thereisnospoon
Gold Member
- Apr 11, 2010
- 29,821
- 3,030
This is what you wrote:"The one advantage with SS is that should you die, your wife and kids will collect benefits until your kids turn 18. This benefit cannot be realized with your investment scenario outside of a separate life insurance policy. In the end, you're not going to see much difference. "Nonsense. If a person has an investment account, mutual fund or other investment vehicle, the funds can most certainly be bequeathed to another.The median salary is only $26,000. If we up that to $30,000, and if someone were to invest 15% for 45 years at 5%, the net savings after accounting for inflation and earnings would only be $325,000. This is assuming that the employer contributes half as they currently do to SS. Considering that current contributions to SS are only a combined 12.4% as the rest goes to Medicare, the current return via SS is only slightly less. The one advantage with SS is that should you die, your wife and kids will collect benefits until your kids turn 18. This benefit cannot be realized with your investment scenario outside of a separate life insurance policy. In the end, you're not going to see much difference. Based on the numbers you are using, you obviously took the median income as being double what it actually is, and you forgot to account for inflation. You need to do your calculations in today's dollars rather than future dollars if you want to show a constant value of the investment.
Bottom line is your op is a lie.
Where do you people get your information from? A Cracker Jack decoder ring?
The greed of the left for assets they did not earn knows no bounds.
Do you have any clue what you are talking about? You seem to be referring to the fact that you can pass your investment account on to survivors should you die. I made no such argument against that. What you don't think about is what happens when you die at an early age, before that investment has had time to grow. Get in the ballgame if you want to play.
Do you have a clue?
You imply that private investment is no good while cheer leading for the government option.
Apparently you fall into the category of those who think because you are unsure of yourself in matters financial, everyone else must be equally as foolish.