|
|
"Heck's Coming With Me"
Posts: 10797
   
Location: Kansas | You know how for 2016 the administration decided recipients didn't need a raise in Social Security, even though many senior citizens totally depend on it. Well, for 2017 the raise will be.. (drumroll).. two-tenths of one percent, or about $3 per recipient. Why bother? The real kick in the teeth is when I see illegals interviewed on TV counting their numerous blessings from U.S. taxpayers and including Social Security in the mix.
|
|
| |
|
| AMERICANS FIRST ......... VOTE FOR DONALD J. TRUMP!! |
|
| |
|
 To the Left
Posts: 1865
Location: Florida | I have money in a savings account and I make one tenth of one percent interest. The people getting screwed are the people who save money and get nothing because the Feds keep the interest rate at nothing to help businesses loan our money at an 18% profit. |
|
| |
|
  Semper Fi
Location: North Texas | Vickie - 2016-06-24 2:00 PM
I have money in a savings account and I make one tenth of one percent interest. The people getting screwed are the people who save money and get nothing because the Feds keep the interest rate at nothing to help businesses loan our money at an 18% profit.
Want to see a economy completely grind to a halt? Raise the interest rates! History tells that high interest rates i.e. Carter Administration have long lasting consequences! Twas the mid to late '80s before the economy actually recovered from high interest rates!
|
|
| |
|
Location: Not Where I Want to Be | Vickie - 2016-06-24 3:00 PM I have money in a savings account and I make one tenth of one percent interest. The people getting screwed are the people who save money and get nothing because the Feds keep the interest rate at nothing to help businesses loan our money at an 18% profit.
I know I should never bite on your fishing expeditions.
But that statement is one of the more insanely idiotic claims that I may have ever read on this site.
Savings accounts are not investment vehicles. You want you money to work for you, put it to work. Don't stash it.
|
|
| |
|
 Own It and Move On
Location: The edge of no where | 1DSoon - 2016-06-24 2:06 PM Vickie - 2016-06-24 3:00 PM I have money in a savings account and I make one tenth of one percent interest. The people getting screwed are the people who save money and get nothing because the Feds keep the interest rate at nothing to help businesses loan our money at an 18% profit. I know I should never bite on your fishing expeditions.
But that statement is one of the more insanely idiotic claims that I may have ever read on this site.
Savings accounts are not investment vehicles. You want you money to work for you, put it to work. Don't stash it.
^^THANK YOU |
|
| |
|
 Take a Picture
Posts: 12841
| 1DSoon - 2016-06-24 2:06 PM
Vickie - 2016-06-24 3:00 PM I have money in a savings account and I make one tenth of one percent interest. The people getting screwed are the people who save money and get nothing because the Feds keep the interest rate at nothing to help businesses loan our money at an 18% profit.
I know I should never bite on your fishing expeditions.
But that statement is one of the more insanely idiotic claims that I may have ever read on this site.
Savings accounts are not investment vehicles. You want you money to work for you, put it to work. Don't stash it.
That was pretty much what I was thinking. I think I have a better interest rate on my checking account than that |
|
| |
|
"Heck's Coming With Me"
Posts: 10797
Location: Kansas | MS2011 - 2016-06-24 2:12 PM
1DSoon - 2016-06-24 2:06 PM Vickie - 2016-06-24 3:00 PM I have money in a savings account and I make one tenth of one percent interest. The people getting screwed are the people who save money and get nothing because the Feds keep the interest rate at nothing to help businesses loan our money at an 18% profit. I know I should never bite on your fishing expeditions.
But that statement is one of the more insanely idiotic claims that I may have ever read on this site.
Savings accounts are not investment vehicles. You want you money to work for you, put it to work. Don't stash it.
The stock market is and always will be volatile.......not always a good idea for senior citizens.
|
|
| |
|
"Heck's Coming With Me"
Posts: 10797
Location: Kansas | foundation horse - 2016-06-24 2:03 PM Vickie - 2016-06-24 2:00 PM I have money in a savings account and I make one tenth of one percent interest. The people getting screwed are the people who save money and get nothing because the Feds keep the interest rate at nothing to help businesses loan our money at an 18% profit. Want to see a economy completely grind to a halt? Raise the interest rates! History tells that high interest rates i.e. Carter Administration have long lasting consequences! Twas the mid to late '80s before the economy actually recovered from high interest rates!
You're talking about extraordinarily high interest rates.....not the normal 5 or 6 percent.
|
|
| |
|
Regular
Posts: 94
Location: Texas | Social security was always mean to "help supplement seniors" not be the sole source of support/income!!
Don't depend on someone else to take care of you! Do what you can now to make sure that your retirement is secure! |
|
| |
|
Semper Fi
Location: North Texas | prober - 2016-06-25 6:00 AM
Social security was always mean to "help supplement seniors" not be the sole source of support/income!!
Don't depend on someone else to take care of you! Do what you can now to make sure that your retirement is secure!
In reality, it is NOT The Government's Job to take care of anyone, period!
Social Security was pitched by FDR, an American Progressive/Socialist as The Government Retirement Plan, which Congress as since absconded with via depositing SS receipts in The General Fund vs. The Private Fund which SS was originally designated to be held in.
So, in reality The Federal Government is screwing it's Citizens..............Again!
|
|
| |
|
 BHW Resident Surgeon
Posts: 25352
Location: Bastrop, Texas | Don't get me started on Social Security. There's no earthly reason why the program should continue indefinitely. I'm waiting for a courageous politician to come out and put forth a sensible argument in favor of transitioning to a privatized system.
As 1D Soon suggested, if you want to save for retirement, the best way to accomplish that is to put your money where it will work for you and grow. Allowing the fed government to confiscate it from you for your entire life won't get you there. Social Security is just as bad as a Ponzi scheme. Bank savings accounts are not money gardens, and the federal government is even worse. Politicians for decades have used criminal scare tactics to convince the unthinking that privatization is somehow dangerous. No matter where you put your money, there will always be risk. At the top of the list of lousy vehicles, in terms of investing for retirement, is social security. It's already failing.
Consider this scenario. If you start contributing 12.4% of your income at age 20 to retirement, you retire at age 60, and you average an annual income of $40K per year, assuming an average annual rate of growth of 7% over those 40 years, how much would your nest egg be worth? Answer: about $1.2 Million. Don't believe me? Figure it out for yourself. Go back and look up the average rate of growth of equities over the last 100 years. If you start with the stock market crash of 1929 until present day, the average rate of growth in the market is roughly 8.5%. If you start in 1932, when the economy started to recover, the rate of growth was roughly 11%. I used a very conservative 7% figure. If I used that 11% figure, then in the above scenario, your nest egg would be worth about $3.5 million. Let's assume the less optimistic scenario of 7% - that means if you draw 5% off that nest egg to live on, your retirement income would be $60K per year for the rest of your life.....when you were used to living on much less during your working years. Your nest egg probably wouldn't change much through your retirement. That would remain as your "money tree" which could be passed on in your estate when you pass away. If you die before reaching retirement, the government can tear up that IOU, if you have no dependents. In a privatized system, it goes wherever you designate.
Here's another huge, albeit less appreciated, advantage of privatization. All that money in privatized retirement would amount to an annual infusion into the economy. We're talking about hundreds and hundreds of billions of "stimulus" dollars into the private sector. That's REAL money, not borrowed money like the 2009 stimulus bill. That creates jobs. But here's another beautiful bonus, for those of you fearing that the government would be left out: all that money and those jobs generate incomes, and hence tax revenues to the fed. You want to eliminate the federal debt? Privatize social security! You want to be able to afford to provide some aid to indigents WITHOUT borrowing money or raising taxes? Privatize social security! You want to provide INCENTIVE to work? Privatize social security and it won't be long before even lazy people realize that they want in on the game.
Of course maybe that is "too risky". Maybe it's too good to be true.
Well, that's what our elected officials tell us anyway. After all, they are so much smarter than the rest of us........aren't they? |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 23
| Bear....this is the most common sense thing I've read in a long time. Sadly, no politician will have the balls to touch SS. |
|
| |
|
"Heck's Coming With Me"
Posts: 10797
Location: Kansas | Bear, when you talk about privatization, does that still stem from money the Govt took from your paycheck or a voluntary program, because most people would just simply spend the money. It would never go into savings.
|
|
| |
|
 Shelter Dog Lover
Posts: 10277
| Bear - 2016-06-25 7:33 AM Don't get me started on Social Security. There's no earthly reason why the program should continue indefinitely. I'm waiting for a courageous politician to come out and put forth a sensible argument in favor of transitioning to a privatized system. As 1D Soon suggested, if you want to save for retirement, the best way to accomplish that is to put your money where it will work for you and grow. Allowing the fed government to confiscate it from you for your entire life won't get you there. Social Security is just as bad as a Ponzi scheme. Bank savings accounts are not money gardens, and the federal government is even worse. Politicians for decades have used criminal scare tactics to convince the unthinking that privatization is somehow dangerous. No matter where you put your money, there will always be risk. At the top of the list of lousy vehicles, in terms of investing for retirement, is social security. It's already failing. Consider this scenario. If you start contributing 12.4% of your income at age 20 to retirement, you retire at age 60, and you average an annual income of $40K per year, assuming an average annual rate of growth of 7% over those 40 years, how much would your nest egg be worth? Answer: about $1.2 Million. Don't believe me? Figure it out for yourself. Go back and look up the average rate of growth of equities over the last 100 years. If you start with the stock market crash of 1929 until present day, the average rate of growth in the market is roughly 8.5%. If you start in 1932, when the economy started to recover, the rate of growth was roughly 11%. I used a very conservative 7% figure. If I used that 11% figure, then in the above scenario, your nest egg would be worth about $3.5 million. Let's assume the less optimistic scenario of 7% - that means if you draw 5% off that nest egg to live on, your retirement income would be $60K per year for the rest of your life.....when you were used to living on much less during your working years. Your nest egg probably wouldn't change much through your retirement. That would remain as your "money tree" which could be passed on in your estate when you pass away. If you die before reaching retirement, the government can tear up that IOU, if you have no dependents. In a privatized system, it goes wherever you designate. Here's another huge, albeit less appreciated, advantage of privatization. All that money in privatized retirement would amount to an annual infusion into the economy. We're talking about hundreds and hundreds of billions of "stimulus" dollars into the private sector. That's REAL money, not borrowed money like the 2009 stimulus bill. That creates jobs. But here's another beautiful bonus, for those of you fearing that the government would be left out: all that money and those jobs generate incomes, and hence tax revenues to the fed. You want to eliminate the federal debt? Privatize social security! You want to be able to afford to provide some aid to indigents WITHOUT borrowing money or raising taxes? Privatize social security! You want to provide INCENTIVE to work? Privatize social security and it won't be long before even lazy people realize that they want in on the game. Of course maybe that is "too risky". Maybe it's too good to be true. Well, that's what our elected officials tell us anyway. After all, they are so much smarter than the rest of us........aren't they?
We would opt out if given the option |
|
| |
|
Location: Not Where I Want to Be | Frodo - 2016-06-25 9:35 AM Bear, when you talk about privatization, does that still stem from money the Govt took from your paycheck or a voluntary program, because most people would just simply spend the money. It would never go into savings.
Dumb should hurt, it's not the Gov. job to take care of the individual.
|
|
| |
|
Semper Fi
Location: North Texas | Frodo - 2016-06-25 8:35 AM
Bear, when you talk about privatization, does that still stem from money the Govt took from your paycheck or a voluntary program, because most people would just simply spend the money. It would never go into savings.
Personal responsibility is just that, PERSONAL. |
|
| |
|
BHW Resident Surgeon
Posts: 25352
Location: Bastrop, Texas | Frodo - 2016-06-25 8:35 AM
Bear, when you talk about privatization, does that still stem from money the Govt took from your paycheck or a voluntary program, because most people would just simply spend the money. It would never go into savings.
Everyone is afraid that the irresponsible people will just raid their private fund, and that is a legitimate concern because no reform will raise your IQ.
Here's what I'm suggesting. Keep the payment amounts into the system the same. Keep the basic rules the same.....meaning, no early withdrawals except in cases of disability. Set the earlies age at which you can withdraw at say 60. If you want to continue working, no problem...no penalty. If you don't want to draw off till a later age, no problem, let it ride. Your employer contributes 6.2% of your salary and you contribute 6.2%....basically unchanged. If you are self-employed, keep the rules the same as today. The government would have a role: to lay out a menu of investment options and to oversee that the fund is distributed according to the rules. It would provide oversight against fraud and abuse. The menu of investment options would be created by a panel of private sector advisors from across a wide spectrum.....experts in the field, so to speak. People would quickly learn some very sound investment strategies that are widely accepted for given age groups - more aggressive portfolios for the young, and more conservative as you age. Each option offered in the menu of choices would be basically like a 401K or mutual fund.....diverse. There would have to be some limits set on how much you can draw annually....say no more than 7-8%. If you choose 7% on your fund that is now valued at $1.35 million, then you will probably be living on close to a 6-figure income throughout your retirement.
I think we'd see a lot of people quickly learn about markets and investing. We'd also see a lot of people get off their asses and go to work. Also, I don't see that a separate retirement fund would be as necessary. If you want a separate fund that's fine. If you want to invest in a Roth IRA, then fine. If you want to set up a college fund for the kids, go for it. The important thing is that your " retirement security" would be yours....you own it. Government can't touch it. |
|
| |
|
BHW Resident Surgeon
Posts: 25352
Location: Bastrop, Texas | Just in case anyone has been wondering if this plan has been put to the test, consider the Galveston county workers retirement plan. Back in 1983, a social security reform bill was passed, and one aspect of that law made it illegal for state and local governments to opt out of SS. Just before that, however, the Galveston county workers managed to slip in the door and opt out, in favor of their own privatized plan. This article compares and contrasts the payout of their plan versus SS, and the result is almost mind blowing. Keep in mind, their plan is very conservative, from an investing standpoint.
There are some differences between what I'm suggesting versus Galveston.....mine is better. Still, they get the right idea. This is from USA Today...not exactly a conservative think tank, mind you:
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/opinion/2005-03-15-benefits-ref...
 (image.jpg)
Attachments
----------------
 image.jpg (20KB - 161 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
 Fact Checker
Posts: 16575
Location: Displaced Iowegian | Bear - 2016-06-25 9:32 AM Just in case anyone has been wondering if this plan has been put to the test, consider the Galveston county workers retirement plan. Back in 1983, a social security reform bill was passed, and one aspect of that law made it illegal for state and local governments to opt out of SS. Just before that, however, the Galveston county workers managed to slip in the door and opt out, in favor of their own privatized plan. This article compares and contrasts the payout of their plan versus SS, and the result is almost mind blowing. Keep in mind, their plan is very conservative, from an investing standpoint. There are some differences between what I'm suggesting versus Galveston.....mine is better. Still, they get the right idea. This is from USA Today...not exactly a conservative think tank, mind you: http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/opinion/2005-03-15-benefits-ref... Scott and I have discussed this option at length over the past few years. I have a cousin who is enrolled in the Galveston program and seems to be very satisfied. I would have to doublecheck but I am certain that it is mandatory for them to be enrolled (just like Social Security). Edited by NJJ 2016-06-25 1:10 PM
|
|
| |
Folks on-line