Social Security Reform

[MajorCaliber]

Social Security is a massive drain on our economy, people would be much better off investing for themselves.

 

[Red Dawn]

What about those who do not invest wisely? I know everybody here especially the Conservatives will but what about those who screw up and have nothing and are to old to work?

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
What about those who do not invest wisely? I know everybody here especially the Conservatives will but what about those who screw up and have nothing and are to old to work?

I would suspect a response of 'tough luck'.

 

[Jhhnn]

Given the nature of the stock market and economic swings, you don't have to be unwise, merely unlucky....

So, you'll just have to make some adjustments to your lifestyle, move to a warmer climate, so that sleeping in an old refrigerator box won't be so uncomfortable...

Imagine Florida and the sunbelt w/o SS...

 

[Engineer]

Side question: If SS were to be privatized, why should the government set the timeline to which I (you) can get the money. If it's YOUR money, why shouldn't you be able to retire when you wish?

(Same with 401k IMO).

Maybe I don't want (or need) to wait until 59.5. Maybe I have enough at 50 and am ready to go?

Comments?

 

[BBond]

Originally posted by: Engineer
Side question: If SS were to be privatized, why should the government set the timeline to which I (you) can get the money. If it's YOUR money, why shouldn't you be able to retire when you wish?

(Same with 401k IMO).

Maybe I don't want (or need) to wait until 59.5. Maybe I have enough at 50 and am ready to go?

Comments?

As with any investment the government, which holds this one, wants that money to be there for a specified period of time so that, over that specific period of time, the capital investment is guaranteed. If Bush gets his "reform" through Wall St. will know the capital is there for them to make billions from for a specified period.

The only people guaranteed income from Bush's proposal are the Wall St. investment people who will be making billions from the Social Security "reform" porposed by Bush.

If, as happened in 2001, the market goes south, those "investors" who are ready to retire will be forced into a tough decision. Keep working until the market comes back, or learn 100 ways to make dog food palatable.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Engineer
Side question: If SS were to be privatized, why should the government set the timeline to which I (you) can get the money. If it's YOUR money, why shouldn't you be able to retire when you wish?

(Same with 401k IMO).

Maybe I don't want (or need) to wait until 59.5. Maybe I have enough at 50 and am ready to go?

Comments?

Well, maybe it's so the gov't doesn't have to carry you if you blow through the money. I do understand your point though and agree, but you know there will be people who we as tax-payers would have to support yet again if they run out.

CsG

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
What about those who do not invest wisely? I know everybody here especially the Conservatives will but what about those who screw up and have nothing and are to old to work?

Nobody that's for doing away with SS has an answer?

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
What about those who do not invest wisely? I know everybody here especially the Conservatives will but what about those who screw up and have nothing and are to old to work?

Nobody that's for doing away with SS has an answer?

John Q. Cripple: Do you expect me to work?

Mr. Goldfinger: No, Mr. Cripple, I expect you to die!

 

[cockeyed]

If it weren't for SS, there would be far less billions of dollars circulating in the economy. When the old folks get those checks, they spend it on things that keep many of us employed. When you pay the FICA from your check, think of it as job security, disability/death insurance, and retirement income. Maybe not such a bad deal afterall.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: cockeyed
If it weren't for SS, there would be far less billions of dollars circulating in the economy. When the old folks get those checks, they spend it on things that keep many of us employed. When you pay the FICA from your check, think of it as job security, disability/death insurance, and retirement income. Maybe not such a bad deal afterall.

If it weren't confiscated from our earnings - there would be just as much if not more money flowing through the system Letting the gov't redistribute the money doesn't equal having more money in the economy.

CsG

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
What about those who do not invest wisely? I know everybody here especially the Conservatives will but what about those who screw up and have nothing and are to old to work?

Nobody that's for doing away with SS has an answer?

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
What about those who do not invest wisely? I know everybody here especially the Conservatives will but what about those who screw up and have nothing and are to old to work?

Nobody that's for doing away with SS has an answer?

What did they do before SS?

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
What about those who do not invest wisely? I know everybody here especially the Conservatives will but what about those who screw up and have nothing and are to old to work?

Nobody that's for doing away with SS has an answer?

What did they do before SS?

Died young or worked themselves to death.

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: ciba
Right now, it's apparent that someone will get the short end of the proverbial stick with social security. Right now, it looks like my generation. If we make significant changes, it may be seniors. Every plan irritates some group.

So the question is, if you had to choose a generation to bear the burden of social security reform, who should it be?

I think reform is possible without screwing either group.

That's laughable.
What do you propose?

Phase out current ponzi scheme over the next generation. Allow for investment in private accounts, raise retirment age for younger workers. This can be done without screwing anybody.

I agree partially. I have mixed feelings about the retirement age.

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: piasabird
I dont know if I will ever get social security. I have paid enough in already, that I should be able to receive it. Already they have raised the minumum age to receive it. If they do that again I most likely will die before i get old enough to qualify. I say lets abolish it now and let everyone starve to death. If I can not get mine then the people of today should have to feel the pain that I will have to feel. That is the only way people will understand what is going on and how washington has been stealing our future for the last 20 years. They have stolen the funds earmarked for social security, so let our elected officials feel our pain now.

I know that I will never see my SS money; one of the many reasons I am a die-hard fiscal conservative.

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Spencer278

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: ciba
Right now, it's apparent that someone will get the short end of the proverbial stick with social security. Right now, it looks like my generation. If we make significant changes, it may be seniors. Every plan irritates some group.

So the question is, if you had to choose a generation to bear the burden of social security reform, who should it be?

I think reform is possible without screwing either group.

That's laughable.
What do you propose?

Phase out current ponzi scheme over the next generation. Allow for investment in private accounts, raise retirment age for younger workers. This can be done without screwing anybody.

When have you been unable to invest in your own private account?

I am currently unable to invest about 12% of income in SS. This would be a good start on everyones retirement planning. This is why SS needs to be phased out.

EXACTLY!

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
Anyone care to remember that SS was set up BECAUSE the stock market had taken the suckers for a ride ?

SS was created as a percaution so the 'Investors' wouldn't be taken again, a Government Guarantee
that they would be taken care of by investing in the 'Government' side of financial care.

You really want to let the Lay's, WorldComs, Enrons, etc. of the world back into the General Populations pocketbook to be picked . . again ?

How many WorldCom and Enrons are in the 8000-something publicly traded companies in the US??

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: ciba
Right now, it's apparent that someone will get the short end of the proverbial stick with social security. Right now, it looks like my generation. If we make significant changes, it may be seniors. Every plan irritates some group.

So the question is, if you had to choose a generation to bear the burden of social security reform, who should it be?

I think reform is possible without screwing either group.

That's laughable.
What do you propose?

Phase out current ponzi scheme over the next generation. Allow for investment in private accounts, raise retirment age for younger workers. This can be done without screwing anybody.

Well, no, that's not true. The privatising of social secuirity solves precisely nothing. There will still be a vast shortfall in funding.

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: Orsorum

Originally posted by: piasabird
I dont know if I will ever get social security. I have paid enough in already, that I should be able to receive it. Already they have raised the minumum age to receive it. If they do that again I most likely will die before i get old enough to qualify. I say lets abolish it now and let everyone starve to death. If I can not get mine then the people of today should have to feel the pain that I will have to feel. That is the only way people will understand what is going on and how washington has been stealing our future for the last 20 years. They have stolen the funds earmarked for social security, so let our elected officials feel our pain now.

I know that I will never see my SS money; one of the many reasons I am a die-hard fiscal conservative.

that explains the turned up collars.

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: Orsorum

Originally posted by: piasabird
I dont know if I will ever get social security. I have paid enough in already, that I should be able to receive it. Already they have raised the minumum age to receive it. If they do that again I most likely will die before i get old enough to qualify. I say lets abolish it now and let everyone starve to death. If I can not get mine then the people of today should have to feel the pain that I will have to feel. That is the only way people will understand what is going on and how washington has been stealing our future for the last 20 years. They have stolen the funds earmarked for social security, so let our elected officials feel our pain now.

I know that I will never see my SS money; one of the many reasons I am a die-hard fiscal conservative.

that explains the turned up collars.

Sometimes you gotta pop da colla.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: ciba
Right now, it's apparent that someone will get the short end of the proverbial stick with social security. Right now, it looks like my generation. If we make significant changes, it may be seniors. Every plan irritates some group.

So the question is, if you had to choose a generation to bear the burden of social security reform, who should it be?

I think reform is possible without screwing either group.

That's laughable.
What do you propose?

Phase out current ponzi scheme over the next generation. Allow for investment in private accounts, raise retirment age for younger workers. This can be done without screwing anybody.

Well, no, that's not true. The privatising of social secuirity solves precisely nothing. There will still be a vast shortfall in funding.

And if there is a vast shortfall, I will get nothing. Which is exactly what most people my age plan on getting from SS.