The truth about taxes

[Spiderman]

In the years prior to retirement, it doesn't matter what you balance if 40% of your equity is swept away in a matter of days.

Investing in the market is not a big deal to me b/c I don't do it. I almost started an investment company a few years ago predicated on stock options. Then I came to my senses and put an end to that crazy endeavor.

Here you go again denigrating the most wildly successful social insurance program in history: Social Security. SS is not and never has been a wealth creating device. It is social insurance b/c it is always reliable having never missed a benefit payment ever.

How you can claim with a straight face that investing in the Wall St. Casino is much better b/c you just might hit the jackpot is beyond me.

Again, Social Security is rock solid benefit payments. No risk. Wall Street is risky and people have lost their shirts and retirements. Maybe you remember the REITs that were the safest investment outside of T-bills. Those went belly up with much of the US market and there was not a damn thing you or anyone could have done about it b/c Wall St criminalized that investment and got away with the crime.

I'm sorry that you think Social Security is robbing you of your financial independence. That strikes me as hyperbole. You are getting or will get a SS benefit b/c at some point in your life you had W2 income. And since you don't pay FICA now b/c you are paid solely by passive income, what are you complaining about?

You see the millions of widows and children and disabled helped by SS and that bothers you to no end as an attack on your financial independence?

You and I are very different people.

If you had most of your assets in income funds and bonds then the temporary loss of 40% (and it's not really a loss unless you cashed out ) all was returned and then some.

Yeah I guess we are different. I expect people to be responsible

Again, the normal form of distribution in the super vast majority of retirement plans is only Lump Sum. You don't have a choice if you need your money to live. And most retirees do. You have the luxury of leaving the funds in the tax deferred trust to grow back. And your hindsight is wondefully 100%.

Lump sum? Are you kidding? You really think that when you retire ALL of the money in your 401K and IRAs is paid out to you in one lump sum?

Why don't you take a little time and learn a few things?

All qualified retirement plans are subject to a withdrawal formula that calculates the minimum required annual distribution. The remainder can stay invested.

What on god's green earth does responsibility have to do with Wall street stealing retirement plan assets? What does it have to do with the father killed in a car accident on his way to work leaving a family of 3 or 4 or 5 behind needing social security to make ends meet?

Who on Wall street has stolen your money?

If you are going to have kids then the first thing you should buy is life insurance in an amount sufficient to replace your income until your youngest child is 18. That's being responsible.

Do you think you're bullet proof? You're not. And just because you hold your real estate in an Scorp doesn't mean squat to a qualified attorney who can pierce that corporate veil faster than you can say 'income redistribution."

First of all I would have to be sued. I doubt that will happen because I protect my interests as much as leally possible. I do not do anything illegal in any of my business dealings never have never will.

Your answers serve your narrow purpose which seems to be, its all about you and your money. Hey it's a free country. I just think there's more to all of this than my own welfare.

I've been taking care of myself since I was 15. I was 100% self sufficient and on my own by 17. I don't think it's too much to ask other adults to do the same.

 

[P@triot]

The great thing about this country is opportunity to educate, learn, and apply yourself to achieve a better way of life than the one you currently find yourself in. No one is stopping you from achieving a business degree, own your own company, and treating your employees to the benefits YOU feel they deserve. Why look to others to set the example, when you can step out with a little "initiative" and lead by example? Show the rest of the business owners in America, just how easy it is to run a company and leave your employees with a better way of life. There are two kinds of people in this world; the complainers who's only key role is to find blame while getting nothing done, and the achievers who set out to actually make a difference. Which are you?

That's all terrific and those are words to live by. How does any of the things you've mentioned change the fact that the super-vast majority of people in the US are part of Labor and not part of the entreprenurial class?

That's their problem. They could be if they choose to be. They've made the conscious choice to live as parasites instead of producers.

You and I part ways on your reductionist closing. Complainers and Achievers? You do know that Labor does all of the productive work - the heavy lifting so to speak? Without Labor, you have empty factories, vacant restaurants, and practically every other economic pursuit under the sun is dead in the water.

And those people "doing the heavy lifting" get paid exactly what they are worth (and in the case of union extortion - a hell of a lot more). So what are you bitching about?

Your implicit shot at labor (complainers) falls on deaf ears. Look at the numbers. The owners of this country have seen their wealth go through the roof over the decades. And Labor? 45 million of them can't even get a decent health insurance plan.

So why don't those people become owners? Or, why don't you provide them with a "decent" insurance plan? Too lazy? Too greedy? No, really - you do all the crying. Why don't you get up off of your ass and actually solve the problem yourself in the FREE MARKET without forcing me to do it for you?

Why don't you start an insurance company and offer cadillac plans for $1 a month? It would literally solve all problems on every side:

• 100% of Americans would have coverage
  
  
• It would be affordable
  
  
• It would be Constitutional
  
  
• It would provide the coverage Obama wants
  
  
• You would end up filthy "rich" and an American hero

Well?

 

[P@triot]

I have never seen more unpaid cheerleaders for the wealthy than in this thread.

The rich are engaging in class warfare against you. And they are winning hands down.

They are rich. You are not.

"Rich" means the relative gap / disparity between their net worth and yours.

You are labor. Labor is to be controlled because that keeps the relative gap between what they have and you have operational and that keeps them in the driver's seat.

Labor is necessary to productivity. Not everyone can be the rich boss. Someone has to do the work. And doing that necessary work should not relegate the workforce to living paycheck to paycheck with no prospect or hint of security. Redistribution is what government does. Kick a little bit of that gravy to the working men and women.

Honestly, stop helping these guys that own you. They don't need your help.

You know who does need your help? People just like you: Labor.

There you have it folks. An accidental moment of honesty from a communist. Redistribute wealth.

Sorry asshole - the Constitution guarantees what belongs to me is mine and cannot be taken or "redistributed". If you don't like freedom - if you're too lazy for it, Cuba is waiting. Enjoy!

 

[P@triot]

Social security is forced dependence and forced poverty.

At least I don't have to feed that particular government pig anymore.

 

[P@triot]

Social security is forced dependence and forced poverty.

At least I don't have to feed that particular government pig anymore.

Really? That bad?

Because I see a program that keeps an estimated 14-22 million (mostly elderly) above the poverty line (depending on whom you ask).

The program assists widows and their kids in making ends meet.

It helps the disabled survive.

You don't pay payroll taxes? You must be a state employee...a public school teacher covered by a collectively bargained retirement plan? Well done. Or you're part of the clergy. No disrespect Father.

And this is where you display your enormous and profound ignorance [MENTION=46262]RightDown[/MENTION]. See, it is not the responsibility of the federal government to keep people "above the poverty line".

You're not entitled to what other people earn. Period.

 

[P@triot]

I have never seen more unpaid cheerleaders for the wealthy than in this thread.

The rich are engaging in class warfare against you. And they are winning hands down.

They are rich. You are not.

"Rich" means the relative gap / disparity between their net worth and yours.

You are labor. Labor is to be controlled because that keeps the relative gap between what they have and you have operational and that keeps them in the driver's seat.

Labor is necessary to productivity. Not everyone can be the rich boss. Someone has to do the work. And doing that necessary work should not relegate the workforce to living paycheck to paycheck with no prospect or hint of security. Redistribution is what government does. Kick a little bit of that gravy to the working men and women.

Honestly, stop helping these guys that own you. They don't need your help.

You know who does need your help? People just like you: Labor.

It's a strange phenomenon, isn't it. I think it's a reflection of the belief that rather than being middle class or lower, they're just temporarily embarrassed millionaires. Any day now, that ship is gonna come in. How they think that will happen, I have no idea. Most of these people are too stupid to come up with a new technology or even some half-assed invention. Maybe they play the lottery or something. Or could it be multi-level marketing? The only thing I disagree with you about is that they're 'labor'. I've never seen a group of people with more time on their hands.

It's simple really [MENTION=37583]JoeNormal[/MENTION]. Please allow me to explain it to you:

We are smart. You are ignorant.

We've studied history. You've ignored it.

We work hard. You are lazy.

Our policies create booming economies such as those we see in North Dakota, South Carolina, and Texas. Your policies create poverty and collapse such as those we've seen in Detroit (city), California (state), and the Obama economy (federal).

See how simple it is? Any questions?

 

[P@triot]

I have never seen more unpaid cheerleaders for the wealthy than in this thread.

The rich are engaging in class warfare against you. And they are winning hands down.

They are rich. You are not.

"Rich" means the relative gap / disparity between their net worth and yours.

You are labor. Labor is to be controlled because that keeps the relative gap between what they have and you have operational and that keeps them in the driver's seat.

Labor is necessary to productivity. Not everyone can be the rich boss. Someone has to do the work. And doing that necessary work should not relegate the workforce to living paycheck to paycheck with no prospect or hint of security. Redistribution is what government does. Kick a little bit of that gravy to the working men and women.

Honestly, stop helping these guys that own you. They don't need your help.

You know who does need your help? People just like you: Labor.

Here you go [MENTION=46262]RightDown[/MENTION] - since you're a Dumbocrat, I have dumbed it down for you:

 

[P@triot]

False dichotemy.

Those are not the only choices we are allowed to choose from.

Exactly. If the same American drawing that $1230 a month had been allowed to invest that money instead of paying it to the government all those years, the person would almost surely have a much more comfortable retirement when he/she decided to retire. PLUS if he or she did not need or use the money it can be given to charity or bequeathed to heirs or whatever the person chooses to do with it. Any unused portions of all the money we pay into social security is swallowed up by the government and is available to nobody.

Ahahahahaa......So what do we do then with the person who did just that, took the risk of investment, and then lost the investment? Just say no when he or she applies for SS when they turn 65 and have nothing?

Now if you had said savings account instead of investment, that would make more sense.

We let them live with the results of their own choices made through free will.

Gee...imagine that you idealistic, immature, utopian craving asshat [MENTION=41423]NoTeaPartyPleez[/MENTION].

 

[RightDown]

If you had most of your assets in income funds and bonds then the temporary loss of 40% (and it's not really a loss unless you cashed out ) all was returned and then some.

Yeah I guess we are different. I expect people to be responsible

Again, the normal form of distribution in the super vast majority of retirement plans is only Lump Sum. You don't have a choice if you need your money to live. And most retirees do. You have the luxury of leaving the funds in the tax deferred trust to grow back. And your hindsight is wondefully 100%.

Lump sum? Are you kidding? You really think that when you retire ALL of the money in your 401K and IRAs is paid out to you in one lump sum?

Why don't you take a little time and learn a few things?

All qualified retirement plans are subject to a withdrawal formula that calculates the minimum required annual distribution. The remainder can stay invested.





Who on Wall street has stolen your money?

If you are going to have kids then the first thing you should buy is life insurance in an amount sufficient to replace your income until your youngest child is 18. That's being responsible.

Do you think you're bullet proof? You're not. And just because you hold your real estate in an Scorp doesn't mean squat to a qualified attorney who can pierce that corporate veil faster than you can say 'income redistribution."

First of all I would have to be sued. I doubt that will happen because I protect my interests as much as leally possible. I do not do anything illegal in any of my business dealings never have never will.

Your answers serve your narrow purpose which seems to be, its all about you and your money. Hey it's a free country. I just think there's more to all of this than my own welfare.

I've been taking care of myself since I was 15. I was 100% self sufficient and on my own by 17. I don't think it's too much to ask other adults to do the same.

Look pal, I have worked with tax qualified retirement plans for over 15 years. I think I have a slightly better understanding of how they work than you do. And suffice it to say, you are completely wrong with your statement. How do I know? B/c you just described requirede minimum distributions which have nothing to do with a retirement plan's normal form of distribution benefit. RMDs are set up so people cannot leave their assets in the tax qualified trust indefinitely, they have to start taking a taste at age 70.5 unless they are non-highly compensated employees still working at that age.

Lump sum distributions are, by far and away, the primary and sole form of distribution in most plans.

Please don't be so snide with your exhortations for me to learn a few things, OK? May I remind you that you were talking out of your ass about your Scorp distributions, FICA and unearned income. And here you are doing it again, yet you accuse me of being ignorant. Please stop that.

Who stole my money from Wall Street? I'm sorry were you in a coma from 2008 until this morning? I don't mean to be flippant, but, come on. I'm not going to educate you about the crash of the real estate industry manfuctured by Wall Street. In your words, "Why don't you take a little time and learn a few things?"

Buy Life insurance? Great. With what. I mentioned that most of Labor has little to no income after expenses and you said that was irrelevant. Fine. Ok. Let's play that game. $100,000 in life insurance to cover the costs of the permanent removal of the primary breadwinner. Now I'm sure with your investment acumen you'd have that amount tripled in a week, but average people losing their main source of income find that that money evaporates pretty quickly.

You don't have to do anything illegal to have your assets reached...just negligent...whoopsie.

Congratulations on your life of rugged individualism. I've been on my own since I was 14. I've learned that life is its own reward and meaning only exists in the service of others. And I've smiled today. Have you?

 

[RightDown]

Social security is forced dependence and forced poverty.

At least I don't have to feed that particular government pig anymore.

Really? That bad?

Because I see a program that keeps an estimated 14-22 million (mostly elderly) above the poverty line (depending on whom you ask).

The program assists widows and their kids in making ends meet.

It helps the disabled survive.

You don't pay payroll taxes? You must be a state employee...a public school teacher covered by a collectively bargained retirement plan? Well done. Or you're part of the clergy. No disrespect Father.

And this is where you display your enormous and profound ignorance [MENTION=46262]RightDown[/MENTION]. See, it is not the responsibility of the federal government to keep people "above the poverty line".

You're not entitled to what other people earn. Period.

Judging by the quality of your thinking memorialized in your responses, I'd say you are about 13 years old. And a big fan of Ayn Rand.

The people are responisble for the general welfare of the citizenry. Didn't you know that?

I guess you didn't.

 

[Spiderman]

Again, the normal form of distribution in the super vast majority of retirement plans is only Lump Sum. You don't have a choice if you need your money to live. And most retirees do. You have the luxury of leaving the funds in the tax deferred trust to grow back. And your hindsight is wondefully 100%.

Lump sum? Are you kidding? You really think that when you retire ALL of the money in your 401K and IRAs is paid out to you in one lump sum?

Why don't you take a little time and learn a few things?

All qualified retirement plans are subject to a withdrawal formula that calculates the minimum required annual distribution. The remainder can stay invested.





Who on Wall street has stolen your money?

If you are going to have kids then the first thing you should buy is life insurance in an amount sufficient to replace your income until your youngest child is 18. That's being responsible.



First of all I would have to be sued. I doubt that will happen because I protect my interests as much as leally possible. I do not do anything illegal in any of my business dealings never have never will.

Your answers serve your narrow purpose which seems to be, its all about you and your money. Hey it's a free country. I just think there's more to all of this than my own welfare.

I've been taking care of myself since I was 15. I was 100% self sufficient and on my own by 17. I don't think it's too much to ask other adults to do the same.

Look pal, I have worked with tax qualified retirement plans for over 15 years. I think I have a slightly better understanding of how they work than you do. And suffice it to say, you are completely wrong with your statement. How do I know? B/c you just described requirede minimum distributions which have nothing to do with a retirement plan's normal form of distribution benefit. RMDs are set up so people cannot leave their assets in the tax qualified trust indefinitely, they have to start taking a taste at age 70.5 unless they are non-highly compensated employees still working at that age.

Lump sum distributions are, by far and away, the primary and sole form of distribution in most plans.

prove it

Please don't be so snide with your exhortations for me to learn a few things, OK? May I remind you that you were talking out of your ass about your Scorp distributions, FICA and unearned income. And here you are doing it again, yet you accuse me of being ignorant. Please stop that.

I don't give a shit what you think. You said you don't invest because it's gambling and then you think you can tell me that the vast majority of people take ALL their money out of retirement savings in one lump sum and then lose all the advantages of tax deferral.

At most a retiring employee might have to roll his 401K into his IRA to get the money off the company books but that is not a lump sum distribution and then RMD rules still apply.

Anyone who takes all his money out of a qualified retirement account in one lump sum is an idiot and deserves to be broke.
.

Who stole my money from Wall Street? I'm sorry were you in a coma from 2008 until this morning? I don't mean to be flippant, but, come on. I'm not going to educate you about the crash of the real estate industry manfuctured by Wall Street. In your words, "Why don't you take a little time and learn a few things?"

Funny I didn't lose any money in 2008 and neither did you since you don't "gamble". In fact my portfolio has come back and then some so tell me how was any of my money "stolen"?

Buy Life insurance? Great. With what. I mentioned that most of Labor has little to no income after expenses and you said that was irrelevant. Fine. Ok. Let's play that game. $100,000 in life insurance to cover the costs of the permanent removal of the primary breadwinner. Now I'm sure with your investment acumen you'd have that amount tripled in a week, but average people losing their main source of income find that that money evaporates pretty quickly.

If you can't afford kids then don't have them. again that is being responsible.

You don't have to do anything illegal to have your assets reached...just negligent...whoopsie.

I'm not negligent. In fact I am probably overly cautious.

Congratulations on your life of rugged individualism. I've been on my own since I was 14. I've learned that life is its own reward and meaning only exists in the service of others. And I've smiled today. Have you?

So you were living on your own paying rent and working full time at 14?

I doubt that.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

I think you've mistaken the need of the individual to assume personal responsibliity for their own decisions in determining where they are in life, for the need to assimilate as part of a collective towards socialized medicine. Whether a person succeeds or fails in life is directly dependent upon the choices they make. There is nothing wrong when someone "fails" at achieving after certain goals in life, as failure in itself can become the best educator to those not afraid to face it. When we allow someone else [government] to make those choices for us, we become enslaved to the reality of someone else determining the outcome of our lives for us. Coincidently, if you think people can't be denied treatment for the sake of saving on costs for the benefit of the "whole", you haven't researched into the effects socialized medicine has on those who already live under its system - like those of Great Britain under NHS.

You can't reduce life's vicisstudes down to merely choices. Let's expand that effort a bit- person / talent, place and time. Choices are made contextually. Sometimes there are limited people and limited circumstances. I don't think watching someone crash and burn because they do not have the financial circumstances to afford healthcare makes them deserve their fate any more than the Paris Hilton's of the world being born to generational wealth.

Canada's health insurance is universal and eminently superior to our brand of insurance. Everyone's covered by the same insurance guaranteeing superior coverage..after all, if the wealthy have the same coverage as the poor...they wouldn't settle for less.

If Universal healthcare is slavery in your books, I'll gladly tow those chains for the rest of my days. It's certainly preferable to the current form of slavery in our country..the one that fashions opinion to serve the plutocracy. That is an insidious whorish slavery...and it is quite rampant.

You may be unaware, but Canada's high court ruled to allow patients to utilize private health care. They recognized the quality of the national health system to be inferior in meeting with the needs to provide care in as timely fashion. In fact Canada's wait time to receive treatment is the worst of any other nation's health care system, including the United States. A universal system is shown that it doesn't reduce health care costs and lowers the quality of care for its patients.

 

[RightDown]

Lump sum? Are you kidding? You really think that when you retire ALL of the money in your 401K and IRAs is paid out to you in one lump sum?

Why don't you take a little time and learn a few things?

All qualified retirement plans are subject to a withdrawal formula that calculates the minimum required annual distribution. The remainder can stay invested.

Who on Wall street has stolen your money?

If you are going to have kids then the first thing you should buy is life insurance in an amount sufficient to replace your income until your youngest child is 18. That's being responsible.

First of all I would have to be sued. I doubt that will happen because I protect my interests as much as leally possible. I do not do anything illegal in any of my business dealings never have never will.



I've been taking care of myself since I was 15. I was 100% self sufficient and on my own by 17. I don't think it's too much to ask other adults to do the same.

Look pal, I have worked with tax qualified retirement plans for over 15 years. I think I have a slightly better understanding of how they work than you do. And suffice it to say, you are completely wrong with your statement. How do I know? B/c you just described requirede minimum distributions which have nothing to do with a retirement plan's normal form of distribution benefit. RMDs are set up so people cannot leave their assets in the tax qualified trust indefinitely, they have to start taking a taste at age 70.5 unless they are non-highly compensated employees still working at that age.

Lump sum distributions are, by far and away, the primary and sole form of distribution in most plans.

prove it



I don't give a shit what you think. You said you don't invest because it's gambling and then you think you can tell me that the vast majority of people take ALL their money out of retirement savings in one lump sum and then lose all the advantages of tax deferral.

At most a retiring employee might have to roll his 401K into his IRA to get the money off the company books but that is not a lump sum distribution and then RMD rules still apply.

Anyone who takes all his money out of a qualified retirement account in one lump sum is an idiot and deserves to be broke.
.



Funny I didn't lose any money in 2008 and neither did you since you don't "gamble". In fact my portfolio has come back and then some so tell me how was any of my money "stolen"?



If you can't afford kids then don't have them. again that is being responsible.

You don't have to do anything illegal to have your assets reached...just negligent...whoopsie.

I'm not negligent. In fact I am probably overly cautious.

Congratulations on your life of rugged individualism. I've been on my own since I was 14. I've learned that life is its own reward and meaning only exists in the service of others. And I've smiled today. Have you?

So you were living on your own paying rent and working full time at 14?

I doubt that.

I just told you that I work in the retirement plan industry and here you go trumpeting your ignorance ...again.

Yes, people have the right to leave their money in the trust until they must take an RMD. But in the real world, the one that you seem to have zero grasp of, people that retire use their retirement funds to live on. The average 401k plan account balance at retirement is something like 130,000. There's small cross section of retirees that average around a quarter of million dollars. Doesn't really matter though once the fees and costs hit. Even the inventor of the 401k calls it a crock for most people.

People need their retirement dollars at retirement and most can't wait to recover market losses.

Novel concept...happens to be true. And it is also true that the only way to get that money is to take a distribution from the retirement plan. And since the vast majority of retirement plans only have a lump sum form of distribution, that is the form of benefit they take. It is illegal to circumvent plan provisions by providing benefit forms not in the plan's adoption agreement.

I'm certain you'll fire back that people should save more!! Let me put that to bed right now. Look at the average household income and how its flat lined over the years, look at the national savings rate, look at the cost of living. All those rank and file jobs out there have to be performed by somebody. Get it? Why should they be consigned to a horribly uncertain life doing work that is necessary to the operation of this economy / country?

You should have quit while you're a head. I have 15 years XP and an advanced degree in tax qualiified retirement planning and you're a Wikipedia Wiz.

I wouldn't mind your screw ups if you weren't such a bastard about it. But you are. You're insulting and pretty vicious. I don't know what's soured you on life but you are one hell of a hard roll.

So you lived long enough to earn the back the dough that was stolen from you in the great real estate heist. Congratulations. Think of how much more money you could have had if the boys on Wall Street hadn't taken a nice big portion of your pie for themselves. And they'll do it again, and you'll probably praise them for it too. I don't know.

Unfortunately your particular sociopathy is common amongst the far right wing. Freedom to you is nothing more than hoping to god people fail and feel it. Killed in an accident? Tough shit for the survivors, you should have bought more insurance that you clearly cannot afford. Can't afford life insurance? Then you shouldn't have had kids to begin with? Lost your job b/c your fatass elitest boss moved the factory to Mexico? Tough, get out there and compete.
This stuff doesn't make you tough or self-reliant. It just makes you a monster.

And to answer your question pal, it was me whose father died at 39, unforseeabley and accidentally. I received SS and I worked to pay a mortgage at 14. I don't pat myself on the back for that nor do I feel that I have to stomp on other people just so I can feel a little bit better about myself and my efforts.

Give up your quest for self-esteem, it's nowheresville, man. Get engaged in life and with people and start serving them.

 

[JoeNormal]

Look pal, I have worked with tax qualified retirement plans for over 15 years. I think I have a slightly better understanding of how they work than you do. And suffice it to say, you are completely wrong with your statement. How do I know? B/c you just described requirede minimum distributions which have nothing to do with a retirement plan's normal form of distribution benefit. RMDs are set up so people cannot leave their assets in the tax qualified trust indefinitely, they have to start taking a taste at age 70.5 unless they are non-highly compensated employees still working at that age.

Lump sum distributions are, by far and away, the primary and sole form of distribution in most plans.

prove it



I don't give a shit what you think. You said you don't invest because it's gambling and then you think you can tell me that the vast majority of people take ALL their money out of retirement savings in one lump sum and then lose all the advantages of tax deferral.

At most a retiring employee might have to roll his 401K into his IRA to get the money off the company books but that is not a lump sum distribution and then RMD rules still apply.

Anyone who takes all his money out of a qualified retirement account in one lump sum is an idiot and deserves to be broke.
.



Funny I didn't lose any money in 2008 and neither did you since you don't "gamble". In fact my portfolio has come back and then some so tell me how was any of my money "stolen"?



If you can't afford kids then don't have them. again that is being responsible.



I'm not negligent. In fact I am probably overly cautious.

Congratulations on your life of rugged individualism. I've been on my own since I was 14. I've learned that life is its own reward and meaning only exists in the service of others. And I've smiled today. Have you?

So you were living on your own paying rent and working full time at 14?

I doubt that.

I just told you that I work in the retirement plan industry and here you go trumpeting your ignorance ...again.

Yes, people have the right to leave their money in the trust until they must take an RMD. But in the real world, the one that you seem to have zero grasp of, people that retire use their retirement funds to live on. The average 401k plan account balance at retirement is something like 130,000. There's small cross section of retirees that average around a quarter of million dollars. Doesn't really matter though once the fees and costs hit. Even the inventor of the 401k calls it a crock for most people.

People need their retirement dollars at retirement and most can't wait to recover market losses.

Novel concept...happens to be true. And it is also true that the only way to get that money is to take a distribution from the retirement plan. And since the vast majority of retirement plans only have a lump sum form of distribution, that is the form of benefit they take. It is illegal to circumvent plan provisions by providing benefit forms not in the plan's adoption agreement.

I'm certain you'll fire back that people should save more!! Let me put that to bed right now. Look at the average household income and how its flat lined over the years, look at the national savings rate, look at the cost of living. All those rank and file jobs out there have to be performed by somebody. Get it? Why should they be consigned to a horribly uncertain life doing work that is necessary to the operation of this economy / country?

You should have quit while you're a head. I have 15 years XP and an advanced degree in tax qualiified retirement planning and you're a Wikipedia Wiz.

I wouldn't mind your screw ups if you weren't such a bastard about it. But you are. You're insulting and pretty vicious. I don't know what's soured you on life but you are one hell of a hard roll.

So you lived long enough to earn the back the dough that was stolen from you in the great real estate heist. Congratulations. Think of how much more money you could have had if the boys on Wall Street hadn't taken a nice big portion of your pie for themselves. And they'll do it again, and you'll probably praise them for it too. I don't know.

Unfortunately your particular sociopathy is common amongst the far right wing. Freedom to you is nothing more than hoping to god people fail and feel it. Killed in an accident? Tough shit for the survivors, you should have bought more insurance that you clearly cannot afford. Can't afford life insurance? Then you shouldn't have had kids to begin with? Lost your job b/c your fatass elitest boss moved the factory to Mexico? Tough, get out there and compete.
This stuff doesn't make you tough or self-reliant. It just makes you a monster.

And to answer your question pal, it was me whose father died at 39, unforseeabley and accidentally. I received SS and I worked to pay a mortgage at 14. I don't pat myself on the back for that nor do I feel that I have to stomp on other people just so I can feel a little bit better about myself and my efforts.

Give up your quest for self-esteem, it's nowheresville, man. Get engaged in life and with people and start serving them.

Bravo! Spiderman made it through life mostly unscathed (probably more due to circumstance than planning) and can't understand why anyone else might need help.

 

[thereisnospoon]

I have never seen more unpaid cheerleaders for the wealthy than in this thread.

The rich are engaging in class warfare against you. And they are winning hands down.

They are rich. You are not.

"Rich" means the relative gap / disparity between their net worth and yours.

You are labor. Labor is to be controlled because that keeps the relative gap between what they have and you have operational and that keeps them in the driver's seat.

Labor is necessary to productivity. Not everyone can be the rich boss. Someone has to do the work. And doing that necessary work should not relegate the workforce to living paycheck to paycheck with no prospect or hint of security. Redistribution is what government does. Kick a little bit of that gravy to the working men and women.

Honestly, stop helping these guys that own you. They don't need your help.

You know who does need your help? People just like you: Labor.

I have seen leftist pro union pap before, but you are the all time award winner.
You poor uninformed individual....Without business there is no need for labor.
You rail against the wealthy, yet you whine about jobs and wages. Ok genius, who do you think builds the businesses that create the jobs and enable workers to receive a paycheck?
Deal with this fact. The person or people who've risked everything to build a business have all of the skin in the game. The workers have very little. They can walk away anytime they like and find another company for employment. Meanwhile if the business dies, the owners are left with nothing.
And you have the gall to whine about business owners. BTW , Mr I hate capitalism, most business owners are NOT wealthy. In fact I know a guy who is a painting contractor. He also works for the temp agency I use when I need additional labor for large jobs. Another guy with that same temp agency who also works with me is a brick mason.
I request these men because they are reliable and do good work. They know better.
There is no such thing as a wealth gap or income gap. These concepts are born of the liberal agenda of class envy as a political tool.
There is no "share". It is none of anyone's business what another person earns or does with their money. There is one thing we all are required to realize. Another person's money is NOT OUR money.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Really? That bad?

Because I see a program that keeps an estimated 14-22 million (mostly elderly) above the poverty line (depending on whom you ask).

The program assists widows and their kids in making ends meet.

It helps the disabled survive.

You don't pay payroll taxes? You must be a state employee...a public school teacher covered by a collectively bargained retirement plan? Well done. Or you're part of the clergy. No disrespect Father.

If you took the money taken from people for SS and the employer match and held it in a private account for the length of a working career and you would have a real nest egg

And since I am on no one's payroll I do not pay payroll taxes. All my income is taxed as ordinary income and therefore not subject to payroll taxes.

You might want to learn a little bit about the tax code if you're going to make assumptions like the ones in your post.

You're probably right about me. I always have a lot to learn. If you are a sole proprietor, as you intimate, you still pay FICA. And if you aren't paying FICA, you'll get caught. Why don't you just tell everyone what sort of a business entity you have? There are very few exceptions to the payroll tax.

Your nest egg scenario sounds good on paper but in reality it's a loser. First of all, you lose a large portion of your benefits to administrative costs (even if you run your own brokerage account and SS admin costs are minute), second, the boys on wall street cull all investments of up to 40% of the value every few years or so, and last, SS is social insurance. You are your brother's keeper b/c it makes for a stronger society. Your way is a dead end to the poor house b/c it is not as reliable as social insurance for benefits paid..

You are correct on one point. You do indeed have a lot to learn.

 

[thereisnospoon]

The Dow is at 16000 because a corrupt and inept government has made the stock market the ONLY hedge most Americans have against runaway inflation--inflation that the government tries to hide by keeping interest rates artificially low and flat out lies about when it says runaway government spending is not creating negative inflationary pressures. Greece is the country that is currently experiencing the worst economy among developed countries in the world. But its stock market is doing just fine for the same reason ours is.

Private sources crashed our economy. The government failed to regulate the financial sector properly. Runaway greed and criminality amongst the financial sector players doomed our economy necessitating a bailout by the gov. in the trillions.

Greece's economy is nothing like the US economy. The US is monetarily sovereign. Greece, as a member of the Euro-nations, is not.

Greece's federal government must live within means set by the Euro. The US federal government has no means to live within. The only boundary to the government's ability to pay any bill on demand is that of inflation. And the US has been flirting more with deflation over the past few years...no COLAs, remember?

" The US federal government has no means to live within."..
I'm wondering how you do not see a problem with that.

 

[thereisnospoon]

That's all terrific and those are words to live by. How does any of the things you've mentioned change the fact that the super-vast majority of people in the US are part of Labor and not part of the entreprenurial class?

You and I part ways on your reductionist closing. Complainers and Achievers? You do know that Labor does all of the productive work - the heavy lifting so to speak? Without Labor, you have empty factories, vacant restaurants, and practically every other economic pursuit under the sun is dead in the water. Your implicit shot at Labor (complainers) falls on deaf ears. Look at the numbers. The owners of this country have seen their wealth go through the roof over the decades. And Labor? 45 million of them can't even get a decent health insurance plan.

I shed no tears for the wealthy. They don't need me...except to do the work from which they prosper quite well.

This is all a part of the choices we make for ourselves, the lifestyle we are willing to build for ourselves. Do you expect me to look to the individual who chooses to work at a fast food chain as a manager and say that "I" should have more of an understanding for those decisions they make? Should their compensation between them and that of an educated experience level of a surgeon be less of a salary gap? Just how are we to determine someone's pay scale if not based on education and skill level? I'm not willing to pay someone a salary of $70,000 for flipping burgers, sorry. If you desire to make a better life for yourself, then stop with the wallowing sad story, and work to achieve a salaried job you are happy with.

I also see that you are unwilling to demonstrate exactly how a business "ought" to be run through your demonstration of 'good faith' as owner. Why should such an opportunity discourage you, if all the tools to learn how to attain and run a business are there? Why stop at simply being among the labor force, and not strive for something that is more gratifying to your cause?

You've made an excellent case for Universal Healthcare. Under that scenario, the burger flipper is covered and the private owner is free to pursue profit. The risk is shared universally and payments for coverage are buttressed by our monetarily sovereign federal government.

Again, Labor is necessary to all production. Labor is comprised of practically all americans. We need solutions, not complaints about the costs of coverage. And as you inferred, Universal Healthcare coverage would ameliorate both matters quite well.

You must be joking.
Tell us, oh great one, how does the US Govt build, fund and administer a health insurance program for 315 million people?
From where does the money to pay for it come?

 

[P@triot]

Really? That bad?

Because I see a program that keeps an estimated 14-22 million (mostly elderly) above the poverty line (depending on whom you ask).

The program assists widows and their kids in making ends meet.

It helps the disabled survive.

You don't pay payroll taxes? You must be a state employee...a public school teacher covered by a collectively bargained retirement plan? Well done. Or you're part of the clergy. No disrespect Father.

And this is where you display your enormous and profound ignorance [MENTION=46262]RightDown[/MENTION]. See, it is not the responsibility of the federal government to keep people "above the poverty line".

You're not entitled to what other people earn. Period.

Judging by the quality of your thinking memorialized in your responses, I'd say you are about 13 years old. And a big fan of Ayn Rand.

The people are responisble for the general welfare of the citizenry. Didn't you know that?

I guess you didn't.

Judging by the idiocy of your responses, I'd say you're retarded and drooling on yourself.

The people are not responsible for shit, you marxist idiot. The person is responsible for the individual. When needed, they can draw voluntary assistance from their family, their friends, their neighbors, their church, their community, and charity.

Welcome to America. If you're so afraid of freedom and choice, Cuba is waiting for you...

 

[RightDown]

I have never seen more unpaid cheerleaders for the wealthy than in this thread.

The rich are engaging in class warfare against you. And they are winning hands down.

They are rich. You are not.

"Rich" means the relative gap / disparity between their net worth and yours.

You are labor. Labor is to be controlled because that keeps the relative gap between what they have and you have operational and that keeps them in the driver's seat.

Labor is necessary to productivity. Not everyone can be the rich boss. Someone has to do the work. And doing that necessary work should not relegate the workforce to living paycheck to paycheck with no prospect or hint of security. Redistribution is what government does. Kick a little bit of that gravy to the working men and women.

Honestly, stop helping these guys that own you. They don't need your help.

You know who does need your help? People just like you: Labor.

I have seen leftist pro union pap before, but you are the all time award winner.
You poor uninformed individual....Without business there is no need for labor.
You rail against the wealthy, yet you whine about jobs and wages. Ok genius, who do you think builds the businesses that create the jobs and enable workers to receive a paycheck?
Deal with this fact. The person or people who've risked everything to build a business have all of the skin in the game. The workers have very little. They can walk away anytime they like and find another company for employment. Meanwhile if the business dies, the owners are left with nothing.
And you have the gall to whine about business owners. BTW , Mr I hate capitalism, most business owners are NOT wealthy. In fact I know a guy who is a painting contractor. He also works for the temp agency I use when I need additional labor for large jobs. Another guy with that same temp agency who also works with me is a brick mason.
I request these men because they are reliable and do good work. They know better.
There is no such thing as a wealth gap or income gap. These concepts are born of the liberal agenda of class envy as a political tool.
There is no "share". It is none of anyone's business what another person earns or does with their money. There is one thing we all are required to realize. Another person's money is NOT OUR money.

Well what do you know another snotty right wing knowitall. Your assessment of the owner/worker risk apportionment is way off.

"In fact I know a guy...." I swear if it weren't for insults, uneducated observations and asinine anecdotal comments, you right wingers would be silent.

I rail against the financial elites that treat their workers like garbage...sort of the way you esteem labor.

I did not say that managers / owners are not necessary to build a business. But no more so than the Labor that truly does the work.

Do me a favor pal, unless you are management, you are labor, so stop stabbing your colleagues in the back playing Uncle Tom to the rich. They don't care about you. They don't need you...except as labor. you're not one of them

And one more thing Pal, the gap between net worth of individuals is what defines wealth, you moron. Otherwise if everyone had the same level of net worth, there would be no rich.

I swear to god you people aren't useful idiots for the plutocrats. You're downright dependable idiots.

I apologize for my lack of civility.