Pay me now or pay me later.
-
So this would go to people who were not yet eligible to collect, possibly for many years? I did not get that understanding.
So it results in another government program we have to administer for decades. What could go wrong? Ever see a government program that didn't grow? I can see the whole country borrowing against future SS.
-
@jon-nyc said in Pay me now or pay me later.:
I think most people would take that. 3 months delay in your 60s sounds trivial to your average 20-50 year old.
Good point. A dollar now is probably worth a lot more than a dollar 30 years hence.
@George-K said in Pay me now or pay me later.:
@jon-nyc said in Pay me now or pay me later.:
I think most people would take that. 3 months delay in your 60s sounds trivial to your average 20-50 year old.
Good point. A dollar now is probably worth a lot more than a dollar 30 years hence.
Social Security is adjusted for inflation.
Supposedly.
-
@George-K said in Pay me now or pay me later.:
@jon-nyc said in Pay me now or pay me later.:
I think most people would take that. 3 months delay in your 60s sounds trivial to your average 20-50 year old.
Good point. A dollar now is probably worth a lot more than a dollar 30 years hence.
Social Security is adjusted for inflation.
Supposedly.
@Jolly said in Pay me now or pay me later.:
@George-K said in Pay me now or pay me later.:
@jon-nyc said in Pay me now or pay me later.:
I think most people would take that. 3 months delay in your 60s sounds trivial to your average 20-50 year old.
Good point. A dollar now is probably worth a lot more than a dollar 30 years hence.
Social Security is adjusted for inflation.
Supposedly.
I realize that, of course. The point Jon was making, I believe, is that $5000 is much more valuable to a 35 year old today than the equivalent inflation-adjusted amount 30 years later.
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
Personally, I like the idea so long as it doesn’t open Pandora’s Box and become something that happens for every perceived emergency.
It’s better than the fed printing money and devaluing your retirement savings through inflation.
-
@Jolly said in Pay me now or pay me later.:
@George-K said in Pay me now or pay me later.:
@jon-nyc said in Pay me now or pay me later.:
I think most people would take that. 3 months delay in your 60s sounds trivial to your average 20-50 year old.
Good point. A dollar now is probably worth a lot more than a dollar 30 years hence.
Social Security is adjusted for inflation.
Supposedly.
I realize that, of course. The point Jon was making, I believe, is that $5000 is much more valuable to a 35 year old today than the equivalent inflation-adjusted amount 30 years later.
@George-K said in Pay me now or pay me later.:
@Jolly said in Pay me now or pay me later.:
@George-K said in Pay me now or pay me later.:
@jon-nyc said in Pay me now or pay me later.:
I think most people would take that. 3 months delay in your 60s sounds trivial to your average 20-50 year old.
Good point. A dollar now is probably worth a lot more than a dollar 30 years hence.
Social Security is adjusted for inflation.
Supposedly.
I realize that, of course. The point Jon was making, I believe, is that $5000 is much more valuable to a 35 year old today than the equivalent inflation-adjusted amount 30 years later.
Depends on the H&B (Hookers & Blow) Index.
-
@Copper said in Pay me now or pay me later.:
3 months of my SS is a lot more than $5K, my wife too.
It's a not a guaranteed full 3 months that is the max it would take to repay. If you make more than that, it will get paid back faster than 3 months.
-
If you have high time preference or a low life expectancy it makes sense.
Or if you think it’ll be worth more invested in something
-
Similar proposal reviewed but rejected by the White House:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/05/10/top-white-house-advisers-unlike-their-boss-increasingly-worry-stimulus-spending-is-costing-too-much/"...
Senior administration officials have discussed the “Eagle Plan,” a 29-page memo that called for an overhaul of federal retirement programs in exchange for upfront payments to some workers, but the White House has already rejected it, according to three administration officials. ...The proposal calls for giving Americans $10,000 upfront in exchange for curbing their federal retirement benefits, such as Social Security, the report says. ...
The plan’s first page says it was written by Paul Touw, chief strategy officer to U.S. State Department undersecretary Keith Krach, whose responsibilities do not include creating domestic policy. ..."
Why the State Department proposed a plan that deals with Social Security?
That is a mystery. :man-shrugging: -
5K vs 10K and the verbiage "curbing Social Security"? Yeah, that's a non-starter.
-
In recent years there have been right-of-center proposals for doing similar things to provide parental leave and care leave. Draw for a few months when you need it, start SS a bit later. Somewhat analogous to borrowing against your 401k.
-
In recent years there have been right-of-center proposals for doing similar things to provide parental leave and care leave. Draw for a few months when you need it, start SS a bit later. Somewhat analogous to borrowing against your 401k.
