The Number of People on Social Security Isn’t Sustainable – Here’s the Problem

What’s going on?

The number of people on Social Security benefits reached a record 61,859,250 last month, according to Social Security Administration data.

CNSNews.com reported that even with the unemployment rate at its lowest since 2000, there are only about two full-time workers for every person on Social Security.

Key statistics:

  • Nearly 62 million people are Social Security beneficiaries.
  • The ratio of workers (including full-time and part-time) to beneficiaries is only about 2.5 to 1.
  • Social Security is heading toward a $12.5 trillion shortfall through 2091.
  • The national debt is at more than $20.6 trillion as of this writing.

What needs to happen next?  

The Social Security board of trustees says Congress needs to increase taxes, cut benefits and/or get some other funds together to pay for Social Security. Whether or not Congress will actually follow that advice remains to be seen.

Learn more about how Social Security works with our explainer here.

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

DOC: Last November saw another record in American history. It's not necessarily a good record. Well, I mean, it's not a bad one. But when you know the full story, it's not a good situation.

In November, nearly 62 million people received Social Security benefits. That is a record high number in American history. Sixty-two million. There are just -- there is just shy of 330 million Americans. Sixty-two million receiving Social Security benefits.

Well, I say, it's not necessarily a bad thing that people are retired and receiving money. That's fine. But when you know the full system and you realize how it's strained and how unsustainable it is, and still, we have not addressed it. When you realize what a Ponzi scheme Social Security is, you realize that's not a good thing. It's not sustainable. It is a failure. Parts of it are absolutely evil. Yeah, you don't hear many people challenge that because for years, Social Security was kind of a third rail. You just accepted, that people wanted and liked it.

Well, yeah, if you're retired and on Social Security and you hear people challenge the notion of Social Security, you're like, whoa, whoa, defend what I'm getting. I would never suggest pulling the rug out from underneath people. But over the long haul, this is a system that has to be changed. Let me explain why. In addition to the 62 million people receiving Social Security, the Bureau of Labor statistics reported that currently there are 126 million full-time workers in the US. So that is just over two full-time workers for each person receiving Social Security.

The notion of Social Security was sold as, okay. Everybody makes money. And you pay into this pot. And it grows. And it makes interest. And when you retire, that money will be there.

That's not really how it is. As soon as the government saw big money, those DC people that just like to spend, as soon as they saw millions and then billions of dollars and hundreds of billions and into the trillions of money into Social Security, they went and robbed that lock box.

Remember the lock box? We'll put it in a lock box. There's no lock box. They took and spent that money and essentially replaced it with IOUs. Don't worry. We took this money for some stuff. We'll always pay those Social Security benefits. Don't worry.

They commingled the monies. Instead of having an account over here that Social Security money, that everybody pays into and then we pay money out of it, they just essentially put it in one big general fund with all the other monies.

Well, since we have deficits every year and a growing national debt that is now over $20 trillion, they have to pay those out of whatever we take in every month.

And knowing that we have all that debt, on top of this, sets up a pretty bleak future unless we do something. When this was sold to people, it wasn't just you'll pay into it. But they also said how many people would be paying into it, versus how many people are taking money out. And at one point, it was five, six people paying into it, versus people taking out.

That's when those Baby Boomers were all working. Huge percentage of the population paying in, with only a small percent taking out.

Right now, 10,000 Baby Boomers retire every day. Ten thousand every day. So now we're down to two people paying in, for everybody that takes money out. And it's not paying in again to that closed fund. It goes into the general fund. At some point, it will be 1-1. And then 1-2.

And we'll be paying for it. That's unsustainable. That means money that we spend or would spend on other things is going to have to go towards this because of a bad system to begin with, and then mismanagement of a bad system.

The mismanagement being not adjusting for inflation, not adjusting for life expectancy, and retirement ages, and adjusting all of these things. But it was failed to begin with, because you don't get the money. Not in every case.

You could pay in and work hard all your life and then die as you retire. You could die the day after you retire and not collect one penny of all that money you paid into it.

Meanwhile, somebody who has barely worked, done the bare minimum, could retire at -- what is it, 67 now?

Maybe a few years ago, retired at 65, and live to be 130.

More -- taking more years than they ever paid into it with the bare minimum and collect and collect. All of these things are possible. It's a failed system.

If you retire having some sort of retirement account you paid into your whole life and died, that money can go to your whole family. Social Security. No. Not unless they're a minor and you die early and then they can collect up until they're 18.

The number of people that scam the system. The fact that Social Security actually is not a livable wage. Unless you paid off your house or something like that and really made good money where you get the upper level, it's not livable by itself. It doesn't adjust for inflation. Let's stop the insanity of Social Security. No. People that are near retirement or retired, not suggesting we pull the rug out from underneath you. Here's the solution: We set a plan in motion to slowly wind -- wind down Social Security over the next ten, 15, whatever years.

Then if you are retired and you're getting Social Security, you will get it even if you live to be 170. If you are near retirement, you will get it. If you're halfway to retirement in there, we're going to have to make some adjustments. You're going to get what you paid into at least. You're going to get some of that money. But you have time to make some other plans. And we can make sure it's a smooth transition so you're not screwed. People on the younger side, on the lower end, you're going to have to pay some monies in, even though you're not going to get some of that out. Frustrating. Horrible. Yeah.

But that's how it's got to be. And we all end up paying for things that we don't want anyways. This is part of the system.

But under the Doc Thompson plan, if we adjust the true for true tax reform, you should be able to have other tax benefits that will offset that so you are in no worse shape. We simply set a true fair and flat tax. And with that, spending reform, where we stop wasting money on stuff we don't need. Winding down stuff like the Department of Education, which just takes a handling fee at the federal level, to redistribute the money back to the states. We stop growing the federal government. And we return that money to the people, with a grand plan like this, we can finally get out from underneath this evil system of Social Security that takes and doesn't always give even though you've worked.

And a system that is unsustainable and likely to go bankrupt anyway. And there's going to be only one way to prop it up if you want it propped up.

When it eventually fails, they're just going to say, we must raise taxes on some level. Or raise your contributions to Social Security significantly, to pay for other people that are on it right now.

It's wrong. I will reluctantly, even though a Libertarian, go along with the idea that we will force people to pay for their own retirement. You must take five, ten, whatever percent we decide and put it into something you can't touch until you're retired. So you'll force them to be responsible. I hate the notion, but versus having Social Security around, I'm fine with it.

We can at least move to that. Because that is a system where you'll at least get what you paid into it. You can at least give it to your children if you die.

A town in Sweden is under fire after denying requests to ring church bells in the 1990s and the 2000s but recently approving a mosque's request to conduct a weekly Islamic call to prayer.

RELATED: Media's anti-Israel, pro-Islam bias sweeps THIS fact under the rug

Authorities in the town of Vaxjo in southern Sweden have given the local mosque a one-year permit to recite the call to prayer every Friday for about four minutes. But Fr. Ingvar Fogelqvist of St. Michael's, the local Catholic church located about a mile from the mosque, says similar requests to ring church bells were denied.

On today's show, Pat and Jeffy talked about this story and favorable bias toward the Muslim faith. The issue isn't that the Islamic call to prayer is allowed; it's that all religions are not being treated equally.

Somebody might want to check the temperature in hell, it might be just a tad chillier than normal.

If you missed Friday's episode of The Glenn Beck Program, you missed something you probably never thought you'd see in this timeline or any other. Glenn actually donned President Trump's trademark red "Make America Great Again" hat and laid out the case for why he thinks Trump will win in a landslide in 2020.

RELATED: The media's derangement over Trump has me wearing a new hat and predicting THIS for 2020

Bottom line: Nancy Pelosi and the mainstream media may have pushed Glenn to this point, but believe it or not, Trump's record will make this next election a walk in the park for number 45. At this point, the sitting president has done enough to earn even Glenn's vote.

Glenn broke down what he thought were the 10 biggest campaign promises that — unlike those made by most politicians — Trump actually kept.

10. Impose a 10% repatriation tax to bring jobs back to America

Not all of Trump's promises were good ones, but regardless of what the consequences may be — he did keep this one.

"Now, I think this one is dangerous," Glenn said on radio Friday. "He did it. Ten percent. Bring all of your money back into the United States. It will create jobs. Yes. It will also create inflation. But it's creating jobs."

9. Withdraw from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)

This has been one of Trump's most passionate issues.

"The stop the TPP. Uh-huh. Right. Sure you are. Uh-huh. Yes. He did," Glenn admitted.

8. Withdraw from the disastrous Paris Climate Accord

Glenn found himself eating crow on this.

"I'm on record saying he will never do that because his daughter is a huge global warming person and he only listens to the family. Eh. Wrong," Glenn said with a puff of crow feathers coming from his mouth.

7. Bring North Korea to the table and rein them in

This looked impossible. Not so.

"'I'm going to bring North Korea to the table.' Are you? Everybody has tried to do that," Glenn said. "Now, they're at the table. We don't know what's going to happen. So the result of that is unknown. But has anybody else done that?"

6. Stop over-regulation and jump-start the economy

It's the economy, stupid.

"Does anybody feel like America is beginning to get on track somewhat economically? You know why? Because he fulfilled another promise," Glenn said. "Stop over-regulating the American people. Give them their money. Give the companies the opportunity to expand and bring their money back into the country, and maybe they'll build buildings. Maybe they'll build offices. Maybe they'll build new products. Maybe they'll build new factories. Maybe they'll hire a bunch of people."

Glenn went on.

"Now, I know Seattle is trying to do everything they can to make sure everybody in their city is homeless and unemployed, but the rest of the country is enjoying the feeling of, wow, maybe things are going to be okay."

5. Reverse Obama's executive orders

If you're like Glenn, you've gotten used to politicians promising "no new taxes," but you can really tell they're lying if their lips are moving. Guess what? That's apparently not Trump.

"The executive orders? Yeah. He's reversed a lot of Obama's executive orders," Glenn said. "These are outrageous promises."

4. Pull out of the Iran nuclear deal

No big deal...

"'I'm going to cancel the Iran Deal.' Yep. None of these are small. You know, I've got maybe ten minutes. I think we can get that done in the first term. And they did," Glenn said.

3. Give tax cuts to middle-class Americans

Maybe this could have been better, but we'll take it.

"I don't like the tax cut. I think he could go a lot further," Glenn said. "But that's not even his job. His job is to sign things that Congress puts in front of him. Not to design it. You Republicans in Congress, you disgust me. You disgust me. 'Imagine what we could do if we had the House and the Senate and the White House.' I can imagine what you'll do — nothing. You'll do nothing."

2. Change strategy and defeat ISIS

The mainstream media have been radio silent on this.

"How about the president's — well, I know I can defeat ISIS. I know I can do it. I'll defeat ISIS. He did," Glenn said. "And did you notice no one in the press even talked about it? All of a sudden, we're not talking about ISIS anymore. How come? Oh, I know. President Trump. That's why."

1. Recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and relocate the US embassy

This one is a true game-changer.

"Now, every president will say to you, when he's running, 'I'm going to make Jerusalem the home.' Well, really? The home of the embassy. Really, are you? Because everybody says that, nobody does it. He did it," Glenn said. "And I think that's going to go down as the biggest game-changer possibly in my lifetime. This is going — it already is — it is changing the game in Iran."

Glenn continued.

"And when it does, this president is going to come out and say something directly to those people, that we support them," he said. "And that's going to add fuel to the fire. And you might see a regime change and a collapse of the Islamic regime in Iran. And it will be 100 percent Donald Trump that made that responsible. One hundred percent. You're going to see changes because of this. He kept that promise. A promise I said, he's not going to do that. Nobody is going to do that. He did."

One chapter of ISIS has ended, but another may be starting

AHMAD AL-RUBAYE/AFP/Getty Images

For the most part, ISIS has fallen in Syria and Iraq. But before we celebrate the demise of this awful terrorist group, before we let our guard down, we should zoom out a bit, because ISIS is spreading. ISIS has largely just scattered out of the region as if someone turned on the kitchen lights and they scrambled.

RELATED: It IS About Islam: This Is a War Against Evil

The Wall Street Journal spoke with Rohan Gunaratna, head of the International Center for Political Violence and Terrorism Research at the Nanyang University in Singapore. “Although Islamic State's ideology has suffered, it still has a huge potential," he told them. “Islamic State has entered a phase of global expansion, very much the same way al Qaeda extended globally in late 2001."

ISIS has spread into West Africa, and throughout much of Southeast Asia, and, as is typical of ISIS, they have done it violently, with a sick venom.

The world is their potential rubble, and their fight is endless.

Again, from the Wall Street Journal: “One chapter of ISIS has finished and another is beginning," said Hassan Hassan, a specialist on Islamic State at the Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy in Washington. “Their resurgence is coming sooner than expected."

The world is their potential rubble, and their fight is endless.

'The Handmaid's Tale' got it right, just with the wrong religion

Alberto E. Rodriguez/Getty Images

Just in case The Handmaid's Tale's heavy-handed message wasn't already heavy-handed enough, a recent episode made it clear there's always room for further hysteria. Particularly, in relation to depictions of a “patriarchal society" run by Christian doctrine and determined by men — oh those dastardly men.

RELATED: Christian privilege is the new white privilege

The show appropriates Margaret Atwood of the same name, depicting a totalitarian society led by Christian doctrine in which women's bodies are controlled, and they have no rights. The story sounds familiar, but not in the same way Atwood and the show's creators have so smugly assumed.

Just as tone-deaf as 4th wave feminism itself, and tone-deaf in all the exact same places. Most notably, the show's heavy-handed indignation toward Christianity. Toward the patriarchy. Toward conservatives and traditional values. And just like 4th wave feminism, the show completely overlooks the irony at play. Because there is a part of the world where women and children are being raped and mutilated. In fact, in this very real place, the women or girls are often imprisoned, even executed, for being raped, and they are mutilated in unspeakable ways.

Theirs is a cruel, bloody, colorless life.

There is a place, a very real place, where women are forced to cover their entire bodies with giant tarp-like blankets, which is all the more brutal given the endless heat of this place. There is a place where women literally have one-third of the rights of men, a place where women are legally, socially and culturally worth less than men.

They cannot drive cars. They cannot be outside alone. They cannot divorce, they cannot even choose who they marry and often, they are forcibly married at a young age.

They are raped. A lot. Theirs is a cruel, bloody, colorless life. This is the life of tens, perhaps hundreds of millions of women. And, I'll tell you, their religion isn't Christianity.