Would the Social Security deficit be helped by people taking early retirement at age 60 instead of waiting 62?

[Banker]

Dennis Kucinich, D-Oh has suggested a million people be allowed to take early retirement at age 60 instead of waiting for age 62, creating a million new jobs. What would that program do to the deficit of the Social Security Administration?
Small short term Increase in their deficit or Big long term decrease in their deficit?

[Curfo]

What's the incentive for early retirement? Would they get the same benefits? If so, you are just putting people on the dole 2 years earlier, increasing the amount of SS paid out. If they don't get the same benefits, who would do it?

[smalllake676]

Hello ,

Nope . We will need about 5 more generations to begin to fix the Social Security Benifit Monthly Income gig .

[mswnana]

You cannot take retirement until 62 unless they change the rules. I do not see how that would help Social Security at all with more people drawing Social Security from the government, even if it meant more people had jobs.

[Your conscience]

it would have a negative effect in the short term, most businesses are not refilling the positions being emptied by the ones retiring and most companies are unwilling to train new people. the ones that do get replaced would take 5+ years to get the same pay scale as the leaving so the taxes are not being replaced at the same rate they would be taken. any party can play what ever sideline game they want, the fact is the baby boomers are a large group and they are going to tear down the system when enough of them retire, as long as the baby boomers kids are to busy bitching about non esential legislation and getting a real job the problems just going to get worse. man i'm glad I'm not apart of social security, you guys are fucked.

[ICQ 378838358]

It would create jobs but the SS is prdicted to go broke in 18 years. I guess those know it all in Congress cant figure taking the lid off the 90,000 a person pays into and make it unlimited so movie stars and sports figs such as A Rod, Tiger etc would pay more. They arent going to starve.

[witz1960]

There is a government program (Social Security) that is a gian Ponzi scheme and set to fall apart in a few years and you want to put more people on the receiving benefits side of the ledger sooner. That will just draw down the reserves of SS sooner.

The assumption that new workers will automatically step in has at least two flaws. 1) Most businesses will use this coerced attrition to reduce payroll costs 2) Even those who are lucky enough to be the replacement workers will not be paying nearly as much into the scheme (er.. system) as those that they are replacing.

That idea sounds like it was created by a pinhead.

When businesses and entrepenuerial spirit have more certainty about the future intrusions of the government along with lowered costs and regulations, more investment in jobs will be made.

[gosam777]

Really wouldn't have any effect. When social security was 1st created, people were not living into their 90's on a regular basis, as today. . The population also hasn't kept pace with producing younger workers to support older workers. At one time, there were 4-5 younger workers supporting every retired person. Now we are down to 3-4 younger per older. Eventually there will 2-3 workers for every person receiving SS.

In addition, in the past, as payroll tax revenues came in from the working class, they went back out to retirees. There were surpluses that were placed in intragovernmental holdings. They were placed in Special Treasury securities which was money the government borrowed from, just like all Treasury securities. And the money is borrowed at little or near no interest. So the investment isn't growing

Many people over 50, are working for the medical insurance benefit. And will not retire early to collect the SS, while losing insurance coverage. Many also are not willing to take the age 62 early retirement at a much reduced payout, rather then waiting until age 66. And 2 years (60 or 62) isn't going to change that.

[Glen]

There's some positives and negatives on both sides. Is the amount you are going to collect on SS really that much that you'd go early at 60? You might be just handing it to people who have enough money to retire at 60 anyway. I'd say that the current economic climate and fall in the stock market has people at that age a bit worried about going early. It's a zero sum game on job creation. We need actual "additional" jobs, more than we need people exiting existing jobs and replacing them. Good question though.

[prusa1237]

Currently Social Security is running a deficit, years ahead of time. More early retirements will only exasperate that.