Social Security Privitization

[chrisms]

I'm 18 years old and have been working for two years, every paycheck being dented by social security. With Bush's plan to allow younger people to invest it in the stock market, how exactly will this work? I heard this in 2000 and nothing ever affected me, I'm wondering if I should expect a fat check in the mail or not.

 

[kranky]

I suspect nothing will change with your paycheck and the same amount of money will be taken out. But you will be permitted to specify where some of that money is invested. You won't be getting a check.

I know a lot of people want to have privatized SS, but we need to fear for the vast numbers of people who won't have a clue what to do with their money. They'll be fodder for every investment firm out there.

 

[jjzelinski]

It sounds great and all, but it doesnt explain how we are going to survive the retirement of the baby-boomers.

 

[assemblage]

I understand the investment part will work like the Thrift Savings Plan which is the personal retirement plan for the federal gov employees that uses bond and stock market index funds.

 

[chrisms]

So I'll get some sort of form to fill out to tell them where I want my money to go? Sounds good to me.

I agree we'll be targeted for our S.S. money, but I don't really care because I'm not that stupid and so far have been pretty good in the stock market. At least they'll get taught a lesson when they're younger and can recover rather than when they're older and have families.

Another good part of this plan, which I'll admit I'm pulling out of my ass, is that nearly all young Americans will be introduced to the stock market early on, and this could increase investment in the future when we find well-paying jobs.

 

[glugglug]

It's a genius plan really..... social security investments into mutual funds will temporarily create a huge surge in the stock market, especially the larger companies on the S&P500 and the Nasdaq 100.

This will create an extremely high amplitude (but short-lived) bubble, making it look like his economic policy is working if this is implemented in the last 2 years of his office (so the bubble doesn't have time to burst).

The more I think about it, the more surprised I am it hasn't already been done!

 

[Viper GTS]

Originally posted by: jjzelinski
It sounds great and all, but it doesnt explain how we are going to survive the retirement of the baby-boomers.

No matter how you cut it one generation is going to get screwed when the change happens.

The problem right now is that the generation that stands to get screwed votes at a MUCH higher rate than those that stand to benefit.

The short answer?

Don't hold your breath.

Viper GTS

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Viper GTS

Originally posted by: jjzelinski
It sounds great and all, but it doesnt explain how we are going to survive the retirement of the baby-boomers.

No matter how you cut it one generation is going to get screwed when the change happens.

The problem right now is that the generation that stands to get screwed votes at a MUCH higher rate than those that stand to benefit.

The short answer?

Don't hold your breath.

Viper GTS

No kidding. [ The Dub] Lets see this generation votes at a 70%r rate and this other votes at a 17% rate. Hmmm, which ones should we pander too? [/The Dub]

 

[jjzelinski]

-------------------------
Jesus protect me from those who proclaim to follow you!

ROFL!:laugh:

On a side note that's a hillarious sig

:beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer:

 

[Jadow]

I have over $100 per check taken out for Social Security, and I get paid twice per month. I KNOW if I'd have that additional $200 per month to invest in my 401k, I would be FAR better off in 35 years than I will be with it getting sunk into Social Security.

I really don't feel that it's fair that I have to pay for the retirements of other people, especially foolish people who don't save for retirement themselves and solely rely on social security.

That being said, if Bush changes social security so that I can invest any percentage of it in the market, say in an S&P 500 fund, or other blended fund where I could make 8-10% annually, I would be extremely greatful.

I hate Social Security and with the system would just go away, I'd gladly just give away the last 10+ years of contributions I've made to it, if that means I can go the next 35 years without it. But that will never happen.

 

[Mursilis]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Viper GTS

Originally posted by: jjzelinski
It sounds great and all, but it doesnt explain how we are going to survive the retirement of the baby-boomers.

No matter how you cut it one generation is going to get screwed when the change happens.

The problem right now is that the generation that stands to get screwed votes at a MUCH higher rate than those that stand to benefit.

The short answer?

Don't hold your breath.

Viper GTS

No kidding. [ The Dub] Lets see this generation votes at a 70%r rate and this other votes at a 17% rate. Hmmm, which ones should we pander too? [/The Dub]

The same one the Dems have been pandering to for the last 20+ years - seniors. The two biggest items driving the country bankrupt are SS and Medicare, which are large senior entitlements, and neither party will cut either program, because seniors vote, and they want their "free" money, and their "free" medical care. Yes, I know they paid into the system back when they were working, but they didn't pay in nearly enough what they receive now, because no one in the Federal gov't knew they'd all live so long, so they're all getting phenomenal returns on the contributions, and leaving the young slackers who don't vote with a hell of a bill.

 

[Mursilis]

Oops, dp.
Ignore.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Viper GTS

Originally posted by: jjzelinski
It sounds great and all, but it doesnt explain how we are going to survive the retirement of the baby-boomers.

No matter how you cut it one generation is going to get screwed when the change happens.

The problem right now is that the generation that stands to get screwed votes at a MUCH higher rate than those that stand to benefit.

The short answer?

Don't hold your breath.

Viper GTS

No kidding. [ The Dub] Lets see this generation votes at a 70%r rate and this other votes at a 17% rate. Hmmm, which ones should we pander too? [/The Dub]

The same one the Dems have been pandering to for the last 20+ years - seniors. True. I just used the Dub because he's the one now who is going to have to decide what to do about it.

 

[assemblage]

"Americans will be introduced to the stock market early on, and this could increase investment in the future when we find well-paying jobs."

Even with a revamped system, investing for their retirement with your additional income should still be considered. Clark Howard is a strong advocate of young people saving and investing as soon as they can. I think his website is clarkhoward.com and he has a radio show. If you really think you'd be a good stock picker and enjoy all that's involved with it, try your hand at some simulated stock trading games.

Some things should also be considered are downpayments for a home and vehicle. That way if you want or need these in the future you'll have the money to do it.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: assemblage
"Americans will be introduced to the stock market early on, and this could increase investment in the future when we find well-paying jobs."

Even with a revamped system, investing for their retirement with your additional income should still be considered. Clark Howard is a strong advocate of young people saving and investing as soon as they can. I think his website is clarkhoward.com and he has a radio show. If you really think you'd be a good stock picker and enjoy all that's involved with it, try your hand at some simulated stock trading games.

Some things should also be considered are downpayments for a home and vehicle. That way if you want or need these in the future you'll have the money to do it.

I don't know about a vehicle but using that money to buy a home or property is a great investment that will reap much higher reurns than most stock investments and definately more than anything the Government can do. If they gave me back all the SS I paid over the last 36 years I definately would use it to buy property.

 

[Rob9874]

Originally posted by: Jadow
I have over $100 per check taken out for Social Security, and I get paid twice per month. I KNOW if I'd have that additional $200 per month to invest in my 401k, I would be FAR better off in 35 years than I will be with it getting sunk into Social Security.

I really don't feel that it's fair that I have to pay for the retirements of other people, especially foolish people who don't save for retirement themselves and solely rely on social security.

That being said, if Bush changes social security so that I can invest any percentage of it in the market, say in an S&P 500 fund, or other blended fund where I could make 8-10% annually, I would be extremely greatful.

I hate Social Security and with the system would just go away, I'd gladly just give away the last 10+ years of contributions I've made to it, if that means I can go the next 35 years without it. But that will never happen.

Very good post. Summarized my thoughts exactly. Except, I pay $242/mo. I read a financial planning book that said you get about a 2% return on your SS contributions. A HORRIBLE investment! If we could take half of that, and put it in a meager and safe 5% mutual fund, we'd be doing much better for ourselves.

Oh wait. We're supposed to deny our own wealth so we can pay for others. :roll:

 

[jjzelinski]

Well those "others" you beride for their entitlement mentality are a lrage part of your party's base. Still haven't heard an explanation as to how with or without privitization we are going to survive the boomers.

 

[assemblage]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: assemblage
"Americans will be introduced to the stock market early on, and this could increase investment in the future when we find well-paying jobs."

Even with a revamped system, investing for their retirement with your additional income should still be considered. Clark Howard is a strong advocate of young people saving and investing as soon as they can. I think his website is clarkhoward.com and he has a radio show. If you really think you'd be a good stock picker and enjoy all that's involved with it, try your hand at some simulated stock trading games.

Some things should also be considered are downpayments for a home and vehicle. That way if you want or need these in the future you'll have the money to do it.

I don't know about a vehicle but using that money to buy a home or property is a great investment that will reap much higher reurns than most stock investments and definately more than anything the Government can do. If they gave me back all the SS I paid over the last 36 years I definately would use it to buy property.

I was talking about saving cash for downpayments. It's better to have previously saved for the downpayments that you know you'll need than not to. If you hit your mid 20's and want to get a home and you haven't saved, it may take a couple years to get the the downpayment. Same with a car. If you can't get around and have no cash to put down, you can get into a bad position with the lendor. They'll stretch out the loan period and you'll pay more in interest. Heck if you saved enough, you could buy it outright.

 

[Mursilis]

Originally posted by: Rob9874
Except, I pay $242/mo. I read a financial planning book that said you get about a 2% return on your SS contributions. A HORRIBLE investment! If we could take half of that, and put it in a meager and safe 5% mutual fund, we'd be doing much better for ourselves.

Oh wait. We're supposed to deny our own wealth so we can pay for others. :roll:

That's 2% if you will start collecting in the next 10 years or so. If you're younger (and I think you said you're in your 20's or something, Rob), the pot will be so dry by the time you retire, your return will likely be in the negative percentages. Of course, that's just educated speculation at this point, but the trends don't look good, and the majority of baby boomers have yet to start drawing SS payments.

 

[ViRGE]

Originally posted by: jjzelinski
Well those "others" you beride for their entitlement mentality are a lrage part of your party's base. Still haven't heard an explanation as to how with or without privitization we are going to survive the boomers.

We can't, and that's all there is to it. The best case senario I've seen would simply be to cut off SS for anyone who hasn't paid in to it yet, then let SS run in to debt, having future generations pay down the debt at a far smaller rate than what we pay in to SS now.

 

[chrisms]

Social Security is like a dirty band-aid on an infected wound that nobody has had the guts to rip off yet.

 

[Rob9874]

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: Rob9874
Except, I pay $242/mo. I read a financial planning book that said you get about a 2% return on your SS contributions. A HORRIBLE investment! If we could take half of that, and put it in a meager and safe 5% mutual fund, we'd be doing much better for ourselves.

Oh wait. We're supposed to deny our own wealth so we can pay for others. :roll:

That's 2% if you will start collecting in the next 10 years or so. If you're younger (and I think you said you're in your 20's or something, Rob), the pot will be so dry by the time you retire, your return will likely be in the negative percentages. Of course, that's just educated speculation at this point, but the trends don't look good, and the majority of baby boomers have yet to start drawing SS payments.

Oh, I agree! I don't expect to receive a dime. But I have to keep paying for a failed system, because it was promised to those who have already paid in. Well, at some point, they're going to have to tell people who paid in, that they don't get anything in return.

 

[Rob9874]

Originally posted by: chrisms
Social Security is like a dirty band-aid on an infected wound that nobody has had the guts to rip off yet.

That's the exact point I made above.

 

[Mursilis]

Originally posted by: Rob9874

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: Rob9874
Except, I pay $242/mo. I read a financial planning book that said you get about a 2% return on your SS contributions. A HORRIBLE investment! If we could take half of that, and put it in a meager and safe 5% mutual fund, we'd be doing much better for ourselves.

Oh wait. We're supposed to deny our own wealth so we can pay for others. :roll:

That's 2% if you will start collecting in the next 10 years or so. If you're younger (and I think you said you're in your 20's or something, Rob), the pot will be so dry by the time you retire, your return will likely be in the negative percentages. Of course, that's just educated speculation at this point, but the trends don't look good, and the majority of baby boomers have yet to start drawing SS payments.

Oh, I agree! I don't expect to receive a dime. But I have to keep paying for a failed system, because it was promised to those who have already paid in. Well, at some point, they're going to have to tell people who paid in, that they don't get anything in return.

At least some people are taking off the blinders and seeing SS for the Ponzi scheme that it truly is.

And where are all the P&N liberals to defend this program? SS was the crown jewel of liberalism, and no one's here to justify it?!?

 

[RobCur]

Originally posted by: Jadow
I have over $100 per check taken out for Social Security, and I get paid twice per month. I KNOW if I'd have that additional $200 per month to invest in my 401k, I would be FAR better off in 35 years than I will be with it getting sunk into Social Security.

I really don't feel that it's fair that I have to pay for the retirements of other people, especially foolish people who don't save for retirement themselves and solely rely on social security.

That being said, if Bush changes social security so that I can invest any percentage of it in the market, say in an S&P 500 fund, or other blended fund where I could make 8-10% annually, I would be extremely greatful.

I hate Social Security and with the system would just go away, I'd gladly just give away the last 10+ years of contributions I've made to it, if that means I can go the next 35 years without it. But that will never happen.

you live in a fantasy world, yea right! You are a either broker or a specialist, brainwashing people, clever. it doesn't work on me cuz i'm not stupid or ignorant like most are.
HAVE A NICE DAY.