How unfair is Social Security going to be on the coming generations? Here’s a report being highlighted by CNN that’s worth looking at:
A couple who each earned the average wage during their careers and retired in 1990 would have paid $316,000 in Social Security taxes, but collected $436,000 in benefits, according to data crunched by Eugene Steuerle, an economist at the Urban Institute.Had that couple turned 65 in 2010, however, they would have paid $600,000 in taxes, but could expect to collect just $579,000. This is the first time in the program’s history that taxes outweighed benefits for this group, a couple with average earnings.The imbalance will get more pronounced for future generations of retirees. Couples now in their early 40s will have forked over $808,000 in Social Security taxes by the time they retire, but get back only $703,000 in benefits.
And with all that, the system is still not on sound footing.Most of our readers are aware that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme not a savings program, that the vaunted trust fund is an accounting mirage, and that nothing much is being done about it by anyone. But sometimes it takes some concrete numbers to properly get your head around what’s really going on.