SS not going to bankrupt but you shouldn't count on it

johnN

https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/social-security-is-not-going-bankrupt-but-you-still-shouldnt-count-on-it-2020-01-15

Social Security not going to bankrupt but you shouldn't count on it

'Social Security is in trouble. The trust funds it relies on to bridge revenue gaps are set to run dry by 2035. Once that happens, the program may have no choice but to cut benefits unless Congress steps in with a fix. The reduction currently on the table is 20%, but since 2035 is a good 15 years away, that percentage has the potential to climb.'







Any changes in the future w/ your investments if SS indeed become solvent? thanks

catch22

How much shouldypu save w your portfolio..3_5% annually for ss?..thx

Clarify the above, please.

davidrmoran

yawn --- feeble thick-witted alarmist financial journalism of no particular point with no new news to it, kinda surprising for Motley

hank

Re: SS not going to bankrupt but you shouldn't count on it

Here’s the actual headline: Social Security Is Not Going Bankrupt, but You Still Shouldn't Count On It

Notice how by inserting the infinity marker (“to”) John alters or muddles the author’s intended message. I still believe that if you find English challenging, it’s imperative to copy / paste the headline directly from the article. A burden of responsibility rests on the shoulders of whomever references someone else’s writing to accurately reflect the message the other party intended.

msf

"feeble thick-witted alarmist financial journalism of no particular point with no new news to it, kinda surprising for Motley"

I respectfully disagree (regarding the "surprising" part). Motley Fool says that its content and products are not journalism. It doesn't claim to be presenting something new, let alone news. Rather, it says its purpose is to "teach".

From the "disclosure policy" linked to in the column:

Investors Communicating With Investors
The Motley Fool is a company that represents investors teaching and learning from other investors. ...

Second, and more important, we don't consider our employees to be journalists, but rather communicators and teachers of financial matters. ... As a company, we utilize every available medium to teach people of all ages...

It didn't disclose that its link - "Simply click here to discover how to learn more about these strategies" - is an ad (subscriber solicitation) for the Motley Fool. Nor is there any disclosure about any fee nasdaq.com may receive for referrals (the URL contains referral data).

With respect to the column itself, the headline and intro section have nothing to do with the heart of the article: "Even if benefit cuts don't come to Social Security, you still need outside income to stay afloat financially." The headline is merely click bait.

davidrmoran

Bylined teaching pieces qualify as what is called service journalism, which is much of what's online, of course, and not only in finance.

Their silly qualification is about as specious as it gets, as if the enterprise is just this long set of unedited / unreviewed threads.

My point was simply that most of what I have read from Motley, or so I recall, is waaaay better than this duh duh thing. But perhaps I am mistaken, and they too have become unsurprising in their lameness. That did not used to be the case.