r/benshapiro • u/EfficiencySoft1545 • Mar 13 '24
Thoughts on Ben's view of social security and retirement? Ben Shapiro Show
Here is the clip from his show where he talks about raising the retirement age, in addition to asking why someone would want to retire: https://twitter.com/JasonSCampbell/status/1767578501505298793
Relevant tweet clarifying his position: https://twitter.com/benshapiro/status/1767906550683705769
Seems to me that he's right, the retirement age has to be raised in order for social security to not collapse entirely. Though it seems to me his point on retirement is a bit short sighted.
19
u/PMarkWMU Mar 13 '24
Im a fan of Ben but hes painting with a broad brush, "everyone I know who retires is dead in 5 years". While this does happen, this isnt true for most. I sure a hell dont want to work all my life and their are plenty of things to do after retirement. Does ben think that those who work physically demanding jobs still work in their elder years?
5
u/JoRo86 Mar 13 '24
I think he means you still do something, even if it's not actual "work." Like a side job or hobby you could do for fun or make a little money with. I love the idea now of being able to sit home all day and play video games, but when the reality hits, I don't know how long that would actually be fulfilling and healthy for me.
No matter how you look at what a person does after retirement, it doesn't change the fact that social security is essentially doomed and anyone who currently pays into it is screwed. We are going to see the highest taxes of our lives or the programs will have to be cut entirely or modified with an increased retirement age. There's no other way out of it but through it.
1
u/PMarkWMU Mar 13 '24
I’m not sure. He should have said that. I work to live. Agreed, once retire I can spend time doing a fun job(not one for financial gain), hobbies, golf, and video games(just not solely). It’s the people that live to work or have nothing else in their lives that need to keep working.
Agreed.
3
u/JoRo86 Mar 14 '24
Well, he basically did. He said if you're a brick layer your whole life, he wouldn't expect you to continue to do that. (He said this on today's show). And that's not to say, work is the only thing that gives purpose. I know he doesn't believe that from listening to him everyday. He stresses family, faith, and work altogether help create a well-rounded, purposeful life.
31
u/Savant_Guarde Mar 13 '24 edited Mar 13 '24
Disagree completely.
No one is forced to retire at any age, so if you want to work until your 109, knock yourself out
Lose your purpose in life? Please, if your job is your "purpose", refer to number 1 above.
SSI is being used on all sorts of people that it was never meant to be used on.
Congress steals the money; there is no trust fund, it is literally the definition of a ponzi scheme.
Eliminate numbers 3 and 4 and SSI might actually be solvent.
So people that are 60 ±/- right now and are planning to retire soon, get screwed because idiots that can't balance a check book waste their money? Justify the 2 decades of deficit spending and 1T in new debt every 100 days
For most of us, SSI is just another unjustified tax.
Imagine if everyone invested their SSI contributions in index funds...EVERYONE, even minimum wage earners would be MILLIONAIRES at retirement. Instead, most of us who contributed won't see a dime, while a large number currently drawing SSI never contributed at all.
The current system of government is not sustainable and fking over those that contributed to SSI is bllsht.
17
u/NA_1983 Mar 13 '24
On point #8: Didn’t GW Bush bring up privatizing SSI 20+ years ago and get absolutely hammered on the proposal? I feel like that’s the only way this program can work moving into the future.
6
u/Savant_Guarde Mar 13 '24
Yes and he got hammered because the leftist media fear mongered older folks into believing they would be stripped of benefits etc.
The math doesn't lie. From the inception of this disaster known as social security, anyone investing in the stock market for their working life would be better off than on SSI.
Leftists can't stand independence.
2
u/ZookeepergameLiving1 Mar 22 '24
It not they not that can't stand independence, it's that if that were an option, their gravey train would end.
3
u/Ok-Tooth-6197 Mar 13 '24
Nobody is saying we should immediately raise the retirement age for everyone. It was raised once before, and any adjustment would be handled in exactly the same way. It wouldn't start kicking in until the people who are like 40 or less right now are ready to retire, so they will have time to plan accordingly. Nobody who is 60+ will see any changes.
4
u/Savant_Guarde Mar 13 '24
Thank you for adding that. I knew it would be a graduated system, but my post was more broad.👍
2
u/WhippersnapperUT99 Liberal Conservative Mar 15 '24
Imagine if everyone invested their SSI contributions in index funds...EVERYONE, even minimum wage earners would be MILLIONAIRES at retirement.
I've given this some thought, but I wonder what the practical effect of that would be. As money flowed into the index funds, the funds would be purchasing shares of companies using money that had not previously been in the market, increasing the price-to-earnings ratios of all the funds potentially to the point where purchasing them no longer makes good investment sense.
Sadly, the stock market is not a magical money making machine that provides a high return-on-investment for every dollar invested. It seems like in order for this to work and produce monetary value for everyone in society, that the money would have to be invested in such a way that it produced productivity increases.
That having been said, it would probably work much better for retirees than our current Social Security system.
10
u/Cococino Mar 13 '24
Some of it is right, some of it is psychotic. Overall, not a reasonable position, and one that's extremely difficult to sell.
Reform the system, maybe change what social security does and introduce new programs that help people manage their own finances. Tell people this is better because you're going to come out ahead, and not have to scrimp by to deal with inflation on things like power and groceries. I think everyone acknowledges that spending and population issues are effecting the program's ability to exist, so sure, go ahead explain how SSI is a ponzi scheme, but bring something new and better to the table to phase it out.
Raising the eligibility age for social security is psychotic, and that was the biggest part of his argument. Some people got to sit down in a call center or office for most of their lives, and their labor consisted of being nice to people on the phone, or typing data on a keyboard. Some people get their spine jostled by heavy machinery for 40 years or get exposed to 1000 times the carcinogens through their work. The average lifespan of most people in America is around 76, the average lifespan of a logger is 50, so when we're considering averages, think about the outliers that effect them.
Overall, I think Ben's position is not defensible. It's easy to see where he's coming from, but where he went was the wrong answer. I think the only people who would support these ideas are people who are confident they have a handle on their finances and ability to retire comfortably with or without social security, and at a time where we have an expanding lower class and shrinking middle class, that is becoming a slimmer and slimmer minority.
4
Mar 13 '24
The system needs an overhaul for sustainability, but right now the big shiny promise Uncle Sam has made to every single taxpayer is if they can make it to retirement the country will help take care of them until they bite the bullet. You can't claim you're raising the age of retirement because "modern medicine means more of you will live longer." That's bs because that medicine costs a lot of money and guess who is paying for it? I also have a major problem because if someone makes 6 figures around 30 years old, they'll be paying 25k+ per year into Uncle Sam's pockets. Assuming they hit 65 they would have paid over 900k into the system. Assuming you get 34k in benefits per year you'd need to live at least 26 years to get more then the money you put into the system via federal income tax.
The reality is we need to start cutting unnecessary spending right now. Foreign wars, loan forgiveness, migrants, many social programs that are basically handouts need to go. The money collected needs to managed, not spent. Until people are ready to have adult conversations about that we will remain in a stagnant state of being screwed.
6
u/Idiotsandcheapskate Mar 13 '24
I am a nurse, working at the hospital. I agree with Ben's position in principle. But that position is just not compatible with modern day realities of America. Have you seen a 70 year old? Vast majority of them are sick AF, I'm saying this as a nurse. Heart failure, severe COPD, diabetes running wild, severe arthritis, atrial fibrillation galore. Those people ain't working nowhere, they are barely moving in fact. Half of them peeing their pants. Health realities in our society are horrifying. And it will only get worse now that 2/3 of people are obese.
3
u/AUorAG Mar 13 '24
SS is not an entitlement, it is a benefit we pay for our entire working life.
The issue is that the government has borrowed from SS to pay for other boondoggles and now it’s operating as a pyramid scheme.
Any changes to SS must also make the money untouchable for any other items other than paying benefits to those who paid in and their survivors.
10
u/Darmonevil Mar 13 '24
Prior to Henry Ford creating a 40 hour a week job concept, people worked 100+ hours a week until they fell over dead. Retirement is a nice luxury that can only be given to individuals in a society where there has been a massive support system erected by the blood, sweat, and tears of others.
The thing people seem to think everyone deserves retirement. Every day that a retired person lives requires that everyone still working support them. I wasn't shocked when Ben said that retirement was a crazy concept. In my mind, the retirement age should be the current life expectancy minus 5-10 years. The system should be able to handle that.
3
u/EdibleMrpants Mar 13 '24
The current life expectancy is 77. If people retire at 62 that’s 15 years of not working.
2
u/WhippersnapperUT99 Liberal Conservative Mar 15 '24
The way SS is currently structured to pay out, if you retire at 62 and then die at 77, the total amount of SS payments received might not be any different than having retired at 65 or 67 and then dying at 77. You get a larger monthly payout the later you retire. There are all sorts of calculators on the Internet to help people estimate when it would be best to start collecting SS.
3
u/CJ4700 Mar 13 '24
Go look at how much you pay into SS over a lifetime and how much a retired person actually collects, it’s less than 10%. The issue is people on social security disability who should be working sucking up decades of benefits not retirees who pay in their entire lives.
2
u/Darmonevil Mar 13 '24
The issue is, the system is top heavy due to the number of people currently receiving benefits. I get what you are saying but we need more people paying in to get to a point where the system can pay out what you put in.
Originally, the pay in amount was based on you dying shortly after retiring... not 20 years later.
1
6
u/tensigh Mar 13 '24
When I was in high school in the late 80s, the main idea was that SS wouldn't be around when I retire. I'm about 15 years away.
It will be there but it won't be much.
5
u/Flaky_Bench6793 Mar 13 '24 edited Mar 13 '24
The same idea is true today. No one actually expects to “retire” on social security alone. Young people know this as well as our grandparents that are currently getting social security. My grandmother (97 now) worked a part time job from like ages 67-74. First at Sears then a position working for her church. She also gets a pension or something from the Army for granddaddy’s service in WW2. And the entire family buys all the big things for her — iPad, iPhone, major car repairs.
I don’t know why everyone here is pretending social security is enough to live on. It’s not and hasn’t been for , what 40 years? More?
I’ll tell you what social security does though— gives you a little bit of slack, so you can slow down. A little.
10
u/CJ4700 Mar 13 '24
Ben has never worked a physical job a day in his life, that’s why he’s okay saying this. Go meet a rancher or contractor, your body doesn’t last forever and if you value family you should want your grandparents to retire someday and have time with their grandkids.
Ben reads word to a camera for a living. Stop funding every bullshit war and handing out cash to countries like Israel with free healthcare and college and we can support SS just fine.
6
2
u/garciaman Mar 13 '24
Oh fuck here we go.
So an accountant thats worked for 50 years isnt qualified for retirement because its not physical? Foh clown.
1
u/hey_im_paul Mar 24 '24
Don’t fight each other. Redirect that energy.
We all should be able to retire. Construction / physical labor is much harder than sitting in a chair though. It should make sense to retire earlier with a more physically demanding job but in reality it’s the exact opposite due to economic factors.
But fuck Ben & his trust fund baby ideas.
2
u/RlyNotYourBroker Mar 13 '24
two things:
Ben wrote on twitter that he supports a phase out (in? - whatever you want to call it) option. So if you are 64 for instance, you would get full benefits, I'm sure even if you were 50+ he would be cool with you getting full benefits, but below that it would phase you out, so maybe you get back some of what you paid in, or you wouldn't be able to collect SS until like 75 or something like that, which I also support.
As far as "Ben has never worked a physical job a day in his life" I don't understand this argument..? I get it from a "your body breaks down" point of view, but he said in that clip that was posted that you shouldn't retire unless you have a medical condition, which a bad back I'm sure he would agree is a medical condition as to why you should retire. but don't forget, ranchers and contractors can open up retirement accounts. why is it that I should pay into social security so some guy who only casually saved for retirement and maybe has a small nest egg can get $2000/month?
My second biggest issue aside from social security being a massive boondoggle that will either bankrupt the country or go insolvent is that people forget that citizens of this country are fee to save for their own retirement, and no - I don't buy that you just "couldn't find a stable job" for all 45 years of your working life and never got the opportunity to save.
5
u/Internal-Grocery-244 Mar 13 '24
As far as "Ben has never worked a physical job a day in his life" I don't understand this argument..? I get it from a "your body breaks down" point of view, but he said in that clip that was posted that you shouldn't retire unless you have a medical condition, which a bad back I'm sure he would agree is a medical condition as to why you should retire.
So according to Ben you have to work yourself into a medical retirement instead of retiring before your body breaks down. Most manual labor workers don't get to be promoted to a management position.
0
u/RlyNotYourBroker Mar 13 '24
Again brother, this essentially assumes that people have no way of saving for retirement themselves which is just not true. I don't think Ben meant that people should legit "never retire" I think he meant you should never retire just to milk off the govt teet. I can pretty much guarantee he has no issue with people who have a 401k or IRA retiring whenever they want and drawing from that.
4
u/Internal-Grocery-244 Mar 13 '24
No your giving him too much grace. In his newest episode he pretty much explains that retirement itself isn't good. Yes he does say that you should invest and all that which I think most people agree with but he says that people lose their passion and decline after retiring so they shouldn't retire.
1
u/RlyNotYourBroker Mar 13 '24
I haven't had time to watch the episode today, but he explains on twitter his stances better, I'm about to post a standalone screenshot of it but he says "if you can afford to retire, do what you want" so I was spot on.
2
u/Internal-Grocery-244 Mar 13 '24
I'll take a look at it. I wish he was more clear on his stances. I feel he forgets what he says sometimes. Seems a little back tracky.
1
3
u/CJ4700 Mar 13 '24
Ben will complain about poor spending habits and how inefficient SS is but he’ll never suggest we stop spending billions bailing out countries like Israel or Ukraine. We could easily support SS at this current rate by spending smarter and not wasting trillions on pointless wars in the Middle East.
Retirees pay into SS for decades, that money they draw out is their money, not yours. And if you look at how much a person pays into SS compared to how much they’ll receive after retiring it’s not even 20%.
3
u/RlyNotYourBroker Mar 13 '24
going from bottom to top:
if the money is theirs, not mine, then why don't I just keep it them and put it in my own retirement account..?
I agree, we could support SS by getting rid of a bunch of things - which I think we should cut the government. But you and I have a fundamental disagreement behind the principle of SS. I think it straight up shouldn't exist, and that you let American people invest in their future on their own and if they don't want to do that then they live with those choices they made?
Also, what if I die before getting social security? the government isn't paying out my family what I would have received in social security? at least if I have an IRA, they can inherit that.
2
u/EfficiencySoft1545 Mar 13 '24
I don't take issue with Ben's argument on social security.
It seems short sighted that he would question why anyone would want to retire, barring health issues.
He clearly is paid a lot of money for his work and probably has a good work/life balance. For a lot of people, that isn't the case.
2
1
u/RlyNotYourBroker Mar 13 '24
I will have to listen to his show today but I believe what he meant (and I could be wrong) is that you shouldn't retire at 65 if you can still work if your only real savings is a social security check. I can pretty much guarantee he has no issue with you retiring if you have a 401k you're drawing from, thats your money. The issue is, I'm paying more into SS than I will ever get back, and that goes for him too, and most people and it shouldn't be like that. Let people keep their money and make their decisions and if they have no retirement at 80 than oh well, not my job to help them. Their family can or they can find a job.
I think you agree with me, but it's not immoral to tell people that if they had no sense of personal responsibility and constantly made decisions for 45 years that bounced them from job to job with no sort of retirement, that I don't owe you a check every month just for being.
2
u/EfficiencySoft1545 Mar 13 '24
I agree with you on SS.
Ben made a response today and he played a portion of his show from yesterday: https://twitter.com/benshapiro/status/1767929429542502644
He is questioning why someone would want to retire at 65 regardless of whether they can or can't afford it.
For highly skilled workers where it would be worth it to continue working and enjoy pay plus other benefits, I understand where he's coming from. But for a lot of blue collar work, work isn't as fulfilling an I think Ben isn't considering those type of people. He's considering the people in his own circle who are well educated, high paid, and have good work/life balance.
2
u/nocticis Mar 13 '24
This. SS biggest issue is no one saves. 100% he’d be fine if someone retired at 65 if they have their own Roth and or 401K. Or issue today is a lack of discipline. Most Americans live above their means with cars houses things they can’t afford. Save 25% of what you make in 401K, Roth and HSA, live on less than you make and be happy with yours.
0
Mar 13 '24
You forgot to factor in one thing buddy, Ben is a grifter who showed his true colors and morons like you are eating it up. Jesus Christ. I really can’t get anymore on the nose by calling you a boot licker.
1
2
u/PassiveIllustration Mar 13 '24
I'm just going to talk about the retirement part, skipping the fiscal part because I mostly agree. I think that idea is just crazy and is only true for people who live to work. I found a career that pays well and is fine but if tomorrow I won the lottery I'm not going to continue working because my passions in life are not through work and I care so much about stuff outside of work. My work supports my life outside work which is why I save for retirement because I don't want to spend the rest of life working. I think it's healthy to have those passions and hobbies else outside of a family what are you working towards?
I sort of understand what he's saying, with my grandparents, both my grandmothers haven't worked in 25+ years but have things unrelated to work that they care and are passionate about. My grandfather's who are both dead never found purpose outside of work and taking care of a family and it was sad but they should have found something in their life.
He also says everyone he knows who retires is dead within 5 years which is so untrue when the average retirement age in the US is 62-65 and the average life expectancy is around 77. So people are living closer to 10-15 years.
2
u/BeeComposite Mar 13 '24
Agree with him that the current system sucks and that people aren’t willing to really plan their future.
Completely disagree with his broad statements and his idea that people shouldn’t retire or that retirement age is too low. I ain’t living for work. If nothing else with technology advances we should work LESS.
2
u/smiling_mallard Mar 13 '24
I agree that SS age should be raised, do not agree with him saying people shouldn’t retire, F that I’m retiring as soon as I can.
2
6
Mar 13 '24
Ben is a rich asshole who never worked a real job a day in his life. No, I will not continue to work for corporations until I fall over and die. That being said, if social security is your whole retirement plan, you are in for a bad time.
2
2
u/Fair-Grab-9680 Mar 14 '24
Also it's hilarious that he's advocating for people working until they die meanwhile he constantly says Biden is too old to be president... Get your shit straight
1
u/skimmily Mar 13 '24
I honestly thing SS as it is should not even be a thing. I think that the money we normally put into SS should just go into an individual account for each person, not some big pot. Each person can choose from different investment options. Or no investment if they choose. What they earned and put in, they take out. One person may put more in than another person. The more you put in the more you get at retirement. Then choose your retirement age on your own.
I know that I’ve already been paying SS tax for almost 30 years, and I’ll still be working another 25 years. I will have put in a lot of money into SS and I will not see that money.
1
u/Fair-Grab-9680 Mar 14 '24
Social security has a lot of problems but it's pretty rich for someone to say they should raise the retirement age when he makes millions for sitting on his ass two hours a day. Most Americans work jobs that become almost impossible to do when your body is falling apart.
1
1
u/Clay_haten Mar 15 '24
Umm it's just silly. Especially coming from a rich guy who sits and talks all day. Imagine telling an oil rig worker that he must work until he dies. Like it's either that or literally everyone becomes a 90 year old Walmart greeter. From what I see ss is expensive but it saves millions of people from poverty. It doesn't seem like conservatives are very concerned about poor people when they say things like this because the average person just sees a rich coastal rich know it all telling hard working Americans that their years of hard work won't allow them to retire comfortably, they'll just work until they die. It doesn't come off well. I think ss is very much possible with some light economic adjustments.
1
u/Critical-Ad1551 Mar 16 '24
I agree with Ben about the Govt should collect our “social security” but it goes to an account for retirement for that person like 401k. That way we get what we put in. His explanation of why the money won’t be there makes sense. It also makes me mad how much money we are spending over seas when we should be saving it.
1
u/Glad_Ad6948 Mar 17 '24
I will not die immediately after I retire because I’ll be up day and night trying to break par lol. I’ll probably get more steps in on the golf course than I do now.
1
1
u/hey_im_paul Mar 24 '24
This is symbolic of how disconnected from reality some of the wealthy really are.
Not advocating for it, but kinda am, this guy should be kicked out of America for crimes against humanity.
1
1
u/garciaman Mar 13 '24
I agree w him, 65 these days is too young. Maybe move it to 68 then 70?
1
Mar 13 '24
Problem is by saying that you're telling the youngest generations the goal post can be moved at anytime. A lot of them will see that as the government just pushing the retirement age farther away from them as time goes on. Sure, in 2025 we're moving it 3 years to 68, but in 30 years they may have moved it past 80. People ain't going to fly for that.
2
u/garciaman Mar 13 '24
Well wait until SS is completely broke , then what are they going to fly with ? At some point these goalposts need to be moved. 65 is ridiculous.
2
Mar 13 '24
I agree there needs to be gives and takes but people ain't going to vote to do that. There are far more people between 18 and 64 and nearly all of them aren't going to vote for anyone trying to push the age of retirement back without something else to make up for it.
1
u/Admirable-Leopard272 Mar 15 '24
Surely you support more easily accessible, more affordable healthcare so we can live longer....right?
0
u/Dewdrop034 Mar 13 '24
Ridiculous, huh….Are you anywhere near the age of 65? No? Oh well, kiddo, let me introduce senior living to you.
First, your eyesight starts to go in your 50’s, then a few years later it’s your hearing, then up next, arthritis!! Not being able to bend your fingers while working is great times!
Prostate problems next… good luck getting to that bathroom with your bad knees. Then we have joint pain, maybe even RA! Fun times!
If you haven’t had a heart attack, stroke or cancer by now, consider yourself blessed, because I’m sure the big corporate boss man does not appreciate you being out for weeks in the hospital.
Medication? Oh, there will be tons of that. None of which any senior could afford on a Walmart greeters pay, the job most people seem to want to relegate seniors to.
So when you reach the age of decrepitness, just remember how ridiculous retirement is at 65 and keep on plugging along. Go ahead, Take one for the team!
1
u/The_Hurricane_Han Mar 13 '24
I agree with him. This is something that absolutely has to be overhauled. I’m for raising the retirement age and revising social security.
1
u/DreiKatzenVater Mar 13 '24 edited Mar 13 '24
I don’t agree with his “work until you die” idea and I’m greatly looking forward to retiring, however I came to the conclusion that I’ll have to work until I’m somewhere between 70-75 years old. I don’t want to (at all), but if things keep going the way they’ve been going I don’t see how retirement isn’t raised even higher.
People aren’t supposed to be on the dole for 30 years anyways. Retirement should have been raised 20 years ago, but the boomers would never have allowed that. I think the Gen Xers will be the ones who have to deliver this blow to the Millennials. Millennials will whine and cry about it for the rest of their lives, but our society’s future is at stake. I’d rather than be secure than a bunch of entitled brats be super dooper pooper scooper mad at me.
Also, I’m going to have at least 3 children, and one of the reasons (albeit not the main one) is that our society needs growth and we all have to do our part. It may be financially inconvenient for me and my wife, but my parents and both sets of grandparents went through so much worse. This won’t be all that difficult in comparison.
-1
u/RlyNotYourBroker Mar 13 '24
he is correct and I 100% agree, but I think he could have elaborated more just to get in front of the rabid left (which he will on todays episode).
Ben is right, the retirement age is too low, and unless you have a medical reason to retire, you should probably still work, there is no reason I need to be paying for a healthy 65 year old to sit at home. I mean if you are relying on a SS check to get by, thats terrible planning by you for 40 years and I just don't buy the argument that you fell on hard times for 40 years and just couldn't find a stable job or learn how to save, you made decisions as to why you don't have a retirement.
We should also be given that money to do with how we please, most I think would put it in a retirement fund, others will just blow it and have about 3k to their name and be 80. Those are decisions you make. I know this is a bit harsh, but again I don't know why I need to be paying thousands into social security every year to pay you out because you spent 40 years of your life doing everything but learning how to save for retirement.
0
0
u/Ben-Kunz Mar 13 '24
I don't see any problem with it. Sure, to actually fix the problem we would need to go through a very unpleasant period, because, believe it or not, the actions of our government has consequences! Eventually someone is going to have the pay the bill. Also, I don't think people realize how massive our debit is in unfunded obligations. I was flabbergasted to learn that when you include unfunded obligations into our governments debt, it doesn't add up to 33 trillion, it adds up to over 120 TRILLION DOLLARS.(source: Truth in Accounting 2021) We cant keep this up, we need to do something eventually, and if we don't do something soon, we will need to do it later, and the longer this goes on, the more unpleasant the consequences will be.
-2
51
u/Synthetic2802 Mar 13 '24
I'm 32, and there is no way in hell that SS will still exist in 30 years without a full overhaul of entitlements.