Jeb Bush: Next president should privatize Social Security

[Camp]

For the most part, and even more so for non-professionals

I see.
I have no issue with you lying to yourself like this -- but do you lie to your kids in a similar manner?

Here's a quiz for you - Suppose you received in the mail a letter from a man who claims to be able to predict the market, asking you to invest with him, and he makes a prediction in the letter that the S&P 500 will go up over the next week. He turns out to be correct in his prediction. Do you invest with him? Of course not, it was one week, one prediction. But suppose he kept sending you letters, week after week - and each week he successfully predicts which way the market moves. How many weeks until you are convinced to invest with him?

Not sure how any of that is relevant to the fact that you 're lying to yourself.
Neither are you.

I'm betting you'd lose a fortune on the guy after about 10 weeks of him 'successfully' predicting the market.

I seriously feel much better knowing you have some guaranteed SS income coming even if your investment turn bad. Naive idiots like yourself are the precise reason the market booms and busts so hard in the first place.

I'm one of the naive idiots. It's always been my opinion that the major reason for market booms and busts is the greedy bastards running the show doing stupid shit they have no idea will work or not or for how long. Didn't know it was my fault. Sorry.
Of course that's why I put my money into long term, stable, slow growth funds. Seem to be doing okay. Not great, just okay. But what do I know?
Also, of course, I'll never see a penny of SS benefits as I'm way to young to retire and enjoy the fruits of my labor that the government and it's geniuses deem fit to steal from my paycheck. Dumb me. I'm aging too slowly.
Hey, what if I die tomorrow, can my loved ones get that cash that the government took?

Yes, your loved ones can get the money. You can get it too, if you become disabled.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

For the most part, and even more so for non-professionals

I see.
I have no issue with you lying to yourself like this -- but do you lie to your kids in a similar manner?

Here's a quiz for you - Suppose you received in the mail a letter from a man who claims to be able to predict the market, asking you to invest with him, and he makes a prediction in the letter that the S&P 500 will go up over the next week. He turns out to be correct in his prediction. Do you invest with him? Of course not, it was one week, one prediction. But suppose he kept sending you letters, week after week - and each week he successfully predicts which way the market moves. How many weeks until you are convinced to invest with him?

Not sure how any of that is relevant to the fact that you 're lying to yourself.
Neither are you.

I'm betting you'd lose a fortune on the guy after about 10 weeks of him 'successfully' predicting the market.

I seriously feel much better knowing you have some guaranteed SS income coming even if your investment turn bad. Naive idiots like yourself are the precise reason the market booms and busts so hard in the first place.

As I recall M14 is a very successful business owner with multiple businesses at least under his belt. I would trust his ability to make choices for himself over the government's choices, much less yours.

So its your contention that merely owning a business gives you an edge in the stock market. That makes zero sense. I'm glad we have ss for idiots like you and M14.

 

[Camp]

.

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.
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.

SS is guaranteed to default – they are going to change the benefits or the tax collections to meet future requirements.

That is a default on the original agreement.

No it isn't. Everyone has understood since the start and for the last 80 years adjustments and changes would and have taken place to grow and adapt to changing times.

What changes have been made in the last 20 years to account for people living longer and insure the solvency of the fund?

Both the amount of taxable income have been increased and the tax rate itself has been increased.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

For the most part, and even more so for non-professionals

I see.
I have no issue with you lying to yourself like this -- but do you lie to your kids in a similar manner?

Here's a quiz for you - Suppose you received in the mail a letter from a man who claims to be able to predict the market, asking you to invest with him, and he makes a prediction in the letter that the S&P 500 will go up over the next week. He turns out to be correct in his prediction. Do you invest with him? Of course not, it was one week, one prediction. But suppose he kept sending you letters, week after week - and each week he successfully predicts which way the market moves. How many weeks until you are convinced to invest with him?

Not sure how any of that is relevant to the fact that you 're lying to yourself.
Neither are you.

I'm betting you'd lose a fortune on the guy after about 10 weeks of him 'successfully' predicting the market.

I seriously feel much better knowing you have some guaranteed SS income coming even if your investment turn bad. Naive idiots like yourself are the precise reason the market booms and busts so hard in the first place.

I'm one of the naive idiots. It's always been my opinion that the major reason for market booms and busts is the greedy bastards running the show doing stupid shit they have no idea will work or not or for how long. Didn't know it was my fault. Sorry.
Of course that's why I put my money into long term, stable, slow growth funds. Seem to be doing okay. Not great, just okay. But what do I know?
Also, of course, I'll never see a penny of SS benefits as I'm way to young to retire and enjoy the fruits of my labor that the government and it's geniuses deem fit to steal from my paycheck. Dumb me. I'm aging too slowly.
Hey, what if I die tomorrow, can my loved ones get that cash that the government took?

Sorry you aren't planning on making it to retirement age. So sad

 

[Muhammed]

Jesus christ, what is wrong with this nut?

"
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.
"

Jeb Bush Next president should privatize Social Security
The one good thing is, he will never get elected now..

Did he really say that?

 

[nat4900]

Like climate change deniers, right wingers who do NOT believe in the "safety net" that SS represents, can only do so for the sake of an argument and just to be contrary.
These dimwits are probably Jeb Bush supporters......so, need I say more?

 

[nat4900]

Sigh, again with the gambling reference that shows you are utterly ignorant of what investing is.

Investing is not gambling by any measure whatsoever.

Go have another drink and blame your stupidity on the booze.

 

[nat4900]

Did he really say that?

Yep.......probably doesn't really want to be president.

 

[SillyWabbit]

I see.
I have no issue with you lying to yourself like this -- but do you lie to your kids in a similar manner?

Here's a quiz for you - Suppose you received in the mail a letter from a man who claims to be able to predict the market, asking you to invest with him, and he makes a prediction in the letter that the S&P 500 will go up over the next week. He turns out to be correct in his prediction. Do you invest with him? Of course not, it was one week, one prediction. But suppose he kept sending you letters, week after week - and each week he successfully predicts which way the market moves. How many weeks until you are convinced to invest with him?

Not sure how any of that is relevant to the fact that you 're lying to yourself.
Neither are you.

I'm betting you'd lose a fortune on the guy after about 10 weeks of him 'successfully' predicting the market.

I seriously feel much better knowing you have some guaranteed SS income coming even if your investment turn bad. Naive idiots like yourself are the precise reason the market booms and busts so hard in the first place.

I'm one of the naive idiots. It's always been my opinion that the major reason for market booms and busts is the greedy bastards running the show doing stupid shit they have no idea will work or not or for how long. Didn't know it was my fault. Sorry.
Of course that's why I put my money into long term, stable, slow growth funds. Seem to be doing okay. Not great, just okay. But what do I know?
Also, of course, I'll never see a penny of SS benefits as I'm way to young to retire and enjoy the fruits of my labor that the government and it's geniuses deem fit to steal from my paycheck. Dumb me. I'm aging too slowly.
Hey, what if I die tomorrow, can my loved ones get that cash that the government took?

Sorry you aren't planning on making it to retirement age. So sad

Meh, I'll just work until I die. What else is there?
That's why God made the Lotto.

 

[PratchettFan]

It doesn't. It gives the power to legislate to Congress. They legislated.
That would fall under Congress' authority to legislate and to provide for the general welfare. You will notice it didn't say just your welfare. General means everyone. As a citizen of this nation you have a duty to this nation. It is hoped people understand that and see it for what it is - a privilege offered to few. But that isn't necessary. Ultimately, you are free. If you don't think the deal is worth it, then you can find somewhere with a better offer. But your continued residence is a consent to the deal.

Ah. You're one of those.
Never mind.

Yes. And you are one of those.

Tell me: What your argument against others who want to impose their disagreeable version of morality upon you, and then succeed?

I do what I assume you are doing. I obey the law. I argue against it, I try to make my voice heard, but ultimately the law itself is more important than that it coincide with my desires. If I think the law is truly unacceptable, then I have the choice of obeying, disobeying and accepting the consequences or leaving.

More likely, you scream like a stuck pig.

Ahhhh.... and you're one of those too. Never mind.

 

[PratchettFan]

It should be privatized and people be able to invest their money in a limited fashion. SS does not even give someone enough to live on let alone create real wealth for the one that is paying for it. There are many benefits a privatized system would have not the least of which is the possibility of passing that asset down to your children should you not utilize all of it.

It isn't intended to create wealth or provide something to pass onto one's children. It is intended to allow you to live when you can no longer work. It is intended to keep a roof over your head and food in your belly and that is it. If you want more, then you need to prepare for retirement. SS doesn't remove responsibility to plan for your future, it just creates a safety net so you don't end up in living in a cardboard box eating out of garbage cans.

And that is the entire damn point. First, they fail to achieve the 'safety net' you are talking about anyway considering that SS does NOT pay out enough to live decently. Second, the program removes SIGNIFICANT wealth from your possession thereby limiting your ability to build a REAL asset.

YOU pay for it - you should expect an asset WORTH what you pay?

That is the entire point but I think you missed it. The system is not designed for you to live decently - whatever you mean by that. It is designed so you can live. If you want to live decently, you need to supplement social security. A safety net, to extend the metaphor, is intended to keep you from hitting the ground. Not to keep you on the high wire.

Your point is really bad.

Essentially it boils down to the idea that a ‘safety net’ that barely provides squat and you admit does not provide even a basic amount of comfort is preferable over wealth creation and developing a real asset.

That is insane.

The fallback that your side seems to go to continually is what happens when they lose it all and that is a sky falling asinine statement. Any privatization system should include safeguards to prevent this. We are not talking about investing your entire egg into typewriters. There are MANY investment opportunities that are very secure over the long term. You WILL lose money in the short term but will gain it in the long.

Add to that the benefit of allowing people to see real advantages and growth in their own fund and they will be FAR more likely to invest on their own as well.

In the current system your money goes down a dark hole (and you don’t even see half of it) for a ‘benefit’ that keeps you in poverty when you realize it.

No one is stopping you from wealth creation. You can put as much money as you like into creating wealth.

 

[GHook93]

It's commonsense economics that socialist will never understand!

Nonsense...The Chilean model is basically a 401K plan......and speaking of "socialism," the Chilean government demands that workers kick in 10% of their salary toward the [basically] government's plan.....

The problem is that Chile has many...if not most....very low-wages' workers and 10% of very little is....well, VERY LITTLE and, ultimately, the Chilean government will have to kick in a hefty amount or risk having retirees starving.

Again please do your research. The Chilean model is the best model in the world second to none.

Yes Chile s Private Pension Model Works Big Time - Investors.com
"In Chile, a major study shows the nation's private retirement accounts provide workers pensions worth 87% of their salaries, 73% of that from profits on savings. So much for the canard about the perils of markets.

The study of 28,000 households by Dictuc, a consultancy affiliated with the Catholic University of Chile, showed that male workers who contributed just 10% of their salaries to their retirements for 40 years or more on average earned retirement checks worth about 87% of their top salaries. No 401(k) account needed.

The Dictuc study shows Chile's private pensions over three decades have yielded returns six times higher than what workers got under Chile's old social security system — which, by the way, was similar to ours."

So what does the Chilean Model Do?

1. Produces 6x the return at retirement.
2. Is self-funded, so the government doesn't have to contribute anything and wouldn't eat up 20% of the budget as the US SS plan does.
3. Generates a ton of money that is invested in the country. SS sits and is never invested or put back into the community. Just like mutual fund capital is invested so in the money in the Chilean model

It makes too much sense and that is probably why liberals are against it.

Then put your after tax retirement investments in a Chilean type pension plan. You'll end up with that PLUS your Social Security, PLUS your Medicare.

I invest in my 401K and IRA, but I still get money taken out of my account every month for SS! If I could take that money and put it in my 401K and IRA I would, but the government doesn't allow that.

 

[GHook93]

Have the conservatives finally accepted the fact that SS is not communism? That was their battle cry for some time.

Red Herring and a very weak one. We scream that it's bankrupt, we scream that we get a negative return on investment, we scream that the Chileans have perfected a social security system that we should emulate and we scream that the government contributes 21% of the budget to SS, and the Chilean system would cut it down to 1-3%!

 

[GHook93]

Conservatives have had about 80 years to convince the American People that Social Security is a bad deal.

Give it up already.

Red Herring and a weak argument. The IDEA of social security is not only a good idea, but a necessary element for our society. Eventually the old (and disabled) can not work and we as a society need to take care of them. Liberals try to say that since social security is necessary (which most conservatives believe), that it's a scared cow that can't be touched. It should be amended and privatized the way the Chilean model was privatized.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Social Security makes you responsible for yourself. You'd prefer irresponsibility.

This is, of course, a lie.
I prefer choice, and once the choices.are made. expect others to take responsibility for their choices.
You know, like a responsible adult.

Successful investment has very little to do with anyone's choices....

Right, Successful investors are just lucky.

Sarcasm aside, YES, they are just as "lucky" as the professional GAMBLER who plays the odds...sometimes it works and most of the time it does not.....NO casino ever went broke from "succesful" gamblers.

Sigh, again with the gambling reference that shows you are utterly ignorant of what investing is.

Investing is not gambling by any measure whatsoever.

Other than the more favorable tax treatment for investing, explain how it is different.

 

[nat4900]

Liberals try to say that since social security is necessary (which most conservatives believe), that it's a scared cow that can't be touched. It should be amended and privatized the way the Chilean model was privatized

Again, with the Chilean system???.........Right wingers bitch constantly about the ACA mandates to enroll into a HC system.......BUT would welcome what the Chilean government MANDATES of workers to chip in 10% of their salary....Go Figure the hypocrisy.

Here are some of the criticism of what's happening in Chile:

Critics argue that the Chilean system leaves defenseless those independent workers who do not achieve the 20 years of payments required to gain access to a minimum pension, should their funds run out.

This is not a small problem. According to research by Isabel Márquez, research director at the Institute of Pension Fund Normalization, [Chile’s state-run pension system], in a study of 540 people registered in the system, 60.6% will not accumulate sufficient capital to get the minimum self-financed pension. Of those, 86% will also be unable to achieve the 240 contributions required to obtain a government guarantee. The country’s income levels make this situation worse. According to Marquez, 50.8% of all workers who belong to the system have incomes below 200,000 Chilean pesos a month (about $340.)

Chile s Pension Reform An Inspiration to Others - Knowledge Wharton

 

[Skull Pilot]

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

It isn't the stock market they fear, it's responsibility.

Leftist drones will suffer any indignity, including death, just so they never have to take blame for the outcomes that affect them. Camp yearns for a dictator to rule over him simply because then his fate will never be his fault.

I don't fear responsibility. Quite the opposite. I fear irresponsibility. In this context, I fear the irresponsibility of the dollar averaged moron Warren Buffet wanna be investors.

Why ar you so fearful? Do you need a psychiatrist?

I've read history.

Really which history?

The history of the stock market than has had positive returns in any 40 year period of its existence?

 

[Skull Pilot]

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.

Hm. That sounds statutory.
Where does the constitution say that as the price of being a citizen of this country, I am responsible for the poor decisions of others?

Social Security makes you responsible for yourself. You'd prefer irresponsibility.

This is, of course, a lie.
I prefer choice, and once the choices.are made. expect others to take responsibility for their choices.
You know, like a responsible adult.

Successful investment has very little to do with anyone's choices, especially when it involves people who are not professional investors.

Time in the market beats timing the market for average investors.
The first mutual fund I invested in at 18 has averaged an 11% return. That fund is still in my portfolio and will be for a long time.

You don't seem to understand a buy and hold strategy.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Social Security makes you responsible for yourself. You'd prefer irresponsibility.

This is, of course, a lie.
I prefer choice, and once the choices.are made. expect others to take responsibility for their choices.
You know, like a responsible adult.

Successful investment has very little to do with anyone's choices....

Right, Successful investors are just lucky.

Sarcasm aside, YES, they are just as "lucky" as the professional GAMBLER who plays the odds...sometimes it works and most of the time it does not.....NO casino ever went broke from "succesful" gamblers.

LOL! Good point. Its a little different though in that most casino games are designed for the house to win in the long run. If I buy a share of stock from you, my expected returns from the transaction are the same as yours (zero).

I should say - if you are trading on the floor, stock trading becomes more like a poker game. You need to know how to read physical signals from potential buyers or sellers, to determine how desperate they are to buy or sell. Floor trading relies a little less on luck and a little more on skill - just like poker.

Investing in the market and day trading on the floor are two completely different things.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Conservatives have had about 80 years to convince the American People that Social Security is a bad deal.

Give it up already.

Red Herring and a weak argument. The IDEA of social security is not only a good idea, but a necessary element for our society. Eventually the old (and disabled) can not work and we as a society need to take care of them. Liberals try to say that since social security is necessary (which most conservatives believe), that it's a scared cow that can't be touched. It should be amended and privatized the way the Chilean model was privatized.

It's hardly a weak argument to point out that the American people are not interested in having their SS privatized. It's the dealbreaker in anyone's proposal TO privatize it.

No it should not be privatized. There is no need for some outside entity to siphon a profit off an American worker's SS money.