• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Anyone Care To Guess The Average Rate Of Return On Money Paid Into Social Security?

Patranus

Patranus

Diamond Member
Lets put a few average lifetime salaries of

1) $100,000
2) $75,000
3) $50,000
4) $35,000

Single/Born in 1985 (so 25 Y/O)

Guess the average rate of return on Social Security payments!!!

Note: The average rate of return on the stock market (1900-2009) is 9.4% and a 30 year treasury bond is 4%.
 
Last edited:
Patranus said:
Lets put a few average lifetime salaries of

1) $100,000
2) $75,000
3) $50,000
4) $35,000

Single/Born in 1985 (so 25 Y/O)

Guess the average rate of return on Social Security payments!!!

Note: The average rate of return on the stock market (1900-2009) is 9.4% and a 30 year treasury bond is 5%.
Click to expand...

The average rate of return of the stock market is nowhere near 9.4% nor is a 30 year bond 5%. lmao. Try 6% and 3%, respectively.
 
$100,000 = 0.69%
$75,000 = 1.16%
$50,000 = 1.81%
$35,000 = 2.38%

So in all cases you would be better off buying a treasure bond or entering the stock market.

Hell, even at minimum wage you are looking at 3.65% also below a treasury bond.
 
Last edited:
Patranus said:
$100,000 = 0.69%
$75,000 = 1.16%
$50,000 = 1.81%
$35,000 = 2.38%

So in all cases you would be better off buying a treasure bond or entering the stock market.

Hell, even at minimum wage you are looking at 3.65% also below a treasury bond.
Click to expand...

Those can't be true...you must be a Republican NEOCON Shill!
 
WHAMPOM said:
90% of invertors lose on the stock market, so what is your point?
Click to expand...

No way you are this stupid. Open an IRA, see what kind of growth you get in 30 years. If you think its less than what Social Security pays back then you are just fucking stupid.
 
GOP&


I see your Troll and raise you, Anus.



=======================
Smarten up or earn a vacation

Admin - Common Courtesy
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I said 30 years, not 10 years that include 2 recessions. fuckhole



=======================
Smarten up or earn a vacation

Admin - Common Courtesy
 
Last edited by a moderator:
heyheybooboo said:
Buh, buh, buh

Need a crying towel ?




--
Click to expand...

Nick's correct. Run it for 30 years. Additionally you wouldn't have a large percentage in stocks anyway as you get 10 years inside when you want to retire and would be moving money to more guaranteed returns that STILL outpace the return on SS.
 
heyheybooboo said:
Buh, buh, buh

Need a crying towel ?




--
Click to expand...


No, you need a fucking clue however.


Lets review our little debate, shall we?


I made a claim that money over 30 years in an IRA will yield better results than the pissant social security "return".

You then retorted with a graph showing investments losing value over the last 10 years.

I then replied, reminding you that my initial claim was over a 30 year period, not 10.

You reply back with some incoherent words and a personal attack.


Nice debate! I had fun!
 
Oh, my!

The wittle Trolls have got their panties in a wadd.

No big surprise.

What type of 'return' did Uncle Sam get on the 2001 & 2003 tax cuts?

Show us how that VooDoo Economics 'stimulated' GDP. Show us how pre-emptive war, a massive military build-up and a DrugCo give-a-way (none of which were paid for) provided a *reasonable* return to America.

Then you can bitch about SS (which, btw, you owe $4+ trillion)




--
 
I believe social security was created because most people live hand to mouth and wind up with nothing. The minimum payment, I would think, is way way better for most folk than nothing, especially when they are too old to work.

It does gall the hell out of me, however, that I have to pay for others, who by rights of their worthless lives, should just die on the side walk, but then, I am an asshole and that's how us assholes are.
 
heyheybooboo said:
Oh, my!

The wittle Trolls have got their panties in a wadd.

No big surprise.

What type of 'return' did Uncle Sam get on the 2001 & 2003 tax cuts?

Show us how that VooDoo Economics 'stimulated' GDP. Show us how pre-emptive war, a massive military build-up and a DrugCo give-a-way (none of which were paid for) provided a *reasonable* return to America.

Then you can bitch about SS (which, btw, you owe $4+ trillion)

--
Click to expand...

WTF does any of that garbage have to do with the thread, which is about the return on social security. Your sad little chart is completely worthless because it doesn't include dividends, and you just arbitrarily picked a 10 year period rather than a long term period as per the OP.

First, I'm not counting on getting any SS money later on, since both parties have happily raided the SS money already. At some point the bill is going to come due and I'm not optimistic about what I'll get back from SS.

Second, if you look at the rate of return on SS, it's pathetic and there is absolutely no reason you could not simply put that money into treasury bonds instead and get a higher return. The stock market would undoubtedly give you a higher return as well, but then you run the risk of idiots investing unwisely and messing up their retirement money and everyone else having to bail them out anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top