Should the government raise the retirement age for Social Security?

Social security funds should be distributed at an age based on a formula that accounts for increased age of life expectancy. Future Options should exist not to pay social security and rather invest that money into a personal retirement fund or pay a tax... 5 years ago from a Republican in Ocala, FL

No, living longer and healthier does not mean still able to perform work especially at the age of 70. 5 years ago from a Libertarian in Arlington, TX

The retirement age should be based on the health of the senior in question. The healthier the senior, the retirement age should be raised. It should not be raised for seniors who are not healthy. 5 years ago from a Green in Lake Darby, OH

Stop allowing people to collect at age 62. They have stopped paying in at a younger age and this further depletes money from social security. There are too many young retirees. 5 years ago from a Republican in Geneva, WA

Follow Milton Freedman's advice on phasing out SS. 5 years ago from a Republican in Aquia Harbour, VA

Yes, but only for those currently under age 55. The retirement age for anyone 55 or older should NOT be raised. 5 years ago from a Republican in New Orleans, LA

No, but SS should not be provided if annual income exceeds $75000.00 per year. 5 years ago from a Republican in Morristown, NJ

Yes, only if their health is taken into consideration. For those who are not as healthy leave it. For those who are healthy raise it. 5 years ago from a Republican in Los Angeles, CA

The retirement age for high paying sedentary jobs with a greater life expectancy should be increased, but that for manual labor jobs should not. 5 years ago from a Green in Druid Hills, GA

You shouldn't be able to collect social security while still working in your previous career as it is supposed to be for retirement. 5 years ago from a Democrat in Los Angeles, CA

Yes but I think it should be raised for anyone who is more than 10 years away from retirement. But not those who are closer and have less time to change their arrangements for their future and we'll-being. 5 years ago from a Democrat in Potwin, KS

Yes, but ultimately education and services should more effectively prepare citizens for retirement much more early on in order to eliminate the need for social security. 5 years ago from a Democrat in Salt Lake City, UT

Proper management of Social Security funds should be researched. These funds should not be used to finance other areas of the federal government. If the retirement age is raised, it should be done so in a minor that does not jeopardize those who... 5 years ago from a Green in Woodstock, GA

No, Social security benefits need to be strictly monitored for individuals receiving non retirement age disabilty. 5 years ago from a Constitution in Towson, MD

Social security should be completely dissolved in favor of fair wages that allow for savings until one is ready to leave the work force with sustainable means. 5 years ago from a Green in Holly Hills, CO

No, fix the system so that it is self sustaining and stop the government from robbing it. 5 years ago from a Democrat in Woodland Mills, TN

Give us back our money and defund it. 5 years ago from a Constitution in Port St. John, FL

Social Security was not intended to be a retirement program. Give every child at birth an account worth $5,000 and let it grow toward a retirement nest egg. Do NOT allow the government to be able to spend that money. Taxes would be paid on the original... 5 years ago from a Libertarian in Manassas, VA

NO, and we should transition Social Security funds into privately managed retirement accounts and away from congressional access and IOU's. Social Security withdrawal should be optional so that those who don't need it are not forced to take it,... 5 years ago from a Constitution in Laytonsville, MD

Yes, but with waivers for those who have worked physically demanding jobs. 5 years ago from a Democrat in Greenwood, PA

No, increased life spans do not equate to increased ability to work in old age. 5 years ago from a Green in Lubec, ME

No. Not all occupations are conducive to older workers. The more physical the job , the harder it is to continue as you age. This would result in lower income (physical labor) workers having to find new jobs as they age. 5 years ago from a Constitution in Lincoln, NE

No - many people are finding it difficult to continue physical labor type work even to the existing retirement age. Raising the retirement age will result in many more people filing for disability instead. 5 years ago from a Democrat in Monticello, MN

No, not all at once, since it will take time to convince employers that those over 65 are employable. We have a serious age prejudice and discrimination in corporations, and need to enforce better age discrimination laws before we raise the retirement... 5 years ago from a Democrat in Hollins, VA

No, and immediately require the federal government to stop dipping into Social Security to pay for other programs. 5 years ago from a Democrat in Hatfield, MA

The social security program no longer functions as was intended. It was suppose to be a safety net for those whose retirement plans failed. Now people are using it as their retirement plan. They should eliminate it. 5 years ago from a Democrat in Ferry Pass, FL

It's not going to exist by the time I retire anyways so it doesn't matter. 5 years ago from a Democrat in Chicago, IL

No, this will force companies, schools, and other work places to continue to employ workers who are possibly not as able or as interested in doing their work. Many places don't want employees who are only there for a paycheck. 5 years ago from a Democrat in West Falls Church, VA

Regardless, social security should be eliminated because it is an unconstitutional transfer of wealth. 5 years ago from a Libertarian in Liberty Hill, TX

No, SS was financially healthy and able to fullfill it's contract with payees untill it's funds and contribution were illegally deposited into the General fund and "borrowed" by politicians to pay for non SS expenditures and never... 5 years ago from a Green in Newark, CA

No, changing the rules under which workers forcibly paid into Social Security is like changing the rules of football during the game. If they want to change the rules, do it for people just entering the workforce. Better yet, let workers opt in to... 5 years ago from a Republican in Houston, TX

Yes because people are living longer, but it also needs to made public how many people die before reaching that age and never collect a penny from the fund. Transparency and public notice are a must to insure that politicians are not criminally... 5 years ago from a Constitution in Crystal City, MO

Social security is a clear and perfect example of a ponzi scheme. This program should be phased out as quickly as possible and retirement planning should be up to the individual. This will increase financial literacy and further promote a strong... 5 years ago from a Constitution in Charlotte, NC

I say give us the best of both worlds. Half the money goes to Social Security which becomes just a bank account, not the traditional SS way.
The other half of a person's money should go into privately managed retirement accounts. In case the money is lost in the private accounts, there is still their SS money. And if the government stops screwing with it, the money will be there for the person. 5 years ago from a Libertarian in Port Charlotte, FL

We should have a maximum age limit. Quality, not quantity of life is what's important. 5 years ago from a Democrat in Vista, CA