Social Security?

[AlexCrowley 0]

There arent private pension plans in the US??

Holy crap Im being ripped off by my financial advisor!!!!

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[wmw999 2,600]

You can make whatever investment choices you want to with the vast majority of your retirement money.

I'm sure you invest a whole lot more into your own retirement 401Ks, TDSPs, IRAs, or whatever you have, than is invested on your account into Social Security. Part of its job is to help those who got the short end of the stick (e.g. widowed, disabled); part of its job is to force people who would not otherwise plan for retirement to help set something aside (anyone who's living at or close to subsistence level), and part of its job is to be a piece of a comfortable retirement.

What would happen if the fund family you invested in turned out to have been mismanaged? You might even be grateful that SS wasn't invested in the same way. Of course, I'm sure all of your investments are good and pay off well.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[tso-d_chris 0]

Quote

I agree, all are not capable. But is it fair to those who are, to not have the opportunity to do so? Why must we be constantly denied because there are those who can't?

Nobody is denying you the opportunity to make personal retirement investments. In fact, 401ks, traditional IRAs and Roth IRAs offer incentives to do just that.

I don't see privatizing SS as anything more than a trick to eliminate SS by renaming existing private retirement investment opportunities with the Social Security name.

[tso-d_chris 0]

Quote

It is actually UNAMERICAN according to the constitution to even suggest that human beings as a whole have the right to help from the government, only that they have the right to have rights and those are granted by God and not by humans.

Quote

. . .promote the general welfare. . .

[Channman 2]

Wendy,

Hope that sun roof is coming along. I think Gravityman...hehehe and I are concerned that the fund managers of SS are doing just that mismanaging the funds.

Americans have always given in time of need and will always continue to do so. Private Charitable operations have given well over a billion dollars to Katrina/Rita victims.

SS in its current state is unsustainable and will have to be addressed now when we can do something about it or later when we can't.

cheers

[ReBirth 0]

Quote

My point is once you show someone the power of waiting 31 days can bring you a return of more than 10 times the amount promised to you.

Yeah...if you earn 100% return per day.

[ReBirth 0]

Quote

I agree, all are not capable. But is it fair to those who are, to not have the opportunity to do so? Why must we be constantly denied because there are those who can't?

You have the opportunity to do so....no one is denying you anything.

I'll admit that paying into SS for those of us smart enough to invest on our own is a sacrifice, so I'll address your last question based on that. We must contribute because we are part of society. The purpose of a society is to pool resources for the good of all.

[billvon 3,132]

>The point is, the Democrats weren't even willing to discuss this
>becasue they would rather use it as a political issue.

Again, it is Bush who is refusing to consider any solution other than his own. There have been dozens of proposals torpedoed by his inflexible insistence on private accounts.

>OK, how about we cut some the $Billions going out every year in
>SS payments?

Specifics, please. Every politician worth his straw hat promises to "cut billions in fat." But currently we can't even fund projected future expenses - so what, exactly, would you cut? Disability insurance? Survivor's benefits? Retirement benefits? Reviews of who qualifies? Increase in retirement age? Price indexing instead of wage indexing?

[Channman 2]

>Yeah...if you earn 100% return per day.

Your response has nothing to do with a concept I was trying to convey. 31 days is a period of time, the penny was an amount vested with a compounding effect over that period of time.

Most people think short term, give me the money now, but people of wealth leverage not only there time but their money.

My point was people don't believe .01 cent could ever grow to 1,000,000.00 in just 31 days, therefore because they have a preconcieved idea they always take the 1,000,000.00, because sometimes they just don't want to listen, and because of that they forefit $10,737,418.24

Once again I'm not talking about a 100% return on your money every single day. (Hope I cleared that up for ya)

There is not an individual here on DZ.Com given that there is well over 75 years of history in the market that shows that any individual willing to make well placed investments in Stock Mutual Funds would not have been far better off than waiting on their SS check in the mail. Hell starting at age 20 investing 25.00 per month to age 65 with a 10% rate of return would be mind numing for many.

[Channman 2]

>The purpose of a society is to pool resources for the good of all.

Nothing personnal, but that sounds like Karl Marks.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

>That's exactly what I've been saying.

Cool! In that case, we have that now, so we're done. (They're called 401k's.)

Only if your company provides them. And then you often have waiting periods that can be quite long, and it's not very suitable for contract W2 workers like myself.

Now were the IRA limit bumped up to match the 401k for those of us not participating in the latter, it would be fine. But as it stands, it's 3k versus 11k.

SS should be eliminated and 12pts just added to our tax brackets. Let's stop pretending that it's anything like a pension program.

[ReBirth 0]

Quote

>The purpose of a society is to pool resources for the good of all.

Nothing personnal, but that sounds like Karl Marks.

Could be....but is it not true? Why else do humans cooperate in a society if not a need to pool resources? Can you do everything on your own to support yourself throughout your life? Would you want to?

I'm as capitalistic as the next red blooded american. Extremism is never the right mix. That means being a hard core socialist like Marx, or being a hard core capitalist like Rockefeller. Believe it or not, there are some good points to socialism, just like there are good points to capitalism. The goal should be to combine all the best points in a productive balance. The Soviet Union collapsed because it went to far in one direction. I fear we are headed to far in the other.

[Channman 2]

IRA contributions are up to 4,000 per year and if you are over the age of 50, you can contribute 4,500.00 per year i.e. (Catch Up Provision).

Same goes for a non working spouse. There for you could invest a total of 10,000.

If you are self employeed or have a home based business you could start a Simple IRA plan, which would allow you to make contributions of a maximum of 10,000 of compensation per year. Even if you have a 401k plan with your current company that you contribute to you can still contribute to your Simple plan. Win Win

[ReBirth 0]

Quote

Quote

>That's exactly what I've been saying.

Cool! In that case, we have that now, so we're done. (They're called 401k's.)

Only if your company provides them.

Ever hear of SEP, KEOUGH or SIMPLE? You have options. And guess what, you can still save money even if it's NOT tax deferred. No one is stopping you.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Cool! In that case, we have that now, so we're done. (They're called 401k's.)

Only if your company provides them.

Ever hear of SEP, KEOUGH or SIMPLE? You have options. And guess what, you can still save money even if it's NOT tax deferred. No one is stopping you.

The conversation is about SS replacements, so don't feed the non retirement accounts into the equation.

And I said I was a contract W2 worker. Not 1099. I don't think SEPs or SIMPLEs apply. With the traditional IRA, I write a check out to my broker and I deduct it off the top.

Nice to hear IRA limits are up to 4k now. But 401ks are at 14. So as I said, 401ks aren't uninversally available, and IRAs are poor substitutes.

[tso-d_chris 0]

Quote

Nothing personnal, but that sounds like Karl Marks.

Is he any relation to the Marx guy that Marxists like so well?

Groucho I think his name was?

[tso-d_chris 0]

Quote

Now were the IRA limit bumped up to match the 401k for those of us not participating in the latter, it would be fine. But as it stands, it's 3k versus 11k.

I agree; it is unfair to cap one so much higher than the other, especially since not everyone has the option of a 401k.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

>The point is, the Democrats weren't even willing to discuss this
>becasue they would rather use it as a political issue.

Again, it is Bush who is refusing to consider any solution other than his own. There have been dozens of proposals torpedoed by his inflexible insistence on private accounts.

>OK, how about we cut some the $Billions going out every year in
>SS payments?

Specifics, please. Every politician worth his straw hat promises to "cut billions in fat." But currently we can't even fund projected future expenses - so what, exactly, would you cut? Disability insurance? Survivor's benefits? Retirement benefits? Reviews of who qualifies? Increase in retirement age? Price indexing instead of wage indexing?

I can only speak for myself, but I'd be willing to allow SS to buy me out for a percentage of what I have contributed if I could opt out entirely and invest the annual SS payments I have to make now. I'm sure many would agree with me. Why not keep SS as a safety net and let those of us who know how to invest use at least a percentage of what we were already paying. Heck, I'd be willing to continue paying SS at 50% of my current rate with no benefit.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

The purpose of a society is to pool resources for the good of all.

A Marxist society, perhaps...

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[ReBirth 0]

Quote

And I said I was a contract W2 worker. Not 1099. I don't think SEPs or SIMPLEs apply.

Ahh, that's different. But you were a consultant, I'm assuming. Making a higher hourly wage than a full time employee...right? I've worked that way before too. And the extra pay per hour is to compensate you for not getting all the normal bennies.

But even if that's not the case....as the conservatives are wont to say....go find another job if you don't like the one you have. No one made you take a job that doesn't offer 401k, did they?

[ReBirth 0]

Quote

Quote

The purpose of a society is to pool resources for the good of all.

A Marxist society, perhaps...

Ok...tell me. What is the purpose of people cooperating with each other? It's not so that they can share their knowledge, their talents, their abilities (aka resources)?

Not everything is black and white. Cooperation among people for the benefit of all is not solely reserved to socialism. Pooling of resources for the common good is and should be the ONLY reason for centralized government.

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. "

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

The purpose of a society is to pool resources for the good of all.

A Marxist society, perhaps...

Quote

Ok...tell me. What is the purpose of people cooperating with each other? It's not so that they can share their knowledge, their talents, their abilities (aka resources)?

If they do so voluntarily, I have no issue. When they are forced to by the Govt. I do have an issue.

Quote

Not everything is black and white. Cooperation among people for the benefit of all is not solely reserved to socialism. Pooling of resources for the common good is and should be the ONLY reason for centralized government.

Again, if it's voluntary. What you are talking about isn't. It's forced.

Quote

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. "

You are reading something that isn't there. Providing for the general welfare does not mean providing welfare. General welfare means promoting overall well being. It does not mean a "Robin Hood" approach to Govt. by providing a welfare check.

• Quote

[ReBirth 0]

"If they do so voluntarily, I have no issue. When they are forced to by the Govt. I do have an issue."

Hmmm, the gov't forces you to do a lot of things. They're called laws. Don't like em? Vote.

Quote

You are reading something that isn't there. Providing for the general welfare does not mean providing welfare. General welfare means promoting overall well being. It does not mean a "Robin Hood" approach to Govt. by providing a welfare check.

And you're reading something that isn't there. I never said anything about "welfare". We're talking about social security. I would say that keeping old people from dying from starvation or the elements promotes overall well being. Obviously many people would rather let them fend for themselves. Personally, I find that to be selfish, cruel, and just a little bit evil.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

"If they do so voluntarily, I have no issue. When they are forced to by the Govt. I do have an issue."

Hmmm, the gov't forces you to do a lot of things. They're called laws. Don't like em? Vote.

Quote

You are reading something that isn't there. Providing for the general welfare does not mean providing welfare. General welfare means promoting overall well being. It does not mean a "Robin Hood" approach to Govt. by providing a welfare check.

And you're reading something that isn't there. I never said anything about "welfare". We're talking about social security. I would say that keeping old people from dying from starvation or the elements promotes overall well being. Obviously many people would rather let them fend for themselves. Personally, I find that to be selfish, cruel, and just a little bit evil.

Then what was the point of quoting the first sentence of the Constitution?

Perhaps if people had a little more awareness and fear of what can happen to you when you get old if you don't save. The "Oh, the Govt. will take care of me" mentality would start to disappear.

[Channman 2]

It is somewhat hard to understand individuals who work there intire lives giving 35 to 40 years into the work place and never saving more than 50,000 in an account. The averages are much worse.

95% of Americans find themselves either still working or financially unable to make ends meet at retirement. SS like it or not is going the way of the Pension programs in this country. The burden is being shifted more and more on to the individual to provide for their own needs as it was in the beginning.

NOTE: That Kallend just whats to stir the pot with this thread.