Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Jesus christ, what is wrong with this nut?
Jeb Bush Next president should privatize Social Security"
WASHINGTON – Jeb Bush thinks the next president will need to privatize Social Security, he said at a town hall meeting in New Hampshire on Tuesday – acknowledging that his brother attempted to do so and failed. It’s a position sure to be attacked by both Republicans and Democrats.
Bush has previously said he would support raising the retirement age to get Social Security benefits, a common position among Republicans. And he backed a partial privatization that House Republicans have proposed that would allow people to choose private accounts.
The future of Social Security has become one of the most hotly contested issues in national politics, and both parties have accused the other of threatening its survival. Republicans argue that Democrats’ refusal to change the program will lead to its bankruptcy. Democrats sayprivatization would kill the program and leave elderly Americans at the mercy of the stock market. Plus, any discussion of changing the system often creates fear in older Americans beyond or nearing the age of retirement, who also tend to vote in the greatest numbers.
Republicans have split on the answer to fix the program, which could begin to pay out more than it takes in as more baby boomers retire and younger generations aren’t able to pay enough into the system to keep it going. Understanding the fear privatization proposals create, some Republicans have argued that the retirement age should be increased or means-testing established instead. Many Democrats advocate raising the ceiling for the tax that funds it.
"
The one good thing is, he will never get elected now..
Maybe the fact that he is 1000% right! The US MUST follow the Chilean model. It has nearly single handedly made Chile a 1st world nation. The model requires each employee to invest 10-20% of their income into the private social security system. At retirement age it goes into an annuity. In the meantime the money is invested and grows. The money is invested in Chile and the earnings go back to the individual. The money Americans currently pay to social security isn't invested and there is no growth. In fact we lose 15-75% (depending on the income bracket) of the money we put in to the system. In Chile they see a 7-10% growth.
These are the positive effects:
Chilean Model of Social Security FreedomWorks
• It generated surpluses without raising taxes, inflation, or interest rates
• Old-age pensions are 40-50 percent higher than the public pension system
• Disability and survivor pensions are 70-100 percent higher than the public pension system
• Significant decreases in the payroll tax have contributed to an unemployment rate below 5%
• Savings rates have sky rocketed and have deepened investment
• Growth rates have more than doubled in the past 10 years
It's commonsense economics that socialist will never understand!
The SS trust fund earned 94 billion dollars in interest last year.
Who is saying retired people need to keep their retirement savings in the stock market? You really dont get this do you?You were the one who noted a 70% loss of wealth in 2008 and 2009. The folks depending on investment returns saw a loss of returns until their investments gained back the losses. Are you saying that the retired folks who lost 70% of their wealth continued to collect their investment returns as if the recession and dive never happened?People on retirement pensions, investment returns, Social Security, etc., live on their month to month checks. They can not afford to take large cuts during recessions and slow downs and wait years for things to get better. A person dependent on stock market returns can not tell the electric company, landlord, bank or whoever to wait about three of four years until the market rebounds.
The gamble is that if a recession hits anytime during you retirement, and you depend on a stock portfolio for income, you may have absolutely no income and be forced to sell your holdings at great losses just to survive. When the market rebounds you will have a shrunken portfolio and hence, a reduced retirement income.
What a steaming pile.
Leftism is truly based on ignorance and bigotry. People who retire move money into various sources. Money market, bond, secured equities. Your bullshit myth about retirees having all their funds in stock for Solyndra is a complete fabrication.
The VAST majority of people investing in IRA and 401K use brokerage funds which diversify by nature. for an 18 year old - the most unstable, fly by night stock is vastly more secure than Social Security. IF the USA exists in 50 years, Social Security sure won't.
Link?Have the conservatives finally accepted the fact that SS is not communism? That was their battle cry for some time.
Who is saying retired people need to keep their retirement savings in the stock market? You really dont get this do you?You were the one who noted a 70% loss of wealth in 2008 and 2009. The folks depending on investment returns saw a loss of returns until their investments gained back the losses. Are you saying that the retired folks who lost 70% of their wealth continued to collect their investment returns as if the recession and dive never happened?People on retirement pensions, investment returns, Social Security, etc., live on their month to month checks. They can not afford to take large cuts during recessions and slow downs and wait years for things to get better. A person dependent on stock market returns can not tell the electric company, landlord, bank or whoever to wait about three of four years until the market rebounds.
The gamble is that if a recession hits anytime during you retirement, and you depend on a stock portfolio for income, you may have absolutely no income and be forced to sell your holdings at great losses just to survive. When the market rebounds you will have a shrunken portfolio and hence, a reduced retirement income.
What a steaming pile.
Leftism is truly based on ignorance and bigotry. People who retire move money into various sources. Money market, bond, secured equities. Your bullshit myth about retirees having all their funds in stock for Solyndra is a complete fabrication.
The VAST majority of people investing in IRA and 401K use brokerage funds which diversify by nature. for an 18 year old - the most unstable, fly by night stock is vastly more secure than Social Security. IF the USA exists in 50 years, Social Security sure won't.
You have yet to show this in any way.Based upon your description of it. If I actually saw the plan it might make a difference. I am responding to what you are saying. What you are saying is an amazingly bad idea.Hate it? Too strong a word. The only thing I know about this plan is what you presented here. I don't even know who proposed it, let alone what is actually in itWe both know you still hate the idea.I'm happy I could make you glad.Now that you understand the issue, I'm glad to see you no longer have any worthwhile objections.
We both know you know you have no sound reason for doing so.
How can you oppose something you admit you know nothing about?
In what way am I for the poor decisions of others?Indeed it does. Living in a first world country isn't free.You.Whoever said you were?How does that answer follow with any degree of soundness from the question?Because their "poor choices" are only know to be poor after the fact. That's the answer.You did not answer my question. Please give it a shot.
You make a bad decision -- how am I responsible for it?
You want the state to cover people when they make poor choices.
That makes me responsible.
Wait.... that's a moral position?It doesn't work that way. The consequences of people being kicked in the teeth by life, either by mistakes or plain bad luck, are unacceptable in a civilized society. We don't let people starve to teach them a lesson.You know, for all the idiots who think that government should be FULLY out of their miserable lives, they should also avoid voting.....After all, these folks are voting to perpetuate a government that should, in their moronic assertion, scarcely exist.
They should be REQUIRED to sign off that if their "privatization" flops, then they should NOT ask for either the FDIC (insurance) and should NOT ask for welfare if they become destitute after some market crash.
Let them become illegal aliens to Mexico.
More hyperbole derived from ignorance.And when that bank goes belly up, like many did in 2008, then we have grandma and grandpa living in cardboard boxes under the overpass eating tins of cat food and trash they dug out of the bins?Jeb Bush: Next president should privatize Social Security
Who is saying retired people need to keep their retirement savings in the stock market? You really dont get this do you?
Because the sheep don't understand the concept of choice.
They are all so afraid of the stock market they don't realize they could save their money in other places
My response was to blather about the wonderful return of investments in the stock market. The DOW was specifically mentioned, hence, the limited return on the 30 best or most popular stocks.Who is saying retired people need to keep their retirement savings in the stock market? You really dont get this do you?You were the one who noted a 70% loss of wealth in 2008 and 2009. The folks depending on investment returns saw a loss of returns until their investments gained back the losses. Are you saying that the retired folks who lost 70% of their wealth continued to collect their investment returns as if the recession and dive never happened?People on retirement pensions, investment returns, Social Security, etc., live on their month to month checks. They can not afford to take large cuts during recessions and slow downs and wait years for things to get better. A person dependent on stock market returns can not tell the electric company, landlord, bank or whoever to wait about three of four years until the market rebounds.
The gamble is that if a recession hits anytime during you retirement, and you depend on a stock portfolio for income, you may have absolutely no income and be forced to sell your holdings at great losses just to survive. When the market rebounds you will have a shrunken portfolio and hence, a reduced retirement income.
What a steaming pile.
Leftism is truly based on ignorance and bigotry. People who retire move money into various sources. Money market, bond, secured equities. Your bullshit myth about retirees having all their funds in stock for Solyndra is a complete fabrication.
The VAST majority of people investing in IRA and 401K use brokerage funds which diversify by nature. for an 18 year old - the most unstable, fly by night stock is vastly more secure than Social Security. IF the USA exists in 50 years, Social Security sure won't.
Because the sheep don't understand the concept of choice.
They are all so afraid of the stock market they don't realize they could save their money in other places
In what way am I for the poor decisions of others?Indeed it does. Living in a first world country isn't free.You.Whoever said you were?How does that answer follow with any degree of soundness from the question?Because their "poor choices" are only know to be poor after the fact. That's the answer.
You make a bad decision -- how am I responsible for it?
You want the state to cover people when they make poor choices.
That makes me responsible.
Wait.... that's a moral position?It doesn't work that way. The consequences of people being kicked in the teeth by life, either by mistakes or plain bad luck, are unacceptable in a civilized society. We don't let people starve to teach them a lesson.You know, for all the idiots who think that government should be FULLY out of their miserable lives, they should also avoid voting.....After all, these folks are voting to perpetuate a government that should, in their moronic assertion, scarcely exist.
They should be REQUIRED to sign off that if their "privatization" flops, then they should NOT ask for either the FDIC (insurance) and should NOT ask for welfare if they become destitute after some market crash.
Let them become illegal aliens to Mexico.
Hm. That sounds statutory.PratchettFan
In that you are a citizen of this country and take advantage of the benefits of this country. You don't get that for free.
Ah.A better word would be mores. But yeah, that's what it is.Wait.... that's a moral position?It doesn't work that way. The consequences of people being kicked in the teeth by life, either by mistakes or plain bad luck, are unacceptable in a civilized society. We don't let people starve to teach them a lesson.You know, for all the idiots who think that government should be FULLY out of their miserable lives, they should also avoid voting.....After all, these folks are voting to perpetuate a government that should, in their moronic assertion, scarcely exist.
They should be REQUIRED to sign off that if their "privatization" flops, then they should NOT ask for either the FDIC (insurance) and should NOT ask for welfare if they become destitute after some market crash.
Let them become illegal aliens to Mexico.
If you look at the Dow, or the S&P500 or any other broad index the stock market returns about 7% a year on average over any 20 year period. People dont need to be whizzes. They need to buy low cost index funds and hold them for 20-30 years. It far outpaces any other investment..
My response was to blather about the wonderful return of investments in the stock market. The DOW was specifically mentioned, hence, the limited return on the 30 best or most popular stocks.Who is saying retired people need to keep their retirement savings in the stock market? You really dont get this do you?You were the one who noted a 70% loss of wealth in 2008 and 2009. The folks depending on investment returns saw a loss of returns until their investments gained back the losses. Are you saying that the retired folks who lost 70% of their wealth continued to collect their investment returns as if the recession and dive never happened?People on retirement pensions, investment returns, Social Security, etc., live on their month to month checks. They can not afford to take large cuts during recessions and slow downs and wait years for things to get better. A person dependent on stock market returns can not tell the electric company, landlord, bank or whoever to wait about three of four years until the market rebounds.
The gamble is that if a recession hits anytime during you retirement, and you depend on a stock portfolio for income, you may have absolutely no income and be forced to sell your holdings at great losses just to survive. When the market rebounds you will have a shrunken portfolio and hence, a reduced retirement income.
What a steaming pile.
Leftism is truly based on ignorance and bigotry. People who retire move money into various sources. Money market, bond, secured equities. Your bullshit myth about retirees having all their funds in stock for Solyndra is a complete fabrication.
The VAST majority of people investing in IRA and 401K use brokerage funds which diversify by nature. for an 18 year old - the most unstable, fly by night stock is vastly more secure than Social Security. IF the USA exists in 50 years, Social Security sure won't.
Because the sheep don't understand the concept of choice.
They are all so afraid of the stock market they don't realize they could save their money in other places
When other, safer investments are made the returns are reduced, invalidating much of the argument about the wonderful world of investing. Sure, savvy investors go for the higher risk bigger return investments when young and earning and transfer to safer investments with age and as retirement comes closer. The problem is that the average person does not have the knowledge and savvy to be a competent investor and needs to trust in an investment broker.
More significantly, than investment skills and trusting a broker or "expert", the people who need SS the most are the ones who will measure the return on how long and how much they collect when they retire. The length of life after the retirement age will be the determining factor, not data sheets and charts. You live 20 years after retirement instead of 10 and you collect double the amount. SS goes on until you die. People trust the government more than they trust the investment broker, investment banks and Wall Street. And as someone previously stated, if SS defaults you can be certain the guys holding your private investments will already have defaulted, gone broke, absconded and your investments will be gone.
I think he pays taxes like anyone else.In what way am I for the poor decisions of others?Indeed it does. Living in a first world country isn't free.You.Whoever said you were?How does that answer follow with any degree of soundness from the question?
You make a bad decision -- how am I responsible for it?
You want the state to cover people when they make poor choices.
That makes me responsible.
In that you are a citizen of this country and take advantage of the benefits of this country. You don't get that for free.
No.It isn't the stock market they fear, it's responsibility.Because the sheep don't understand the concept of choice.
They are all so afraid of the stock market they don't realize they could save their money in other places
No.
They fear the loss of government power and control.
