----- Original Message ----- From: "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 4:52 AM Subject: Re: Social Security
> On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 11:52:13PM -0600, Dan Minette wrote: > > > I've got a few facts and observations thrown in. First of all, Social > > Security is set up like a mix between a safety net for senior citizens > > and an old fashioned pension that is calculated as a function of one's > > last 5 years of salary. There is a variable rate of yearly benefits > > per dollar of yearly salary. The rate of marginal return is > > > <1.2k 0% > > 1.2k-7k 73% > > 7k-10k 60% > > 10k-55k 26% > > >55k 12% > > > > > As a result, a 55 year old making 10k/year when they (and > > corresponding yearly adjusted amounts in previous and subsequent > > years) would receive 6972/year when they retired at 66. But, the > > difference between someone who makes 60k/year and 70k/year is only > > 1224/year. > > Do you have a cite? Your method of calculation is quite a bit different > than what is currently used. My source was: http://www.ssa.gov/planners/calculators.htm I just plugged in a bunch of yearly saleries and obtained a graph. I used the simplest calculator, so the assumptions about income in previous and past years may have influenced me. I appreciate your cite, and I'll run the numbers through the calculator to see if I can quantify discrepencies...but I bet that's the source of the difference. Also, the Diamond-Orszag Social Security Plan that is discussed qualifies, in my book, as a modest tweak of the present system. Dan M. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
