Page 3 of 3
This should not be surprising. The rising cost of health care in general is one of the most important fiscal problems facing the United States. Medicare is only one aspect of this, albeit a big one.
“The path of health care spending for seniors relative to taxes and premium revenues is unsustainable in the long run,” write the Urban Institute’s Mr. Steuerle and Mr. Quakenbush in a study of Medicare lifetime benefit calculations.
Until recent years, Social Security was in the same boat, actuarially speaking. Recipients often received much more in income support benefits than the value of the Social Security taxes they’d paid.
For example, workers with average wages who retired at age 65 in 1980 got back both the employee and employer share of Social Security contributions, plus interest, in only 2.8 years, according to a Congressional Research Service study of the subject.
A similar person who retired in 2003 will have to wait 17.3 years before getting that money back, according to CRS.
“For those retiring in 2020 it will take 21.6 years,” writes CRS analyst Dawn Nuschler.
In large part this increase is due to a package of reforms meant to stabilize Social Security’s finances that passed Congress in 1983. Among other things, lawmakers voted to raise the program’s retirement age from 65 to 67. That’s being phased in now. The full two-year increase will affect people born in 1960 or later.
The bottom line: New retirees already on average will get back less from Social Security over their lifetimes than they’ve put in. The Urban Institute’s prototypical single male earner, if he retired in 2010, will have paid $46,000 more to Social Security then he’ll see in benefits. The two-earner average couple? In regards to government-provided social insurance, the Urban Institute projects they’ll end up $105,000 in the red.