From: "Robert Comer" 

> Really? I thought SS depended on age at retirement when it came to
> figuring benefits.

Partially, but it's also based on how much you pay into it too.

- Bob Comer


"Jeff Shultz"  wrote in message
news:pan.2004.12.14.06.35.27.169683{at}shultzinfosystems.com...
> On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 20:55:04 -0500, Geo wrote:
>
>> "Jeff Shultz"  wrote in message
>> news:pan.2004.12.13.15.12.24.60949{at}shultzinfosystems.com...
>>> On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 07:15:30 -0500, Robert Comer wrote:
>>>
>>> > What about us that it's further out (20-30 years), but
not further out
>>> > enough to have the social security private account get funded
>>> > enough...
>>> >
>>> > - Bob Comer
>>> >
>>> >
>>> I don't know about your social security benefits, but if you don't have
>>> some private retirement account set up by this point you are
>>> irresponsibly screwing yourself.
>>>
>>> And I don't believe it's the government's responsibility to protect you
>>> from the fruits of your irresponsibility.
>>>
>>> SS was designed aa retirement augmentation, not a full-blown pension.
>>
>> So is it wrong to count on getting something for all the money you invest
>> in SS?
>
>
> Count on? I don't even count on waking up in the morning.
>
>> SS is sort of like college tuition, everyone tells you that you need to
>> save for your kids college but if you do then what happens is the college
>> charges you more for tuition, you gain nothing unless you are so well off
>> that the cost is trivial anyway. Well SS is sort of like that, the better
>> off you are earning wise at retirement the less return you get on your SS
>> contribution.
>>
> Really? I thought SS depended on age at retirement when it came to
> figuring benefits.
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5