Martin O'Malley

Even though Social Security was always intended to be one leg of a three legged stool (the others being a pension and savings) the sad truth is there are not many more pensions out there, and personal savings rates are abysmally low.

Some here have even advocated lowering the age to collect SS to 50, which I honestly think is far, far too low. It's one thing to be on disability, no longer able to work. But for most people, there really are jobs out there, and you're better off working, even at a reduced rate, and not taking SS.

The other thing to consider is what kind of reduction would need to be in effect to take SS at 50. I'm guessing in the neighborhood of 80-90%, meaning you'd collect at age 50 only 10-20% of what you'd get at full retirement age. Not very much money. Plus, full retirement age is the point at which you can earn as much money as you can with no reduction in SS. Before that age, income over some particular amount results in SS reduction.

People honestly do need to save more.