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.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
Mormon version of the Bible you mean. And it has nothing to do with this but thanks. This has to do with paying in a buck and getting back six.
Mormon version of the Bible you mean. And it has nothing to do with this but thanks. This has to do with paying in a buck and getting back six.
Uh-oh! PMH caught either lying again or caught being ignorant again. Either way, he has zero credibility...
"Early recipients of Social Security received more than six dollars in benefits for every dollar paid in Social Security taxes. Today and in the future, recipients will receive less than a dollar in benefits for every dollar paid in Social Security taxes"
What No One Wants to Admit About Social Security Taxes
70 is not the new 50. It's 70. I know how they pay out......They don't if they can help it. I would settle for the scumbags to give me back what I paid in.
70 is not the new 50. It's 70. I know how they pay out......They don't if they can help it. I would settle for the scumbags to give me back what I paid in.
What I see so many miss is a dollar in is not that same dollar out. Over the life of a worker the value of that dollar and its purchasing power drops due to inflation. Getting out what you put in would mean much more in payouts than you put in. Social Security is a scam plain and simple.
To answer the question, I would rather have the $1 million in PM's as they hold their value much better than a dollar.
I would imagine my spouse would rather have the $7 million that accumulated don't you think?If you die it goes to your spouse. So always.
The major point most objectors to this plan have is THEY look at ONE year decline of the market!
Since 1900 (end-of-year 1899), through 2010, the average total return/year of the DJIA (Dow Jones Industrial Average) was approximately 9.4% -- 4.8% in price appreciation, plus approx 4.7% in dividends. (Some numbers won't add up due to rounding.)
Observations: Average Stock Market Return Since 19xx
The major point most objectors to this plan have is THEY look at ONE year decline of the market!
Since 1900 (end-of-year 1899), through 2010, the average total return/year of the DJIA (Dow Jones Industrial Average) was approximately 9.4% -- 4.8% in price appreciation, plus approx 4.7% in dividends. (Some numbers won't add up due to rounding.)
Observations: Average Stock Market Return Since 19xx
The main objection is that it's a pay as you go system. The money I'm putting in is going to those who are now retired. If we change the system the currently retired run out of money. So it cannot be done.
The major point most objectors to this plan have is THEY look at ONE year decline of the market!
Since 1900 (end-of-year 1899), through 2010, the average total return/year of the DJIA (Dow Jones Industrial Average) was approximately 9.4% -- 4.8% in price appreciation, plus approx 4.7% in dividends. (Some numbers won't add up due to rounding.)
Observations: Average Stock Market Return Since 19xx
The main objection is that it's a pay as you go system. The money I'm putting in is going to those who are now retired. If we change the system the currently retired run out of money. So it cannot be done.
YOU ARE RIGHT!! The current system WILL run out of money because right now 2.5 workers support one retiree!
The privatization would be a CHOICE to anyone UNDER age 50 for example or some age that could be calculated.
So anyone say under 50 could choose:
A) Put my current FICA and my employers' contribution into a self directed savings account or stock program.
B) I don't wish to participate please continue as current plan.
So those that choose the privatized method would NO LONGER be the responsibility of the STATE.
Those that choose to continue to be the wards of the state would then count on the fixed payments at retirement.
The main objection is that it's a pay as you go system. The money I'm putting in is going to those who are now retired. If we change the system the currently retired run out of money. So it cannot be done.
YOU ARE RIGHT!! The current system WILL run out of money because right now 2.5 workers support one retiree!
The privatization would be a CHOICE to anyone UNDER age 50 for example or some age that could be calculated.
So anyone say under 50 could choose:
A) Put my current FICA and my employers' contribution into a self directed savings account or stock program.
B) I don't wish to participate please continue as current plan.
So those that choose the privatized method would NO LONGER be the responsibility of the STATE.
Those that choose to continue to be the wards of the state would then count on the fixed payments at retirement.
If lots of people make that choice there wouldn't be money for those currently collecting SS. Where would the money come from for those over 50 when they retire?
Much is made about 70 being the new 50,
70 is the new 50 in the Workforce | TIME.com
This means for people LIKE ME age 71 I am still very active in my business nearly as much as I was when I was 50!
So while I'm getting MINE.. i.e. social security I don't understand why especially younger people don't figure out that because there are more of people like me, i.e. living longer then what SS originally planned in the 1930s i.e. (I'd be dead by 65!) they need to fix this!
Because as more of us live longer and yet we have SS kicking in at 65. With more retired people at 65 getting SS there are fewer younger people paying in!
Solution..
A) Raise retirement age to 70 for all those people currently under age 50!
B) Give the younger people the chance to tell SS where to put their payments... privatize SS!
So by raising the age we have more people paying in for those younger people when they retire at 70!
But more importantly IF NOT mandatory BUT IF the young employee wants to invest say at 25 their SS/Medicare payments into
the wild and risky stock market for 20 years then the next 20 switch a portion to more secure investments and then last 20 years
into totally secured risk free investments.. this 25 year old would have base on average starting salary of $30,000 with increases
in income over the 60 years would have nearly $1 million that is solely under the young worker control!
So at age 70 getting ready to retire this young (now old retiree) has money set aside MORE then traditional SS would pay.
Also with $1 million the health care costs would be taken care of with no need for medicare!
AND AGAIN NO one would be forced to participate in the privatized SS... you want traditional more power!
Two solutions that would solve the "safety net" destruction that is ahead!
You need to factor in how much it would cost to fund an annuity that would pay equal to survivor benefits to both a child in school and a spouse caring for said child, as well as disability benefits a person may be eligible before retirement age.
When you factor in those costs, the actual retirement benefit of 1800 or 2400 or so bucks a month is actually not a bad return, even though SS is insurance rather than an investment.
Take the checks. It has a terrific return if you live that long. You'll get back much more than you paid in.
Horse shit.. you get a better return on a crappy savings or money market account... and you can pass on the leftovers
If you pay the maximum into SS then you will not get back more than you put in, but most Americans never come close to putting in the maximum, so they make out just fine and they don't have to worry whether the money will be there or not. As much as some people worry that they won't get their SS when they retire, the fact is that unless the entire federal government collapses, SS will be there for everyone.
And that is why it's a ponzi. Well that and the fact that it doubles with each generation of new "victims."Much is made about 70 being the new 50,
70 is the new 50 in the Workforce | TIME.com
This means for people LIKE ME age 71 I am still very active in my business nearly as much as I was when I was 50!
So while I'm getting MINE.. i.e. social security I don't understand why especially younger people don't figure out that because there are more of people like me, i.e. living longer then what SS originally planned in the 1930s i.e. (I'd be dead by 65!) they need to fix this!
Because as more of us live longer and yet we have SS kicking in at 65. With more retired people at 65 getting SS there are fewer younger people paying in!
Solution..
A) Raise retirement age to 70 for all those people currently under age 50!
B) Give the younger people the chance to tell SS where to put their payments... privatize SS!
So by raising the age we have more people paying in for those younger people when they retire at 70!
But more importantly IF NOT mandatory BUT IF the young employee wants to invest say at 25 their SS/Medicare payments into
the wild and risky stock market for 20 years then the next 20 switch a portion to more secure investments and then last 20 years
into totally secured risk free investments.. this 25 year old would have base on average starting salary of $30,000 with increases
in income over the 60 years would have nearly $1 million that is solely under the young worker control!
So at age 70 getting ready to retire this young (now old retiree) has money set aside MORE then traditional SS would pay.
Also with $1 million the health care costs would be taken care of with no need for medicare!
AND AGAIN NO one would be forced to participate in the privatized SS... you want traditional more power!
Two solutions that would solve the "safety net" destruction that is ahead!
I asked this before but don't think I got an answer.
Social security is a pay as you go system. So the money I'm putting in now is going for payments for people who are currently retired. So all my money is not just sitting somewhere waiting for me to collect. Given that, how can you start these private accounts? The money that would be used for them has to go to payments for current retirees.
And to further answer Brain, you can't start them. Your money has been done stolen and gone a long time ago.
And to further answer Brain, you can't start them. Your money has been done stolen and gone a long time ago.
I disagree. The money was not actually stolen, it was used and/or promised to be returned at a later time if you are lucky enough to live that long.
IMO the way out of this is to own up to the debt and pay everyone what they are owed in a cash buyout, unless you opt to leave your cash buyout in place and collect it from the government in the form of monthly SS checks as originally promised.
We can get the money to pay for the one time cash buy out by using our current system of unlimited expansion of credit. IOW we'll just write it off as an investment. (This means we'll just invent the money by expanding the overall monetary supply.) Granted there may be some inflationary price issues that year but what the hell.
At that point there would be no more SS taxes. They would not be needed because everyone would already have their SS money, either in their hands if they took it, or in an account in their name at the SS office in the case where they wanted to leave their money in the hands of govco.
And to further answer Brain, you can't start them. Your money has been done stolen and gone a long time ago.
I disagree. The money was not actually stolen, it was used and/or promised to be returned at a later time if you are lucky enough to live that long.
IMO the way out of this is to own up to the debt and pay everyone what they are owed in a cash buyout, unless you opt to leave your cash buyout in place and collect it from the government in the form of monthly SS checks as originally promised.
We can get the money to pay for the one time cash buy out by using our current system of unlimited expansion of credit. IOW we'll just write it off as an investment. (This means we'll just invent the money by expanding the overall monetary supply.) Granted there may be some inflationary price issues that year but what the hell.
At that point there would be no more SS taxes. They would not be needed because everyone would already have their SS money, either in their hands if they took it, or in an account in their name at the SS office in the case where they wanted to leave their money in the hands of govco.
You have a $ amount for what this buyout would be?
From the people that WERE NOT of the age to make the choice.The main objection is that it's a pay as you go system. The money I'm putting in is going to those who are now retired. If we change the system the currently retired run out of money. So it cannot be done.
YOU ARE RIGHT!! The current system WILL run out of money because right now 2.5 workers support one retiree!
The privatization would be a CHOICE to anyone UNDER age 50 for example or some age that could be calculated.
So anyone say under 50 could choose:
A) Put my current FICA and my employers' contribution into a self directed savings account or stock program.
B) I don't wish to participate please continue as current plan.
So those that choose the privatized method would NO LONGER be the responsibility of the STATE.
Those that choose to continue to be the wards of the state would then count on the fixed payments at retirement.
If lots of people make that choice there wouldn't be money for those currently collecting SS. Where would the money come from for those over 50 when they retire?
