Don't worry about social security johnjohn, by the time it will be useful to you, it will be dead (for good or bad, depending on how you look at it)
<< Nope. Over any 15 year period of the stock market, you could have had nearly a 100% gaurantee of a return on your money greater than 2% (S&P500). Do your research, you clearly have no idea what you are talking about. >>
The part you fail to mention is the beta of this return. The beta of this return is hardly zero. Therefore, when you take out the money is vitally important as well.
SS must be all privatized (i.e. SS is abolished), or it must be all government owned (i.e. the way it is now).
There can be no middle ground in this.
It would be a gigantic conflict of interest for a government sanctioned program to invest in something like the stock market. Do you really want the gov't to own pieces of a public company? Here in Canada, we call them Crown Corporations (e.g. Petro-Canada).
I guess SS could invest in T-bills, but since T-bills are issued by the gov't, you'd have the gov't owing money to itself, and paying itself interest
Oh yes, a simple solution would be for people to only receive what they put in. This could be done over a period of 5 years, and then SS could be closed.
Professional money management, diversification, asset allocation, and dollar cost averaging are some concepts the govt. does not seem to understand.
I never said the govt. should invest in private companies. I said they should encourage participation in employee 401k programs or they should back out and let experience financial advisors handle peoples money, voluntarily. If people are forced to make their own decisions, they will educate themselves. People are not stupid, you know. Learn to read my post before you talk our of your butt.
The part you fail to mention is the beta of this return. The beta of this return is hardly zero. Therefore, when you take out the money is vitally important as well.
This is a concept with which I am not familiar. Please explain.
EDIT: spelling and grammar
I never said the govt. should invest in private companies. I said they should encourage participation in employee 401k programs or they should back out and let experience financial advisors handle peoples money, voluntarily. If people are forced to make their own decisions, they will educate themselves. People are not stupid, you know. Learn to read my post before you talk our of your butt.
The part you fail to mention is the beta of this return. The beta of this return is hardly zero. Therefore, when you take out the money is vitally important as well.
This is a concept with which I am not familiar. Please explain.
EDIT: spelling and grammar
wyvrn i agree with you but your asking for something that government won't do and thats relinquishing power and control. Remember they feel your pain and know whats best for you and your family, tongue firmly planted in cheek, what a crock.
The federal govt. should never have gotten as big and bloated as it is now, but that is another subject I am not going to try to tackle in this post.
I realize people's lives are busy and we cannot all be experts, but I will never believe that the SS program is the best we can do as a collective intelligence. What a fvcking crock of donkey doodoo.
I realize people's lives are busy and we cannot all be experts, but I will never believe that the SS program is the best we can do as a collective intelligence. What a fvcking crock of donkey doodoo.
Its expanded slowly and inexorably beyond its original intent over the years and has given government another lever to control.
HomeBrewerDude
Lifer
- Jan 18, 2001
- 14,465
- 1
- 0
To whoever said 'do your research' and your garuanteed a '100% return in 15 years on the market' is full of CRAP. Yeah, you ought to get it, but you might not. Talk about being won over by propaganda. And I am not impressed with your 15 year 100% garuantee. A simple bond at 6% (compounded annually) will give you a 100% return in 14 years.
And yeah, you need to go ahead and invest in a retirement fund, just like everyone else. SS was never meant to provide for a comfortable retirement so I don't know why you expect it too.
And you cheap bastards who don't want to see the elderly receive a the meager benefits that they truely depend on can go live in another country.
And yeah, you need to go ahead and invest in a retirement fund, just like everyone else. SS was never meant to provide for a comfortable retirement so I don't know why you expect it too.
And you cheap bastards who don't want to see the elderly receive a the meager benefits that they truely depend on can go live in another country.
<And yeah, you need to go ahead and invest in a retirement fund, just like everyone else. SS was never meant to provide for a comfortable retirement so I don't know why you expect it too.>
Huh!!! Have you calculated the percentage of your paycheck that goes to government already ? What the heck is leftover to invest in a reitrement fund most people are trying to just make ends meet and hang on from paycheck to paycheck much less invest in any retirement fund. which leads to the second part that it was never meant to provide for a comfortable retirement . Uh DUH!! thats what our discusion is all about government has its hands in the cookie jar way too much and its only getting worse with each passing year. As for the other line of leaving the country, please spare us that.
Huh!!! Have you calculated the percentage of your paycheck that goes to government already ? What the heck is leftover to invest in a reitrement fund most people are trying to just make ends meet and hang on from paycheck to paycheck much less invest in any retirement fund. which leads to the second part that it was never meant to provide for a comfortable retirement . Uh DUH!! thats what our discusion is all about government has its hands in the cookie jar way too much and its only getting worse with each passing year. As for the other line of leaving the country, please spare us that.
Actually the S&P 500 has outperformed any bond or similar low interest investment over any 15 year period. Just because a bond is "guaranteed" does not make it a good investment. Inflation by most accounts is 4-5%, so a 6% bond yields you very little growth. Over almost any 15 year period, the stock market has yielded a 12% return (in last ten years has been closer to 23% with that bull market you were talking about). That is 12% a year. Compound that for 15 years and a bond is bush league in comparison.
To understand rate of return, the difference between 6% a year and 12% a year is not just 6%. The growth is not linear, it is exponential. Why? Once you add in the interest from year to year, it increases your capital. That is the magic of compounding.
(The 100% figure I used was to illustrate that you had a nearly perfect chanve not to lose money. It was not referring to the rate of growth, ok )
If you even know what the S&P500 was, or diversification, you would not be arguing bonds my friend. Like I said, do you research.
To understand rate of return, the difference between 6% a year and 12% a year is not just 6%. The growth is not linear, it is exponential. Why? Once you add in the interest from year to year, it increases your capital. That is the magic of compounding.
(The 100% figure I used was to illustrate that you had a nearly perfect chanve not to lose money. It was not referring to the rate of growth, ok
)If you even know what the S&P500 was, or diversification, you would not be arguing bonds my friend. Like I said, do you research.
HomeBrewerDude
Lifer
- Jan 18, 2001
- 14,465
- 1
- 0
<< I realize people's lives are busy and we cannot all be experts, but I will never believe that the SS program is the best we can do as a collective intelligence. >>
That about sums it up. First the government takes without permission. Then it doesn't even bother to entrust the money it took (i.e. no "lock-box". It dips into the SS till whenever it feels the need. You get a paltry 2% roi bone if you live long to gum at it. And in order to "save" this mis-funded socialist program they'll need to greatly reduce benefits, increase the retirement age, or greatly increase taxes...or all 3.
Spending $10 for $2 of "benefit" is far from wise. It's nice the elderly aren't nearly as impoverished as 30 years ago. But given the $$$ that goes into this sysytem the elderly ought to all be arab shieks by now. :|
That about sums it up. First the government takes without permission. Then it doesn't even bother to entrust the money it took (i.e. no "lock-box"
. It dips into the SS till whenever it feels the need. You get a paltry 2% roi bone if you live long to gum at it. And in order to "save" this mis-funded socialist program they'll need to greatly reduce benefits, increase the retirement age, or greatly increase taxes...or all 3.Spending $10 for $2 of "benefit" is far from wise. It's nice the elderly aren't nearly as impoverished as 30 years ago. But given the $$$ that goes into this sysytem the elderly ought to all be arab shieks by now. :|
Right.
Ok so take $1000 at 2% and compound for ten years. Then take 1000 at 6% and compound for ten years. Then take $1000 at 12% and compound for ten years. Then come back and tell me SS is a good way to invest, ok?
Ok so take $1000 at 2% and compound for ten years. Then take 1000 at 6% and compound for ten years. Then take $1000 at 12% and compound for ten years. Then come back and tell me SS is a good way to invest, ok?
HomeBrewerDude
Lifer
- Jan 18, 2001
- 14,465
- 1
- 0
wyvrn. Where is the garuantee? You going to underwrite with your license? I understand that the market usually out performs bonds and that bonds usually barely outperform inflation. The operative word there is usually. An index won't help improve returns when there is an across the board collapse.
Please, stop with the insidious wise cracks and tell me how the government will garuantee a rate of return when that return is based on investsments that themselves offer no garuantee. If you are so informed then you ought to be able to explain it without attacking me. Freak out somewhere else.
Please, stop with the insidious wise cracks and tell me how the government will garuantee a rate of return when that return is based on investsments that themselves offer no garuantee. If you are so informed then you ought to be able to explain it without attacking me. Freak out somewhere else.
What I was saying is that a guarantee on a paltry 2% (if that indeed is correct) means nothing. You did not read my posts. Over any 15 year period in American Stock Market History, you have a nearly 100% chance of outpacing 2%. In fact, the avg. 15 year percentage Rate of Return from the stock market is 12%.
The stock market, long term, has the highest rate of success of any market instrument, including bonds. Wake up!
A guarantee on 2% only means your money will never outpace inflation. There is your stinking guarantee, man!
E D U C A T E.. Y O U R S E L F.
I understand that the market usually out performs bonds and that bonds usually barely outperform inflation.
WRONG. The correct statement would be:
"I understand that the market ALWAYS out performs bonds and that bonds usually barely outperform inflation over any 15 year period[/b]." I challenge you to find any, ANY 15 year period where he S&P500 did NOT outperform a govt. bond. DARE YOU!!!
The govt. gaurantee on bonds is for investors who want security and not growth, like a current retiree. Why would someone who is just starting to save for retirement lock themselves into guaranteed low growth? Long term, the stock market is always the best investment, as long as you diversify (don't buy all Boeing, etc...).
There I am done arguing with ignorant people.
The stock market, long term, has the highest rate of success of any market instrument, including bonds. Wake up!
A guarantee on 2% only means your money will never outpace inflation. There is your stinking guarantee, man!
E D U C A T E.. Y O U R S E L F.
I understand that the market usually out performs bonds and that bonds usually barely outperform inflation.
WRONG. The correct statement would be:
"I understand that the market ALWAYS out performs bonds and that bonds usually barely outperform inflation over any 15 year period[/b]." I challenge you to find any, ANY 15 year period where he S&P500 did NOT outperform a govt. bond. DARE YOU!!!
The govt. gaurantee on bonds is for investors who want security and not growth, like a current retiree. Why would someone who is just starting to save for retirement lock themselves into guaranteed low growth? Long term, the stock market is always the best investment, as long as you diversify (don't buy all Boeing, etc...).
There I am done arguing with ignorant people.
YamahaXS,
You state that using SS money in the stock market is a so-called "risky scheme". Well if it is, then please answer Ornery's question (he beat me to it, but good for him) as to why Federal employees do not pay into SS but instead pay into 3 different funds, a stock fund, mutual fund and I believe a money market fund (don't know if the last one is correct). Each year they are allowed to shift the amounts between these funds, i.e. 80%/10%/10%. So, if Federal employees can take the "risk" why aren't we allowed to? I'd be willing to risk it in the hopes of getting something rather than sitting here and wondering if I'm going to get anything. Its simply a government scam that allows them to control our lives. Period.
Rockhound
You state that using SS money in the stock market is a so-called "risky scheme". Well if it is, then please answer Ornery's question (he beat me to it, but good for him) as to why Federal employees do not pay into SS but instead pay into 3 different funds, a stock fund, mutual fund and I believe a money market fund (don't know if the last one is correct). Each year they are allowed to shift the amounts between these funds, i.e. 80%/10%/10%. So, if Federal employees can take the "risk" why aren't we allowed to? I'd be willing to risk it in the hopes of getting something rather than sitting here and wondering if I'm going to get anything. Its simply a government scam that allows them to control our lives. Period.
Rockhound
Beta: A value quantifying the volatility of a certain investment vehicle. The larger the value, the more volatile the investment vehicle.
The beta of the stock market is not inconsiderable. Go to your local bank and look at the Anders investment poster. Look at the REALLY BIG DIPS in the stock market. What if you took your money out during those times? You sure wouldn't have made 15%, or anywhere close to that amount.
My comments about the investing in public companies were not directed at you wyvrn. I expect an apology for your "talking out of my butt" statement. BTW, one does not easily invest into a private company. All companies on a stock market are public companies.
Now then, having said that, you sure are implying that SS funds (individually or otherwise) be invested into the stock market, what with your assertion that sticking money into the stock market automatically gives you a reasonable rate of return. Geez, don't you remember Black Monday? How about the 1930s?
<< why Federal employees do not pay into SS but instead pay into 3 different funds, a stock fund, mutual fund and I believe a money market fund >>
Why not? Call your federal rep if you want this to change.
The beta of the stock market is not inconsiderable. Go to your local bank and look at the Anders investment poster. Look at the REALLY BIG DIPS in the stock market. What if you took your money out during those times? You sure wouldn't have made 15%, or anywhere close to that amount.
My comments about the investing in public companies were not directed at you wyvrn. I expect an apology for your "talking out of my butt" statement. BTW, one does not easily invest into a private company. All companies on a stock market are public companies.
Now then, having said that, you sure are implying that SS funds (individually or otherwise) be invested into the stock market, what with your assertion that sticking money into the stock market automatically gives you a reasonable rate of return. Geez, don't you remember Black Monday? How about the 1930s?
<< why Federal employees do not pay into SS but instead pay into 3 different funds, a stock fund, mutual fund and I believe a money market fund >>
Why not? Call your federal rep if you want this to change.
wyvrn and rock hound are on message and totally right.
shazam,
<Why not? Call your federal rep if you want this to change.>
I can hear my local representative now " hello mister so and so, sure thing we'll allow you to do what the elite can do. Don't worry about us losing control over your every move and action, bt the way mr. so and so did you contribute 10k to my re-election campaign ? No? ...click....."
shazam,
<Why not? Call your federal rep if you want this to change.>
I can hear my local representative now " hello mister so and so, sure thing we'll allow you to do what the elite can do. Don't worry about us losing control over your every move and action, bt the way mr. so and so did you contribute 10k to my re-election campaign ? No? ...click....."
Shazam,
Day trading in the stock market is gambling.
If you money is in the stock market for the long term, you will get a good return. The history of the stockmarket has shown 12% growth. Take a look at the earning rates of any mutual funds, historically they all show about the same.
Day trading in the stock market is gambling.
If you money is in the stock market for the long term, you will get a good return. The history of the stockmarket has shown 12% growth. Take a look at the earning rates of any mutual funds, historically they all show about the same.
Skip the stock market for a second here, i can purchase 10 year and 30 year treasuries along with some investment grade corporates and still beat the pants off the governments measly 2% real rate of return. At no more added risk than the world ending and if that were to occur i wouldnt need it anyway.
What the hell does day trading have to do with anything? What, you consider the Great Depression a result of DAY TRADING????!! Do you even comprehend what happened back then and why?
<< I understand that the market ALWAYS out performs bonds and that bonds usually barely outperform inflation over any 15 year period >>
Well, duh. Bonds are inherently less risky than the stock market, therefore they MUST have a lower rate of return.
<< I understand that the market ALWAYS out performs bonds and that bonds usually barely outperform inflation over any 15 year period >>
Well, duh. Bonds are inherently less risky than the stock market, therefore they MUST have a lower rate of return.
<< I can hear my local representative now " hello mister so and so, sure thing we'll allow you to do what the elite can do. Don't worry about us losing control over your every move and action, bt the way mr. so and so did you contribute 10k to my re-election campaign ? No? ...click....." >>
Yup, and whining on a message forum is even more productive.....
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter