Which would you rather have $1m in the bank or Social Security Check???

[Brain357]

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?

About 25t, give or take a few.

And that would be a good idea to you?

 

[Brain357]

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?

From the people that WERE NOT of the age to make the choice.
That's why I said "for example"... In 2014, over 59 million Americans will receive almost $863 billion in Social Security benefits.
There are currently 2.8 workers for each Social Security beneficiary. By 2033, there will be 2.1 workers for each beneficiary.
Social Security Administration: Social Security Basic Facts

Right now 2.8 workers SS deductions are pay one beneficiary an average of $1,294 monthly benefit.
In 1940, the life expectancy of a 65-year-old was almost 14 years; today it is about 20 years.

So two things will need to happen:
1) Retirement age for any of those UNDER say 50 years old that WANT to continue the current method would be 70.
2) Retirement age for any under 50 and want to choose would not be an issue.

Again.. I was suggesting age 50 would be the cut off point, i.e. any one under 50 can have the choice between privatize and traditional.
This decision age point is a suggestion that based on more thorough analysis might be older or younger depending on as you point out the payments for
those retiring.

In any event the SS trustees acknowledge going in the current method makes the reduction of payments in the future a certainty!
Social Security Administration: Social Security Basic Facts

The concepts of solvency, sustainability, and budget impact are common in discussions of Social Security, but are not well understood.
Currently, the Social Security Board of Trustees projects program cost to rise by 2035 so that taxes will be enough to pay for only 75 percent of scheduled benefits.

I don't see how the math could possibly workout. If somebody is 49 and decide to privatize are they starting back at 0? Cause there is no money there for them.

What is your cutoff for changing retirement to 70? Nobody wants to work till they are 70.

 

[healthmyths]

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?

From the people that WERE NOT of the age to make the choice.
That's why I said "for example"... In 2014, over 59 million Americans will receive almost $863 billion in Social Security benefits.
There are currently 2.8 workers for each Social Security beneficiary. By 2033, there will be 2.1 workers for each beneficiary.
Social Security Administration: Social Security Basic Facts

Right now 2.8 workers SS deductions are pay one beneficiary an average of $1,294 monthly benefit.
In 1940, the life expectancy of a 65-year-old was almost 14 years; today it is about 20 years.

So two things will need to happen:
1) Retirement age for any of those UNDER say 50 years old that WANT to continue the current method would be 70.
2) Retirement age for any under 50 and want to choose would not be an issue.

Again.. I was suggesting age 50 would be the cut off point, i.e. any one under 50 can have the choice between privatize and traditional.
This decision age point is a suggestion that based on more thorough analysis might be older or younger depending on as you point out the payments for
those retiring.

In any event the SS trustees acknowledge going in the current method makes the reduction of payments in the future a certainty!
Social Security Administration: Social Security Basic Facts

The concepts of solvency, sustainability, and budget impact are common in discussions of Social Security, but are not well understood.
Currently, the Social Security Board of Trustees projects program cost to rise by 2035 so that taxes will be enough to pay for only 75 percent of scheduled benefits.

I don't see how the math could possibly workout. If somebody is 49 and decide to privatize are they starting back at 0? Cause there is no money there for them.

What is your cutoff for changing retirement to 70? Nobody wants to work till they are 70.

So a 49 person wants to privatize. Fine. What has been put in till age 49 is paid out traditionally at 70 because the ONLY way to save traditional SS is to
raise the age to 70.

I'm 71 and I'm still working out of CHOICE. My friends that are retired are bored. They are mentally atrophying.
I'm challenged. So yes people today at 70 are the new 50!

And it will even more so when the 49 person turns 70 as 21 years later the average lifespan would be 75.
See no one thought when SS first set up in the 30s people would live past 65! So that's the magic age and guess what people are living beyond 70.

So the 49 keeps the traditional payments due them at age 70 while from 49 on invests in his OWN privatized SS.
Remember we are being told 401Ks and pensions are going away. So how else will there be a supplement to SS?

That 49 year old person would still get the SS payments PLUS now has accumulated easily $100,000 over the next 21 years. The major difference it is the person's accumulation!

 

[Brain357]

From the people that WERE NOT of the age to make the choice.
That's why I said "for example"... In 2014, over 59 million Americans will receive almost $863 billion in Social Security benefits.
There are currently 2.8 workers for each Social Security beneficiary. By 2033, there will be 2.1 workers for each beneficiary.
Social Security Administration: Social Security Basic Facts

Right now 2.8 workers SS deductions are pay one beneficiary an average of $1,294 monthly benefit.
In 1940, the life expectancy of a 65-year-old was almost 14 years; today it is about 20 years.

So two things will need to happen:
1) Retirement age for any of those UNDER say 50 years old that WANT to continue the current method would be 70.
2) Retirement age for any under 50 and want to choose would not be an issue.

Again.. I was suggesting age 50 would be the cut off point, i.e. any one under 50 can have the choice between privatize and traditional.
This decision age point is a suggestion that based on more thorough analysis might be older or younger depending on as you point out the payments for
those retiring.

In any event the SS trustees acknowledge going in the current method makes the reduction of payments in the future a certainty!
Social Security Administration: Social Security Basic Facts

The concepts of solvency, sustainability, and budget impact are common in discussions of Social Security, but are not well understood.
Currently, the Social Security Board of Trustees projects program cost to rise by 2035 so that taxes will be enough to pay for only 75 percent of scheduled benefits.

I don't see how the math could possibly workout. If somebody is 49 and decide to privatize are they starting back at 0? Cause there is no money there for them.

What is your cutoff for changing retirement to 70? Nobody wants to work till they are 70.

So a 49 person wants to privatize. Fine. What has been put in till age 49 is paid out traditionally at 70 because the ONLY way to save traditional SS is to
raise the age to 70.

I'm 71 and I'm still working out of CHOICE. My friends that are retired are bored. They are mentally atrophying.
I'm challenged. So yes people today at 70 are the new 50!

And it will even more so when the 49 person turns 70 as 21 years later the average lifespan would be 75.
See no one thought when SS first set up in the 30s people would live past 65! So that's the magic age and guess what people are living beyond 70.

So the 49 keeps the traditional payments due them at age 70 while from 49 on invests in his OWN privatized SS.
Remember we are being told 401Ks and pensions are going away. So how else will there be a supplement to SS?

That 49 year old person would still get the SS payments PLUS now has accumulated easily $100,000 over the next 21 years. The major difference it is the person's accumulation!

Ok so this guy is still going to collect his earned SS at 70? How is he going to do that if most the people his age or younger choose to privatize? There won't be any money. There won't be enough people paying in.

 

[healthmyths]

I don't see how the math could possibly workout. If somebody is 49 and decide to privatize are they starting back at 0? Cause there is no money there for them.

What is your cutoff for changing retirement to 70? Nobody wants to work till they are 70.

So a 49 person wants to privatize. Fine. What has been put in till age 49 is paid out traditionally at 70 because the ONLY way to save traditional SS is to
raise the age to 70.

I'm 71 and I'm still working out of CHOICE. My friends that are retired are bored. They are mentally atrophying.
I'm challenged. So yes people today at 70 are the new 50!

And it will even more so when the 49 person turns 70 as 21 years later the average lifespan would be 75.
See no one thought when SS first set up in the 30s people would live past 65! So that's the magic age and guess what people are living beyond 70.

So the 49 keeps the traditional payments due them at age 70 while from 49 on invests in his OWN privatized SS.
Remember we are being told 401Ks and pensions are going away. So how else will there be a supplement to SS?

That 49 year old person would still get the SS payments PLUS now has accumulated easily $100,000 over the next 21 years. The major difference it is the person's accumulation!

Ok so this guy is still going to collect his earned SS at 70? How is he going to do that if most the people his age or younger choose to privatize? There won't be any money. There won't be enough people paying in.

He'll be dead by then!

Look privatization isn't perfect. NOTHING is. But you tell me a better way of the fact which is this according to the SS Trustees!
Social Security Administration: Social Security Basic Facts
The concepts of solvency, sustainability, and budget impact are common in discussions of Social Security, but are not well understood.
Currently, the Social Security Board of Trustees projects program cost to rise by 2035 so that taxes will be enough to pay for only 75 percent of scheduled benefits.


YOU have a better IDEA???
Also maybe there is a better way of phasing in privatization.
Remember the whole point is there will never be enough money for the government to take care of everyone from womb to tomb.
There never was going to be enough because they didn't calculate people living beyond 65!

 

[Brain357]

So a 49 person wants to privatize. Fine. What has been put in till age 49 is paid out traditionally at 70 because the ONLY way to save traditional SS is to
raise the age to 70.

I'm 71 and I'm still working out of CHOICE. My friends that are retired are bored. They are mentally atrophying.
I'm challenged. So yes people today at 70 are the new 50!

And it will even more so when the 49 person turns 70 as 21 years later the average lifespan would be 75.
See no one thought when SS first set up in the 30s people would live past 65! So that's the magic age and guess what people are living beyond 70.

So the 49 keeps the traditional payments due them at age 70 while from 49 on invests in his OWN privatized SS.
Remember we are being told 401Ks and pensions are going away. So how else will there be a supplement to SS?

That 49 year old person would still get the SS payments PLUS now has accumulated easily $100,000 over the next 21 years. The major difference it is the person's accumulation!

Ok so this guy is still going to collect his earned SS at 70? How is he going to do that if most the people his age or younger choose to privatize? There won't be any money. There won't be enough people paying in.

He'll be dead by then!

Look privatization isn't perfect. NOTHING is. But you tell me a better way of the fact which is this according to the SS Trustees!
Social Security Administration: Social Security Basic Facts
The concepts of solvency, sustainability, and budget impact are common in discussions of Social Security, but are not well understood.
Currently, the Social Security Board of Trustees projects program cost to rise by 2035 so that taxes will be enough to pay for only 75 percent of scheduled benefits.


YOU have a better IDEA???
Also maybe there is a better way of phasing in privatization.
Remember the whole point is there will never be enough money for the government to take care of everyone from womb to tomb.
There never was going to be enough because they didn't calculate people living beyond 65!

The only way you could do it is if you get like a whole generation to pay into it but not collect. That's not going to happen.

I don't think you can get rid of it. People may have to get less benefits at some point, but it's not going away. I don't count on it at all for my retirement, so I suggest others do the same. When I retire whatever I get from SS will just be a bonus.

 

[MikeK]

Take the checks. It has a terrific return if you live that long. You'll get back much more than you paid in.

It's a black hole. I have paid into that Ponzi scheme for years and will collect NOTHING.

The belligerent voice of youth

It's difficult for those who are under fifty and are healthy to believe they ever will grow old. And it follows for those under the transitory spell of that common delusion to resent being forced by government to pay for something they doubt they will ever receive. It is the popularity of that delusion which fosters the equally popular notion that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme that will never pay off. And those bankers and Wall Street scam artists who already have ravaged the U.S. Economy would like nothing more than to have the Social Security fund turned over to them, which is why they are promoting the idea of privatizing it.

Let me assure you I was young and strong once and I had my doubts that anything as good as Social Security would be waiting for me when I reached sixty-five -- which, until I turned fifty I didn't believe would ever happen. But it did happen, a dozen years ago, and ever since then the Social Security Administration has direct-deposited a nice sum of cash in my checking account on the first day of every month without fail. And if I live another twenty years I have absolutely no valid reason to believe it won't continue.

So my advice to you and to others who are young and deluded by notions of eternal life, don't listen to the bankers and their toadies. Social Security, which is an insurance policy, not an investment program, has been paying off for seventy-five years without so much as a speed bump. And if Social Security ever does fail the cause will be so significant that the failure will be the least of the Nation's problems and you'll have a lot more than it to worry about.

So go ahead and enjoy your youth, which includes the delusion that you'll never grow old. Just don't be taken in by the bankers and the Wall Street types. Social Security will be waiting for you along with Medicare, senior discounts, and strong laxatives. And they make life a lot easier.

 

[healthmyths]

Take the checks. It has a terrific return if you live that long. You'll get back much more than you paid in.

It's a black hole. I have paid into that Ponzi scheme for years and will collect NOTHING.

The belligerent voice of youth

It's difficult for those who are under fifty and are healthy to believe they ever will grow old. And it follows for those under the transitory spell of that common delusion to resent being forced by government to pay for something they doubt they will ever receive. It is the popularity of that delusion which fosters the equally popular notion that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme that will never pay off. And those bankers and Wall Street scam artists who already have ravaged the U.S. Economy would like nothing more than to have the Social Security fund turned over to them, which is why they are promoting the idea of privatizing it.

Let me assure you I was young and strong once and I had my doubts that anything as good as Social Security would be waiting for me when I reached sixty-five -- which, until I turned fifty I didn't believe would ever happen. But it did happen, a dozen years ago, and ever since then the Social Security Administration has direct-deposited a nice sum of cash in my checking account on the first day of every month without fail. And if I live another twenty years I have absolutely no valid reason to believe it won't continue.

So my advice to you and to others who are young and deluded by notions of eternal life, don't listen to the bankers and their toadies. Social Security, which is an insurance policy, not an investment program, has been paying off for seventy-five years without so much as a speed bump. And if Social Security ever does fail the cause will be so significant that the failure will be the least of the Nation's problems and you'll have a lot more than it to worry about.

So go ahead and enjoy your youth, which includes the delusion that you'll never grow old. Just don't be taken in by the bankers and the Wall Street types. Social Security will be waiting for you along with Medicare, senior discounts, and strong laxatives. And they make life a lot easier.

Maybe.........

Social Security Administration: Social Security Basic Facts

The concepts of solvency, sustainability, and budget impact are common in discussions of Social Security, but are not well understood.
Currently, the Social Security Board of Trustees projects program cost to rise by 2035 so that taxes will be enough to pay for only 75 percent of scheduled benefits.

Plus when this occurs,
By the time the baby boomers retire, there will be just two workers who will have to pay all the taxes to support every one retiree.
It is going to get much worse. In order to continuing funding retiree benefits, the payroll tax will have to be raised to more than 18 percent.
That’s nearly a 50 percent increase.
Social Security: Follow the Math | Cato Institute

 

[RKMBrown]

You have a $ amount for what this buyout would be?

About 25t, give or take a few.

And that would be a good idea to you?

Sure why not? What's wrong with me getting a check for 500k dollars to put into my 401k to fund my future retirement needs and also receiving an additional 12-15% each month in my paycheck?

Sounds like FANTASTIC IDEA to me.

I'm not even gonna ask for interest or inflation adjustments. Just give me the damn money I put in there straight up.

 

[Brain357]

About 25t, give or take a few.

And that would be a good idea to you?

Sure why not? What's wrong with me getting a check for 500k dollars to put into my 401k to fund my future retirement needs and also receiving an additional 12-15% each month in my paycheck?

Sounds like FANTASTIC IDEA to me.

I'm not even gonna ask for interest or inflation adjustments. Just give me the damn money I put in there straight up.

With a 25t price tag? No thanks. Then we will have to bail out all the homeless old people one day who didn't save enough.

 

[RKMBrown]

And that would be a good idea to you?

Sure why not? What's wrong with me getting a check for 500k dollars to put into my 401k to fund my future retirement needs and also receiving an additional 12-15% each month in my paycheck?

Sounds like FANTASTIC IDEA to me.

I'm not even gonna ask for interest or inflation adjustments. Just give me the damn money I put in there straight up.

With a 25t price tag? No thanks. Then we will have to bail out all the homeless old people one day who didn't save enough.

You are "confused." The 25t "price tag" is already an unfunded liability that current workers and our children will be forced to pay out of their paychecks. All i'm doing is funding it the same way we fund unlimited expansion of credit. Call it a fiscal stimulus plan. The current workers and our children and grandchildren will then be off the hook for it.

As to homeless.. that's what we have welfare for. SS is not welfare.

 

[RKMBrown]

So a 49 person wants to privatize. Fine. What has been put in till age 49 is paid out traditionally at 70 because the ONLY way to save traditional SS is to
raise the age to 70.

I'm 71 and I'm still working out of CHOICE. My friends that are retired are bored. They are mentally atrophying.
I'm challenged. So yes people today at 70 are the new 50!

And it will even more so when the 49 person turns 70 as 21 years later the average lifespan would be 75.
See no one thought when SS first set up in the 30s people would live past 65! So that's the magic age and guess what people are living beyond 70.

So the 49 keeps the traditional payments due them at age 70 while from 49 on invests in his OWN privatized SS.
Remember we are being told 401Ks and pensions are going away. So how else will there be a supplement to SS?

That 49 year old person would still get the SS payments PLUS now has accumulated easily $100,000 over the next 21 years. The major difference it is the person's accumulation!

Ok so this guy is still going to collect his earned SS at 70? How is he going to do that if most the people his age or younger choose to privatize? There won't be any money. There won't be enough people paying in.

He'll be dead by then!

Look privatization isn't perfect. NOTHING is. But you tell me a better way of the fact which is this according to the SS Trustees!
Social Security Administration: Social Security Basic Facts
The concepts of solvency, sustainability, and budget impact are common in discussions of Social Security, but are not well understood.
Currently, the Social Security Board of Trustees projects program cost to rise by 2035 so that taxes will be enough to pay for only 75 percent of scheduled benefits.


YOU have a better IDEA???
Also maybe there is a better way of phasing in privatization.
Remember the whole point is there will never be enough money for the government to take care of everyone from womb to tomb.
There never was going to be enough because they didn't calculate people living beyond 65!

They knew they were kicking the can down the road at the start. The people bought into it because they knew they would benefit from it. The first generations into pyramid schemes are always the happiest customers because they get to benefit the most. It's people that get stuck with the bill, the last generation or two, that cause the pyramid to collapse.

 

[Brain357]

Sure why not? What's wrong with me getting a check for 500k dollars to put into my 401k to fund my future retirement needs and also receiving an additional 12-15% each month in my paycheck?

Sounds like FANTASTIC IDEA to me.

I'm not even gonna ask for interest or inflation adjustments. Just give me the damn money I put in there straight up.

With a 25t price tag? No thanks. Then we will have to bail out all the homeless old people one day who didn't save enough.

You are "confused." The 25t "price tag" is already an unfunded liability that current workers and our children will be forced to pay out of their paychecks. All i'm doing is funding it the same way we fund unlimited expansion of credit. Call it a fiscal stimulus plan. The current workers and our children and grandchildren will then be off the hook for it.

As to homeless.. that's what we have welfare for. SS is not welfare.

So they collect welfare instead of ss, what have we gained?

 

[RKMBrown]

With a 25t price tag? No thanks. Then we will have to bail out all the homeless old people one day who didn't save enough.

You are "confused." The 25t "price tag" is already an unfunded liability that current workers and our children will be forced to pay out of their paychecks. All i'm doing is funding it the same way we fund unlimited expansion of credit. Call it a fiscal stimulus plan. The current workers and our children and grandchildren will then be off the hook for it.

As to homeless.. that's what we have welfare for. SS is not welfare.

So they collect welfare instead of ss, what have we gained?

What have we gained? Liberty.

SS is not welfare. Why are you conflating welfare for the homeless with SS checks?

What part of liberty and freedom to live as we choose is confusing you? Why do I have to be forced to fork over 12-15% of my salary so you can force me to accept a measly pittance of a SS check after I turn 65? Just because you might be to ignorant to spend your 12-15% wisely does not mean I should be punished by having my 12-15% taken from me and "spread" around as YOU SEE FIT. Who made you pro socialists into the rulers of the results of my labor?

By your reasoning no one should be trusted with their income. Why don't you marxists just take 100% of everyone's labor and spread that around as you see fit? What are you marxists waiting for? Cmon do it! Stop bleeding us by increasing these taxes slowly over generations, get it over with and take it all like a man.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Take the checks. It has a terrific return if you live that long. You'll get back much more than you paid in.

It's a black hole. I have paid into that Ponzi scheme for years and will collect NOTHING.

The belligerent voice of youth

It's difficult for those who are under fifty and are healthy to believe they ever will grow old. And it follows for those under the transitory spell of that common delusion to resent being forced by government to pay for something they doubt they will ever receive. It is the popularity of that delusion which fosters the equally popular notion that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme that will never pay off. And those bankers and Wall Street scam artists who already have ravaged the U.S. Economy would like nothing more than to have the Social Security fund turned over to them, which is why they are promoting the idea of privatizing it.

Let me assure you I was young and strong once and I had my doubts that anything as good as Social Security would be waiting for me when I reached sixty-five -- which, until I turned fifty I didn't believe would ever happen. But it did happen, a dozen years ago, and ever since then the Social Security Administration has direct-deposited a nice sum of cash in my checking account on the first day of every month without fail. And if I live another twenty years I have absolutely no valid reason to believe it won't continue.

So my advice to you and to others who are young and deluded by notions of eternal life, don't listen to the bankers and their toadies. Social Security, which is an insurance policy, not an investment program, has been paying off for seventy-five years without so much as a speed bump. And if Social Security ever does fail the cause will be so significant that the failure will be the least of the Nation's problems and you'll have a lot more than it to worry about.

So go ahead and enjoy your youth, which includes the delusion that you'll never grow old. Just don't be taken in by the bankers and the Wall Street types. Social Security will be waiting for you along with Medicare, senior discounts, and strong laxatives. And they make life a lot easier.

Actually, it's quite simple: I will NOT grow old. I have, at best, a 50/50 chance of seeing 60, a minuscule chance of seeing 65, and zero chance of seeing 70. Unless i decide to go full-parasite & go on disability, I will pay into that Ponzi scheme for 45+ years and get NOTHING for it!

 

[Brain357]

You are "confused." The 25t "price tag" is already an unfunded liability that current workers and our children will be forced to pay out of their paychecks. All i'm doing is funding it the same way we fund unlimited expansion of credit. Call it a fiscal stimulus plan. The current workers and our children and grandchildren will then be off the hook for it.

As to homeless.. that's what we have welfare for. SS is not welfare.

So they collect welfare instead of ss, what have we gained?

What have we gained? Liberty.

SS is not welfare. Why are you conflating welfare for the homeless with SS checks?

What part of liberty and freedom to live as we choose is confusing you? Why do I have to be forced to fork over 12-15% of my salary so you can force me to accept a measly pittance of a SS check after I turn 65? Just because you might be to ignorant to spend your 12-15% wisely does not mean I should be punished by having my 12-15% taken from me and "spread" around as YOU SEE FIT. Who made you pro socialists into the rulers of the results of my labor?

By your reasoning no one should be trusted with their income. Why don't you marxists just take 100% of everyone's labor and spread that around as you see fit? What are you marxists waiting for? Cmon do it! Stop bleeding us by increasing these taxes slowly over generations, get it over with and take it all like a man.

You want to print up 25 trillion and hand it out and you want me to take you seriously? What will that do to the value of the dollar? That's more than our entire debt.

 

[MikeK]

About 25t, give or take a few.

And that would be a good idea to you?

Sure why not? What's wrong with me getting a check for 500k dollars to put into my 401k to fund my future retirement needs and also receiving an additional 12-15% each month in my paycheck?

[...]

Would you be saying the same thing and asking the same question if this were 2008?

Your 401k is an investment program which is subject to being wiped out -- as has happened to so many in the recent stock market disaster. Social Security is not an investment. It is an insurance policy.

I've been collecting Social Security for thirteen years. While I've never taken the time to figure it out I'm sure I've already received much more than I'd contributed and if my genes are a reasonably accurate predictor of my life expectancy I probably will be collecting for another dozen years. There simply is no 401k plan that will, presuming proportionate contributions, generate income anywhere near that level.

 

[RKMBrown]

And that would be a good idea to you?

Sure why not? What's wrong with me getting a check for 500k dollars to put into my 401k to fund my future retirement needs and also receiving an additional 12-15% each month in my paycheck?

[...]

Would you be saying the same thing and asking the same question if this were 2008?

Your 401k is an investment program which is subject to being wiped out -- as has happened to so many in the recent stock market disaster. Social Security is not an investment. It is an insurance policy.

I've been collecting Social Security for thirteen years. While I've never taken the time to figure it out I'm sure I've already received much more than I'd contributed and if my genes are a reasonably accurate predictor of my life expectancy I probably will be collecting for another dozen years. There simply is no 401k plan that will, presuming proportionate contributions, generate income anywhere near that level.

Yes, I would.

And, yes I'm fully aware that people who had low income most of their lives will benefit more from there SS payments than I will at my expense. Just another... Efff you to the people who earn higher income levels.

It's like hey you got an A on your report card.. we're gonna give you a C and raise that other guy's F to a C. Isn't socialism great!

 

[RKMBrown]

So they collect welfare instead of ss, what have we gained?

What have we gained? Liberty.

SS is not welfare. Why are you conflating welfare for the homeless with SS checks?

What part of liberty and freedom to live as we choose is confusing you? Why do I have to be forced to fork over 12-15% of my salary so you can force me to accept a measly pittance of a SS check after I turn 65? Just because you might be to ignorant to spend your 12-15% wisely does not mean I should be punished by having my 12-15% taken from me and "spread" around as YOU SEE FIT. Who made you pro socialists into the rulers of the results of my labor?

By your reasoning no one should be trusted with their income. Why don't you marxists just take 100% of everyone's labor and spread that around as you see fit? What are you marxists waiting for? Cmon do it! Stop bleeding us by increasing these taxes slowly over generations, get it over with and take it all like a man.

You want to print up 25 trillion and hand it out and you want me to take you seriously? What will that do to the value of the dollar? That's more than our entire debt.

Why not? We'll print the 25trillion anyways. What part of unlimited expansion of credit is confusing you?

 

[MikeK]

Sure why not? What's wrong with me getting a check for 500k dollars to put into my 401k to fund my future retirement needs and also receiving an additional 12-15% each month in my paycheck?

[...]

Would you be saying the same thing and asking the same question if this were 2008?

Your 401k is an investment program which is subject to being wiped out -- as has happened to so many in the recent stock market disaster. Social Security is not an investment. It is an insurance policy.

I've been collecting Social Security for thirteen years. While I've never taken the time to figure it out I'm sure I've already received much more than I'd contributed and if my genes are a reasonably accurate predictor of my life expectancy I probably will be collecting for another dozen years. There simply is no 401k plan that will, presuming proportionate contributions, generate income anywhere near that level.

Yes, I would.

And, yes I'm fully aware that people who had low income most of their lives will benefit more from there SS payments than I will at my expense. Just another... Efff you to the people who earn higher income levels.

It's like hey you got an A on your report card.. we're gonna give you a C and raise that other guy's F to a C. Isn't socialism great!

Your complaint would be valid if you are wealthy and if a means test is imposed along with an increased eligibility age to compensate for the projected shortfall.

That's the downside. The upside is Social Security will be there for you if your fortune is somehow wiped out -- as so many fortunes were during the Great Depression and the more recent economic collapse.

Social Security is an insurance program intended to prevent the kind of destitute poverty that affected so many during the Depression years. But unless your personal assets exist at the millionaire level, even if you are affected by a minor means test adjustment, and provided you don't die soon after Social Security eligibility, you will recover every penny you contribute and probably a lot more. So someone of your fortunate status should have no problem contributing to the Social Security program, which is safe from investor risk, in addition to your market investments, which, as history has demonstrated, are subject to significant loss.

As mentioned in an earlier message, there are powerful interests engaged in a major propaganda effort to promote privatization of the Social Security program. These high-rollers would like nothing more than getting their hands on the Social Security fund, which they would transform into an investment program to gamble with in their Wall Street casinos. And we've seen what comes of that.

So the best thing I can tell you is Social Security is by no means the best possible investment -- because it is not an investment. It is an insurance policy, and a damn good one. And the only thing you have to be concerned about is being means tested out of your entire eligibility. But in order for that to happen you would need to be so wealthy you wouldn't even notice it.