Obama claims GOP trying to destroy Social Security

[her209]

Look, if you're worried about people cutting up their own safety net, then impose restrictions. Hell, if you wanted me to invest in government bonds only and get a 1% return that's fine. That'll be a SS equivalent, but at least make it MY own money like a 401k and let me watch it grow as each paycheck goes to it and every year it gets a decent return.

The fact is a PAYGO system is just fail. People need to start being accountable for their own money. The PAYGO system just results in government borrowing massive loads of money from the SS fund and just paying it back with the general fund. It's retarded.

Force you to buy government bonds at 1 percent interest...
Pay on maturity of government bond with tax revenue...
:hmm:

 

[charrison]

Force you to buy government bonds at 1 percent interest...
Pay on maturity of government bond with tax revenue...
:hmm:

As bad as that is, it is better than the system we have now.

 

[Modelworks]

Because social security is a dumb as shit idea?

Perhaps.

Why not create a set of laws that enforces the selection of a retirement account. And enforce regulations, not money collection into government-owned organizations.

Why have any government regulations on retirement or healthcare or anything else in those areas ? Let people do what they did 100 years ago, depend on themselves and their families, radical concept I know.

 

[Craig234]

Why have any government regulations on retirement or healthcare or anything else in those areas ? Let people do what they did 100 years ago, depend on themselves and their families, radical concept I know.

Why, yes it is. Your post isn't clearly sarcastic or not, so let's just say you need to be quite ignorant to not be aware of the *disaster* for people then.

 

[Craig234]

Senator John Kerry called TEA party folks and conservatives hypocrites about two months ago for decrying socialism yet clinging to SS as an entitlement. What he failed to remember, is that for the past 24 years, I've had SS taxes taken from my pay involuntarily. If he wants, he can refund me that money. I'll gladly take it without interest and invest it myself in a mutual fund and turn it into something useful.

That's a fair criticism of Kerry's attack, if it was as you say.

Reality is that you will leave a rash of 401k's behind in your wake as you move from job to job, with the need to eventually roll them over, taking a hit with the fees every time...

What fees? You can roll over 401(k)'s for no charge, is that not always the case?

401k's were a fix by corporations (who lobbied for them as well) to rid themselves of what they already were seeing as un-sustainable existing pension plans.

Yes, they were lobbied for by corporations IIRC - to cut expenses, the 'sustainable pension' issue is an opinion that's arguable implying one conclusion.

Anyway.. I digress. SS is important for today's citizens as it may very well be the only thing that keeps you afloat as you try to live off your measly 401k savings. Again, those measly 401k savings are not the fault of the market, but the fault of a system gamed against the worker.

Oh.. and if it matters... I'm a conservative.

You're speaking as someone discussing the needs of the people, rather than as a Republican Party official who knows the politics of SS is that it hurts the party.

 

[Genx87]

raise the fica tax past $108,000. Why do you stop paying tax after this magic amount?

Because they stop making payments based on that amount.

 

[Jhhnn]

You harp on me for repeating the same thing over and over again, then you go and do the same thing, whining about the "financial elite" i.e. "rich" people that you hate so much. Good job.

I don't hate them, at all. I do, however, acknowledge the truth, that the system has been strongly rigged in their favor from the Reagan era forward. Raising SS contributions for working people enabled that, in part. Federal deficits have favored them even more- they got enormous tax cuts and safe haven for part of their money in US govt securities, the backbone of every great portfolio. Win-win.

If the course of the future fails to take that into account, then we won't be able to solve any of our fiscal problems, SS being merely one of them.

I don't even know why I should bother responding to you, given you've already resorted to name-calling. I'm no idiot.

Reviewing my posts directed towards you personally, the only thing I've found that might be construed as name calling is my use of the term "Righties". If that offends you, I apologize. What you advocate wrt SS is definitely an echo of what right wing ideology calls for. I never offered that you are an idiot.

Right now, I cannot afford to do much, but at least I have an IRA. More than I can say for a lot of people my age (or even older). Besides, it is a diversified portfolio as well, so it isn't reliant on just one or two different investments. Will I put some money into a savings account? I suppose, but the rate of return is pretty low on something like that. And honestly, the FDIC insured stuff irks me a little bit as it would be using taxpayer money to bail out stuff.

Well, whatever you can save beyond your IRA is always good. It's there if you need it, and it'll never go down unless you withdraw funds. That can't be said for investments. Diversification won't save anybody in a systemic decline, which is what we've experienced. I know people who retired early on the strength of their investments at the height of the tech boom, 10 years ago. They subsequently got hammered, had to go back to work, at lower pay than previously. I'm sure it's been much the same wrt the real estate/ stock market bubble bursting of 2007. Job opportunities for people 50+ are more limited than for younger people, something to keep in mind.

Long term savings strengthen the banking system tremendously, and FDIC insurance helps that to happen. In normal times, payouts by the FDIC don't come from taxpayer money, at all, but rather from monies contributed by participating banks. It's self supporting insurance system, administered by the govt.

Most people can create automatic savings plans through their bank or credit union. When sufficient amounts have been accumulated, part can be shifted to higher yield insured CD's of various maturities...

You're not really diversified if savings aren't part of your plan.

 

[Exterous]

The EBRI’s report has a ton of detailed information on almost everything you might want to know about retirement savings and participation, from defined contribution plans to IRAs. For the purposes of our comparisons, I’ll just look at the age breakdown (2007 figures adjusted to 2009):

* < 35: $6,306
* 35 – 44: $22,460
* 45 – 54: $43,797
* 55 – 64: $69,127
* 65 – 75: $56,212
* 75+: (sample size insufficient)
Awesome amounts we have there. I wonder, since those are 2007 figures, if the amount has actually went down considering the crash of 2007-2009.

God, those are depressing figures. No wonder everyone cries for SS. Maybe the financial troubles we are going for will finally be enough to actually encourage financial responsibility

 

[soulcougher73]

Republicans speak with forked tongues, particularly wrt SS. They're going to "save" it by forcing people to put their money at the tender mercies of Wall St...

Dunno about the rest of you, but the numbers for my own tax deferred investments and my pension plan still haven't recovered...

Lots of retired people would still be totally screwed if they'd been depending exclusively on a revenue stream from their investments...

Saint Ronnie really screwed boomers when he increased SS contributions to cut fatcat taxes at the same time. The SS trust is currently owed a few $T as a result, and Repubs are now trying to welch on those commitments... any way they can. They'd have to raise taxes on the true bush constituency to honor those commitments, and that's just unthinkable for them...

Pretty much this. Id hate to only invest in wall st for my retirement. SS is a neccesary evil in a modern society of dumb asses. If they would stop borrowing from it, it should/would work properly. If you abolished SS most people (going back to the dumb asses) would just spend that extra money as if it were some kind of raise. The ones you who invest in wall st. are not guarenteed anything. You could end up old and retired with jack shit because wall st collapsed yet again.

 

[soulcougher73]

Screw letting the GOP invest my money in the stock market. Stop taking it out of my check altogether and let me invest it myself.

While this sounds fine in theory and i even somewhat support that idea. I would have to add that people opting out of SS have to sign a waiver saying they will never come looking for government help in the future if your stocks take a nose dive and you lose everything. You will just because homeless on the streets and be happy with it.

Unfortunatly no matter how sound the investments are at the time, they are no sure thing.

 

[Fingolfin269]

While this sounds fine in theory and i even somewhat support that idea. I would have to add that people opting out of SS have to sign a waiver saying they will never come looking for government help in the future if your stocks take a nose dive and you lose everything. You will just because homeless on the streets and be happy with it.

Unfortunatly no matter how sound the investments are at the time, they are no sure thing.

If I just paid myself cash every month and stuck it under my mattress I would probably be in better shape than paying into SS.

 

[soulcougher73]

Not that it is any of your business, but I'm 23 and I have an IRA, and a percentage of every paycheck goes into it. And the company matches it. That's how it should be, save for your own future, if you don't, you're stupid.

And if your IRA crumbles and you are left with nothing? What is your plan then? Not saying it will, but IF it does. Investments always carry risk with them. They are not a 100% sure thing.

 

[spidey07]

And if your IRA crumbles and you are left with nothing? What is your plan then? Not saying it will, but IF it does. Investments always carry risk with them. They are not a 100% sure thing.

One ALWAYS has guaranteed investments and you move more allocation into them as you get closer to retirement.

 

[Fingolfin269]

And if your IRA crumbles and you are left with nothing? What is your plan then? Not saying it will, but IF it does. Investments always carry risk with them. They are not a 100% sure thing.

You're right, there is no such thing as a sure thing. With that being said, if I have to gamble on me or the government being more of a sure thing when it comes to the handling of my money, I'm going with me.

 

[soulcougher73]

You're right, there is no such thing as a sure thing. With that being said, if I have to gamble on me or the government being more of a sure thing when it comes to the handling of my money, I'm going with me.

You are right as i said, i do agree with you in theory. But you have to remember 90% of the people are pretty much dumb asses. Most people are this website are in the other 10% i would assume. But those 90% still need to be accounted for one way or the other. You either force them to save via SS or you abolish it and they dont save and then they go on welfare or something. Either way tax payers are going to foot the bill. Just one way is better.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

While this sounds fine in theory and i even somewhat support that idea. I would have to add that people opting out of SS have to sign a waiver saying they will never come looking for government help in the future if your stocks take a nose dive and you lose everything. You will just because homeless on the streets and be happy with it.

Unfortunatly no matter how sound the investments are at the time, they are no sure thing.

A waiver that says in size 72 pt font that they will not whine, bitch or QQ to the government that they opted out and made the wrong decision will not prevent a bunch of dumbtards from crying and blaming the government when they invest in some penny stock and it goes down the drain along with their $2 million retirement. There are dumb people in this world.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Force you to buy government bonds at 1 percent interest...
Pay on maturity of government bond with tax revenue...
:hmm:

You don't get do you? The minimal improvement we should make is that instead of it being a pool of money, we should implement the lockbox strategy and also individualize the money.

If your concern is losing all the money, then allow me to earn the SAME return on that money as the government does right now. We'll keep it equal. What I put into the system right now will be what I get to save up on my own. The only difference is its in my account and the government can't raid it for the War on Terror. Furthermore, we can keep the same restrictions like withdrawl age and what not.

At least this is a step in the right direction by keeping the money in MY hands rather than the government hands.

Of course I do believe we should open up investments and let people choose what they want to invest in. This is why 401ks have mutual funds and bonds. Typically less risky investments. Obviously I'm not advocating opening up to the general stock market and let you go bid on penny stocks or run after IPOs. Because obviously there's too many people like you who can't handle risk properly.

 

[her209]

You don't get do you? The minimal improvement we should make is that instead of it being a pool of money, we should implement the lockbox strategy and also individualize the money.

If your concern is losing all the money, then allow me to earn the SAME return on that money as the government does right now. We'll keep it equal. What I put into the system right now will be what I get to save up on my own. The only difference is its in my account and the government can't raid it for the War on Terror. Furthermore, we can keep the same restrictions like withdrawl age and what not.

What do you think the government is doing when it sells bonds? Its using the proceeds from the bond sales to fund government projects -- that is, until it starts selling government "social security" bonds to pay off the maturing "social security" bonds. Which sounds like what Madoff was doing. Hell, they'll even start sending out account statements to show you how well your "investment" is doing.

Uh oh!

 

[piasabird]

Congress has been stealing (Democrats & Republicans) from the SSN fund and putting IOU's in a big safe for years. It is time for Congress to pay every IOU back in full or to shut their trap. "We the People", want our money back.

I say to either pay up or to shut up.

Social Security has already been trashed and now the bill is due. Us working stiffs will have to work longer this year to pay for the Social Security shortfall. This is assuming we make enough tax receits to actually pay the interest on our debt. The bill is due and now someone has to pay.

Grandma wants her money.

 

[thegimp03]

Privatizing SS may not be the best idea, but it's better than having it controlled by the government where both sides tend to fall back on that to pull money out of whenever they need it and write an IOU. I can just imagine that situation as looking like Dumb and Dumber when Harry and Lloyd find out that the briefcase has $1 million dollars in it and they start scratching out IOU notes for the Lamborghini they buy...

 

[werepossum]

Has there been an election since Roosevelt where the Democrats didn't claim the Republicans want to destroy Social Security? It's the same every election. Democrats don't dare mention what they have done, and they certainly don't dare mention what they actually want to do, so they pick their little groups and throw a good scare into each of them. It's always the same scare every time too; it's only group-specific, not election-specific. And just for icing on the turd cake, they accuse Republicans of scare tactics - especially if Republicans dare bring up what the Democrats have said or done.

 

[Red Dawn]

Has there been an election since Roosevelt where the Democrats didn't claim the Republicans want to destroy Social Security? It's the same every election. Democrats don't dare mention what they have done, and they certainly don't dare mention what they actually want to do, so they pick their little groups and throw a good scare into each of them. It's always the same scare every time too; it's only group-specific, not election-specific. And just for icing on the turd cake, they accuse Republicans of scare tactics - especially if Republicans dare bring up what the Democrats have said or done.

So what you are saying that neither party is worth a shit or a vote?

 

[werepossum]

So what you are saying that neither party is worth a shit or a vote?

I'm saying that Democrats do this every election, with every identifiable group in their coalition. All they have is fear. Although yeah, neither party is worth a shit or a vote. I usually vote Libertarian, although increasingly I'm being drawn into voting for the lesser evil - which is usually Republican. Still, at least once in my life Republicans have actually run FOR something: Contract With America, actual hard reforms for which they promised (and delivered) change on what the leadership could change and an up or down vote on what must be implemented via legislation. That's once more than the Dems, who for every election run "Republicans are going to cut Social Security" for oldsters, "Republicans are going to bring back the plantations" for blacks, "Republicans are going to cut your subsidized tuition" for youngsters, etc. Republicans at least occasionally run on principles; Democrats* only run on fear and bribes.

* Exceptions being Mondale and Dukakis, who bravely said what they were going to do and were soundly trounced for it, and Obama, who occasionally said what he would do but unfortunately wasn't believed.

 

[Hacp]

Pretty much this. Id hate to only invest in wall st for my retirement. SS is a neccesary evil in a modern society of dumb asses. If they would stop borrowing from it, it should/would work properly. If you abolished SS most people (going back to the dumb asses) would just spend that extra money as if it were some kind of raise. The ones you who invest in wall st. are not guarenteed anything. You could end up old and retired with jack shit because wall st collapsed yet again.

If you hate to invest in wall street, invest in CDs.

 

[Darwin333]

Screw letting the GOP invest my money in the stock market. Stop taking it out of my check altogether and let me invest it myself.

ROFL.

You guys that think its "your" money once the government taxes it from you are hilarious. Once they tax it and lets not bullshit about the subject, social security tax is a TAX, they aren't sticking your money in an account for you to later spend they are TAXING you and spending it on other shit. At the same time they are currently promising to pay you when you retire by taxing other people at that time. Bottom line, it ain't yo money no mo. They aren't going to give anything back to you and they aren't gonna let you opt out. That would be like being able to opt out of property taxes because you don't use the roads or schools, just not gonna happen. The best you could possibly hope for (assuming you want out of the system) is a complete elimination of Social Security and whatever you have "paid" in you simply lose (benefit being you don't have to pay anymore in).