then most people bag their own groceries, with one or two employees there to help people like me or the fragile elderly.

So this is a complex problem, but yeah a lot of people did end up either quietly starving in their home homes or essentially on blankets with tin cups. A lot MORE families were able to take in elders than can do so today, but only if they lived close by to start with.

We tend to view "the old days" through a misty lens that almost always makes "today" look terrible and the past look better. Humans have always done this, but it has gotten especially bad in the West as families shrank in size and little children didn't hear nearly as many "tales" from grandparents, great-grandparents, and grand-uncles/aunties as they used to about what it was REALLY like when they were a child.

But then our entire society seems to be heck bent on erasing all sense of history and the past, but this post is long enough without going into the consequences of that - you can see that all over the board with articles on everything from Woke to education.
Agree with a lot of what you posted, but I'm considered elderly and in just my lifetime the 50's and 60's had their own set of problems but at least in my family tribe and AO the older folks were treated much better and most were cared for by their family members.

It's also true that our minds make the "good old days" better than they were at times, but in our current rush to oblivion if they weren't really they will be soon.
 

CathyC

Senior Member
And if an elder parent “has” to be in a nursing home everything they did save has to be spent down and/or given over to that place that is supposed to be giving them care, which in both my experience and my opinion, is anything but that. In a lot of cases, they are just neglected and/or abused.
 

WalknTrot

Veteran Member
My wife and I could easily live on our Social Security.
Everyone I ever talked to expected SS to Be their retirement. It has only been in the last 5 to 10 years that anyone suggested that SS is somehow just supposed to "help" with retirement.
Hmm...somehow, my recollection has been exactly the opposite.

Back when SS first came into existence, it was "pin money", a little bit to help out the extended family or to supplement savings/investments/part-time work and never intended to be sole support for the elder population, like so many fantasize that it is today.
 

Tennessee gal

Veteran Member
My husband’s parents cared for his maternal grandmother for the first 25 years of their marriage.
My husband and I cared for his parents the last 4 years of their lives . They were married 55 years and died 23 hours apart.
We never questioned if we’d care for our parents as it was the way we were raised. Both my husband and I came along late in our parents’ lives.
Thankfully, my employer allowed me to work from home and I realize not everyone has that opportunity.
 
Almost no one ever says a mumblin' word about the elephant in the living room - INFLATION. Which is GOVERNMENT POLICY.
Inflation is not controlled by the FedGov. (I know that you know this fact)

Inflation is the direct result of economic policies, practices and "procedures," that are decided/set according to the Federal Reserve and the international central banking system and their wants, wishes and desires.

The Federal Reserve is NOT an agency of our constitutionally defined Federal Government.

The Federal Reserve is a PRIVATELY OWNED corporation - that de facto controls inflation.


intothegoodnight
 

bobfall2005

Veteran Member
It is a ponzi scheme. What was collected has already been used to pay out to others. Your “pay in” that was collected was spent a long time ago.
This exactly the case.
It's in the hole around 11 billion an month.
Every dime of payment goes out to Ss checks.
 

billet

Veteran Member
I've been collecting since 2001 when I was 50 and had a serious accident. Of course it was SS/disability, which was a different slice out of the same pie that rolled over in straight up SS.
I think I've collected much more than I paid in.
 

Hfcomms

EN66iq
Any cola's will never, ever begin to keep up with inflation and that by design. John Williams from Shadowstats uses the criteria they used back in 1990 to measure inflation and he says we are already at 12% annual or more. So don't spend your 5.9% all in one place.
 

bobfall2005

Veteran Member
Personally, i don't care.

In socialism, the workers pay for the non workers.
Until you run out of other people's money.
 
These days many frail elderly people have outlived their families (families are smaller) also plenty of people in the "Good Old Days" simply starved to death (my Mom and Old As Dirt had a lot of stories along that line especially in the 1930s) and another major point was:

Not nearly as many people lived into advanced old age.

There were always a few people, once you get agriculture you will inevitably get the occasional Roman Senator or Egyptian pharaoh who lived to be 90 or 100. But most people passed away by around age 70 if they survived childhood and the issues of war and childbearing.

Some of this IS caused by societal changes both physical and legal, for example as recently as the Great Depression it was common for families to informally adopt fragile elders as an "auntie or and "uncle." But today if you tried that on any more symbolic basis, if you tried to move them into your spare room social services would like come to a knocking at your door.

The same is true with all the rules and regulations around organizations like churches or community groups providing informal charity, unless they want to build, fund, and comply with all legal mandates to open a nursing home, they can get into trouble very quickly.

I have had close friends nearly (or actually) arrested just distributing food to people (as recently as last week - a warning they were not arrested).

Again, with younger "old" people, if they are not disabled (like me) they can usually get some sort of income and work a doing something; if an employer will hire them. Some things could be modified but in the US are not (usually) for example in Europe Cashiers sit down, you do see people as old as 80 working in supermarkets. But then most people bag their own groceries, with one or two employees there to help people like me or the fragile elderly.

So this is a complex problem, but yeah a lot of people did end up either quietly starving in their home homes or essentially on blankets with tin cups. A lot MORE families were able to take in elders than can do so today, but only if they lived close by to start with.

We tend to view "the old days" through a misty lens that almost always makes "today" look terrible and the past look better. Humans have always done this, but it has gotten especially bad in the West as families shrank in size and little children didn't hear nearly as many "tales" from grandparents, great-grandparents, and grand-uncles/aunties as they used to about what it was REALLY like when they were a child.

But then our entire society seems to be heck bent on erasing all sense of history and the past, but this post is long enough without going into the consequences of that - you can see that all over the board with articles on everything from Woke to education.
Could not have articulated your response any better, Melodi.

In past times, our extended family, too, practiced all of what you mentioned.

My grandfather "took in" an single elderly Christian gentleman with no family, and who was in great health. He became the "farm hand" to manage things during the day, while my grandfather worked his regular job. Said elderly gentleman lived with the grandparents until he passed, at age 101. Grandparents took care of all arrangements.

One example from my childhood experiences - there are several other separate successful stories about caring for the elderly relatives/neighbors as they deeply aged, each resonating with your comments.

It Used To Be This Way®


intothegoodnight
 

Murt

Veteran Member
so if SS is getting a 5.9% COLA that means that inflation must be between 15 and 20% minimum

I could live on what I get and have lived on less but I have a job and intend to work it for a while longer if possible to position myself to be more comfortable in my Galtness
 

9idrr

Senior Member
Just remember, you're already that far behind and ain't never gonna catch up. You've already paid those prices throughout the year.
 

Elza

Veteran Member
It is a ponzi scheme. What was collected has already been used to pay out to others. Your “pay in” that was collected was spent a long time ago.
Actually it wasn't that way at it's inceptin in 1935. The idea was to collect, invest, and manage the money. Had they done so it would be more than solvent today. Instead they started stealing out of it immediately to finance the Lend/Lease operation. The account has been empty ever since.

The Civil Service Retirement Act went into effect at the same time. It, too, was based on 15%. Half from the gov and half from the employee. However it was written in such a way that the thieving politicians couldn't steal it blind like they did SS. When it was done away with in 1983 it had TONS of money in the account. (Which the politicians had been salivating over since it's inception. They couldn't steal from it while it was in operation so they did away with it and THEN stole the money that was left.) All that money was there and CSRA annuities were one HELL of lot better than SS ever thought of being.

It isn't the fault of the system. It was/is squarely the fault of the thieving politicians.
 

bobfall2005

Veteran Member
Actually it wasn't that way at it's inceptin in 1935. The idea was to collect, invest, and manage the money. Had they done so it would be more than solvent today. Instead they started stealing out of it immediately to finance the Lend/Lease operation. The account has been empty ever since.

The Civil Service Retirement Act went into effect at the same time. It, too, was based on 15%. Half from the gov and half from the employee. However it was written in such a way that the thieving politicians couldn't steal it blind like they did SS. When it was done away with in 1983 it had TONS of money in the account. (Which the politicians had been salivating over since it's inception. They couldn't steal from it while it was in operation so they did away with it and THEN stole the money that was left.) All that money was there and CSRA annuities were one HELL of lot better than SS ever thought of being.

It isn't the fault of the system. It was/is squarely the fault of the thieving politicians.
Would have
should have
could have.

Now, It's a Ponzi scheme.
 

jed turtle

a brother in the Lord
Er, what do you think the biological weapon/ vaccine is for? Your health? Hahaha. no really, don’t you make the connection yet? Sheesh. It is not rocket science, and YOU KNOW IT!

we have about two weeks to two months max to get ready to do , likely, the heaviest lifting/ decision-making that most of us have ever done. Call your family, call your friends and have an “all Hands On Deck” meeting with your most trusted and beloved. About : How do you help each other survive when the Collapse hits “like a tsunami”, the light bill goes unpaid, and every other ugly prediction comes true. Oh and when it hits, bite your tongue before you dryly tell them in a month, “ I told you so”...
let them remember somberly all on their own.
 

Kathy in FL

TB Fanatic
My husband’s parents cared for his maternal grandmother for the first 25 years of their marriage.
My husband and I cared for his parents the last 4 years of their lives . They were married 55 years and died 23 hours apart.
We never questioned if we’d care for our parents as it was the way we were raised. Both my husband and I came along late in our parents’ lives.
Thankfully, my employer allowed me to work from home and I realize not everyone has that opportunity.
My husband’s parents were older at his birth. His father died unexpectedly when hubby was 26. His mother was planning on moving in with us a few years later but died unexpectedly of colon cancer before she could. She was gone in 2 weeks. My parents were young when I was born, my mother still a teenager. It is just last year that we moved them lock, stock, and barrel into our former house a couple of houses down from us. Was it an adjustment? Yes. But it is the best they we could have done for them. Mom & Dad need me and I’m the oldest. I tread a fine line trying to help them maintain their independence but that’s the way life rolls. Hopefully my kids are learning something in the process.

Family isn’t something that just sort of happens accidentally. It is something you nurture and work hard at. Too damn many lazy people in this world that want an easy ride. Life is not meant to be easy. You don’t learn and grow when life is easy. You learn and grow by working at life.
 

John Deere Girl

Veteran Member
I'm so rich now Oregon dropped me from Medicaid. I have to pay the full Part B premium now. I will lose $100 out of last years monthly payment.


I doubt I will even get any health care at all.

I got screwed on my cataract surgery and the delays are 4 months now with brown turning the pure bloods into hitler's Juden.

I can't opt out of paying the part b either, even as they deny me health care et al as an unvacinated. :vik:

I will pay for zero health care I think. Brown's new mandate for health care workers takes effect on the 18th and my eye doctor quits 3 weeks later and is moving out of state. Kaiser fired 2000 non vacinated last week.
Can you sign up for VA healthcare?
 

anna43

Veteran Member
My grandmother took in her m-i-l and was mean as he!! to her. Great-grandmother was a very sweet old lady and even as a very young child I realized grandma was mean. She wouldn't let my sis and I in to see G-grandma but her bed was next to a window off the porch so we would go onto the porch and wave to her. So sometimes family isn't the best answer.

We took in my m-i-l for six months and it worked out okay. She went back home, had a fall, broke a hip that could not be mended and ended up spending her last six years in a nursing home. Both her physical and mental health improved at the nursing home and she made good friends and loved all the activities.

I offered for my mother to stay with me before she went into assisted living because my house is handicapped accessible. She absolutely would not consider it (which to be honest I knew she would do) and is still in assisted living at 100. She also likes all the social activities and there are only brief periods of time when she's free to "take phone calls." Ridiculous that a 100 year old lady has a more interesting social life than her dd.
 

summerthyme

Administrator
_______________
My wife and I could easily live on our Social Security.
Everyone I ever talked to expected SS to Be their retirement. It has only been in the last 5 to 10 years that anyone suggested that SS is somehow just supposed to "help" with retirement.
It was never meant to be more than essentially a subsistence living by itself.

Summerthyme
 

9idrr

Senior Member
My wife and I could easily live on our Social Security.
Everyone I ever talked to expected SS to Be their retirement. It has only been in the last 5 to 10 years that anyone suggested that SS is somehow just supposed to "help" with retirement.
It has been much longer than that that my yearly letters stated you should not plan on having SocSec as your only income for retirement. Even if the dot-gov hadn't told me that, I sure wasn't gonna throw myself on their tender mercies.
 

CaryC

Veteran Member
5.9%? Wait till next year. We haven't seen anything yet.
LOL next year ROFLOL next year. 5.9% is the average back to Sept of last year. If not Jan. Sept alone was over 8%. Just Sept was 8%+

Next year! That's a good one. I've already stolen 20guage's we're going to be rich, so don't be surprised if you start seeing that in my posts. LOL

No harm no foul intended, just poking at you.

Next year.
 

20Gauge

Has No Life - Lives on TB
Social Security COLA largest in decades as inflation jumps
By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR and CHRISTOPHER RUGABER18 minutes ago


This Tuesday, Oct. 12, 2021, photo shows a Social Security card in Tigard, Ore.  Millions of retirees on Social Security will get a 5.9% boost in benefits for 2022. The biggest cost-of-living adjustment in 39 years follows a burst in inflation as the economy struggles to shake off the drag of the coronavirus pandemic.  (AP Photo/Jenny Kane)

This Tuesday, Oct. 12, 2021, photo shows a Social Security card in Tigard, Ore. Millions of retirees on Social Security will get a 5.9% boost in benefits for 2022. The biggest cost-of-living adjustment in 39 years follows a burst in inflation as the economy struggles to shake off the drag of the coronavirus pandemic. (AP Photo/Jenny Kane)

WASHINGTON (AP) — Millions of retirees on Social Security will get a 5.9% boost in benefits for 2022. The biggest cost-of-living adjustment in 39 years follows a burst in inflation as the economy struggles to shake off the drag of the coronavirus pandemic.
The COLA, as it’s commonly called, amounts to $92 a month for the average retired worker, according to estimates released Wednesday by the Social Security Administration. That marks an abrupt break from a long lull in inflation that saw cost-of-living adjustments averaging just 1.65% a year over the last 10 years.

With the increase the estimated average Social Security payment for a retired worker will be $1,657 a month next year. A typical couple’s benefits would rise by $154 to $2,753 per month.

“It goes pretty quickly,” retiree Cliff Rumsey said of the cost-of-living increases he’s seen. After a career in sales for a leading steel manufacturer, Rumsey lives near Hilton Head Island, South Carolina. He cares at home for his wife of nearly 60 years, Judy, who has advanced Alzheimer’s disease. Since the coronavirus pandemic, Rumsey said he has noted price increases for food, wages paid to caregivers who occasionally spell him and personal care products for Judy, not to mention energy costs.
The COLA affects household budgets for about 1 in 5 Americans. That includes Social Security recipients, disabled veterans and federal retirees, nearly 70 million people in all. For baby boomers who embarked on retirement within the last 15 years, it will be the biggest increase they’ve seen.
“It’s going to be welcome,” said analyst Mary Johnson of the nonpartisan Senior Citizens League advocacy group. “But what we are hearing is that even with the COLA, buying power will still be eroded because price increases are still going up.”
Policymakers say the COLA was designed as a safeguard to protect Social Security benefits against the loss of purchasing power in an ever-changing economy, and not a pay bump for retirees. About half of seniors live in households where Social Security benefits provide at least 50% of their income, and one-quarter rely on their monthly payment for all or nearly all their earnings.

“Regardless of the size of the COLA, you never want to minimize the importance of the COLA,” said retirement policy expert Charles Blahous, a former public trustee helping to oversee Social Security and Medicare finances. “What people are able to purchase is very profoundly affected by the number that comes out. We are talking the necessities of living in many cases.”
This year’s Social Security trustees report amplified warnings about the long-range financial stability of the program, but there’s little talk about fixes in Congress with lawmakers’ attention consumed by President Joe Biden’s massive domestic agenda legislation and partisan machinations over the national debt. Social Security cannot be addressed through the budget reconciliation process Democrats are attempting to use to deliver Biden’s promises.
But Social Security’s turn will come, said Rep. John Larson, D-Conn., chairman of the House Social Security subcommittee and author of legislation to tackle looming shortfalls that would leave the program unable to pay full benefits in less than 15 years. His bill would raise payroll taxes while also changing the COLA formula to give more weight to health care expenses and other costs that weigh more heavily on the elderly. Larson said he intends to press ahead next year.
“This one-time shot of COLA is not the antidote,” he said.

Although Biden’s domestic package includes a major expansion of Medicare to cover dental, hearing and vision care, Larson said he hears from constituents that seniors are feeling neglected by the Democrats.
“In town halls and tele-town halls they’re saying, ‘We are really happy with what you did on the child tax credit, but what about us?’” Larson added. “In a midterm election, this is a very important constituency.”
The COLA is only one part of the annual financial equation for seniors. An announcement about Medicare’s Part B premium for outpatient care is expected soon. It’s usually an increase, so at least some of any Social Security raise goes for health care. The Part B premium is now $148.50 a month, and the Medicare trustees report estimated a $10 increase for 2022.
Economist Marilyn Moon, who also served as public trustee for Social Security and Medicare, said she believes the current spurt of inflation is an adjustment to highly unusual economic circumstances and the pattern of restraint on prices will reassert itself with time.
“I would think is going to be an increase this year that you won’t see reproduced in the future,” Moon said.

Policymakers should not delay getting to work on retirement programs.
“We’re at a point in time where people don’t react to policy needs until there is a sense of desperation, and both Social Security and Medicare are programs that benefit from long-range planning rather short-range machinations,” she said.

Posted for fair use
and in other news, the medical costs for SS will have a price increase of 7% next year.......
 

20Gauge

Has No Life - Lives on TB
LOL next year ROFLOL next year. 5.9% is the average back to Sept of last year. If not Jan. Sept alone was over 8%. Just Sept was 8%+

Next year! That's a good one. I've already stolen 20guage's we're going to be rich, so don't be surprised if you start seeing that in my posts. LOL

No harm no foul intended, just poking at you.

Next year.
I understand. The being "rich" was a joke, but sadly it is becoming true very quickly.....
 

Quiet Man

Nothing unreal exists
I understand. The being "rich" was a joke, but sadly it is becoming true very quickly.....
Ya... We'll have lots of dollars (unless they are 'bailed-in'), but they will buy very little. Perhaps cash will rise in purchasing power (even a lot) after the system dies, and before the next unit of exchange is established.
 

20Gauge

Has No Life - Lives on TB
Ya... We'll have lots of dollars (unless they are 'bailed-in'), but they will buy very little. Perhaps cash will rise in value after the system dies, and before the next unit of exchange is established.
Who really knows. I am betting on silver to get me through
 

Melodi

Disaster Cat
Hmm...somehow, my recollection has been exactly the opposite.

Back when SS first came into existence, it was "pin money", a little bit to help out the extended family or to supplement savings/investments/part-time work and never intended to be sole support for the elder population, like so many fantasize that it is today.
I think this totally depended on the social-economic level of the family/recipients, for retired sharecroppers or other folks who had very low incomes (no matter how hard-working) during their working lives, Social Security WAS their retirement income.

For people even slightly up the scale who were able to save some money (it didn't all go just for rent, food, heat, and taxes) they tended to have social security as a supplemental income to their pension from the factory or other job (and many "good" jobs had some sort of pension either from the employer or sometimes the union).

I saw (and filed away) some of the original documentation for Social Security from the 1930s and originally it was "only" for "widows and orphans" but soon expanded.

On paper, it was always supposed to be a "supplemental income" but for many who retired during and just after the Great Depression, it WAS their retirement because they had lost everything and were too old (and often disabled) to earn any extra.

So there was a nice legal fiction that the Congress Critters could "comfort" themselves with that the money didn't really need to be enough to live on because it wasn't intended to be lived on - except it was. Not always very well, but for many then and now, it is what they have and if they are really too old or disabled to work, that IS their reality.

Pretending it isn't "supposed" to be that way won't change things, though it could make a lot more older people end up in much more expensive (to the taxpayer) nursing homes or specialized public housing if the situation is totally ignored.
 
Top