Soc.Sec: only two people for every senior crapola

[donsu]

the bushgang keeps saying only two people pay for every senior and it used to be 14 for each senior.

so they are saying the population of america is decreasing? that so many "baby boomers" will retire that only two americans will be left to pay for one senior.

I can't believe this.

where are the stats on this? who made up the stats? isn't the population of america going up all the time?

(and all the illegals with made-up papers have SS taken from their pay which they will never claim.)

two and two is not coming up four.

[TahitiNut]

1. In December 2003, 39,443,023 people received OASI benefits.

That number includes retired workers, survivors, and dependents.

The number of workers contributing to OASI at that time was about 148 million. That's about a 3.7::1 ratio.

[donsu]

3. is the population of america growing or not?

nt

[TahitiNut]

8. Yes, but the number of payroll workers is NOT.

As you can see, Bush Pere et Fils have been very good at wiping out American jobs. They've been the most vicious assassins in the class war on the working class.

[TahitiNut]

9. How to LIE with statistics.

In the earliest days of Social Security, the only beneficiaries were retired workers themselves, and only those who "qualified." Today, the beneficiaries of Social Security include:

Retired workers & dependents (covered under "Old Age" provisions)

• Retired worker
  
• Spouse of retired worker
  
• Child of retired worker

Survivors (covered under "Survivors" provisions)

• Child of deceased worker
  
• Aged widow(er)
  
• Young widow(er) with child in care
  
• Disabled widow(er)
  
• Parent of deceased worker

Disabled workers & dependents (covered under "Disability" provisions)

• Disabled worker
  
• Spouse of disabled worker
  
• Child of disabled worker

This is why, at a minimum, it's important to be specific about which part of OASDI (Old Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance) is being discussed.

So, when we examine a single month (December 2003) and query the Social Security site for the number of beneficiaries of each kind, we get:

32,686,172 Retired workers & dependents

• 29,585,732 Retired workers
  
• 2,612,960 Spouses of retired workers
  
• 487,480 Children of retired workers

6,828,320 Survivors

• 1,901,340 Children of deceased workers
  
• 4,518,380 Aged widow(er)s
  
• 191,320 Young widow(er)s with child in care
  
• 215,360 Disabled widow(er)s
  
• 1,920 Parents of deceased workers

7,619,911 Disabled workers & dependents

• 5,873,411 Disabled workers
  
• 150,420 Spouses of disabled workers
  
• 1,596,080 Children of disabled workers

Now, the number of workers in the Social Security payroll base in 2003 was 147,722,000. Using these numbers, you can claim damned near any ratio you'd want.



Note: All the above, and much more, can be obtained at http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/ProgData/benefits.html

[FrannyD]

2. jobs

Maybe statistic is based on the assumption only 2 out of 10 Americans will be holding a decent job. For every job outsourced = Less revenue. Continued outsourcing is unsustainable not SS.

[ArkDem]

4. Take a gander...

http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~stephan/Animation/pyramid.html

[donsu]

5. thanks for the link - I gandered and see we are constantly growing

in population

[ArkDem]

10. the overall percentage of elderly is GREATLY increasing,

as well. The graph goes from a pyramid with the elderly at the top to a virtual square. It basically disproves your theory.

[whistle]

6. It's bullshit... 135 million U.S. workers today and less than....

...30 million collect social security benefits. Also, there is well over $1.8 trillion in SS surpluses (albeit, these are in Federal IOUs) and that surplus will continue to grow through 2018 to 2021. It's total bullshit. Bush wants a way to pay the tax cuts to the rich, so looting social security is his answer. Thus, he and others of the republican party will tell whatever bullshit and lies they can to achieve that tax cut.

[DinahMoeHum]

7. You should also consider salaries of workers in the past

compared to now.

Used to be, say, you needed 10 workers at $14K/year to pay for every SS recipient.

Now, it only takes 4 workers at $35K/year or 2 workers at $70K/year
to pay for every SS recipient.

Got it?


:shrug:

[markus]

11. Lie

When the system was first started, there were about 14-1. Ever since the late 1950s/early 1960s, we have been at two-point-some-odd payers for every payee.

This is from the Social Security web site. I forgot to book mark it, then gave away the chart to a local newspaper reporter who was at a Save Social Security event.

But it shouldn't be hard to find again.