Started By
Message

re: Is one major cause of wealth disparity a poor rate of return on social security?

Posted on 5/28/14 at 2:24 pm to
Posted by Hawkeye95
Member since Dec 2013
20293 posts
Posted on 5/28/14 at 2:24 pm to
quote:

What "point" would you suggest such calculations be based upon?

I think the study is somewhat misguided. There is no "point" to use. The poor are poor not b.c of social security, but b.c they make a shitty income/have no skills. Letting them invest that in stocks vs. social security isn't going to stop them from being poor.
Posted by JEAUXBLEAUX
Bayonne, NJ
Member since May 2006
55358 posts
Posted on 5/28/14 at 2:37 pm to
We all live in society and thus must contribute to society. Taxes are not theft. Excessive Corp profits are theft. (I know how do you define this).

War profiteering is theft.
Posted by NC_Tigah
Carolinas
Member since Sep 2003
124430 posts
Posted on 5/28/14 at 2:42 pm to
quote:

A lot of poor people get back more from Social Security than they ever put in, no?
First, there is a slight skew, but not enough to overcome even a modest ROI differential.

Second, the OP presumption is that SS withholdings would equate dollar-for-dollar regardless of ROI. IOW whatever the input, output would be increased.

Posted by NC_Tigah
Carolinas
Member since Sep 2003
124430 posts
Posted on 5/28/14 at 2:48 pm to
quote:

The poor are poor ... b.c they ... have no skills
Obviously that includes lack of investment capacity.

So if the government is taking money from working-class individuals, or from underpaid wives with Masters Degrees, and then finally giving it back at some point based on an atrocious calculated ROI, that is a preferred m.o.?

This post was edited on 5/28/14 at 2:49 pm
Posted by 90proofprofessional
Member since Mar 2004
24445 posts
Posted on 5/28/14 at 3:34 pm to
quote:

A lot of poor people get back more from Social Security than they ever put in, no?

probably so for those on disability, although they're not all that huge a piece of the social security outlays
Posted by ShortyRob
Member since Oct 2008
82116 posts
Posted on 5/28/14 at 8:40 pm to
quote:

No eliminating the cap on taxes makes the whole system for equitable for all Americans.
You must have one fricked up definition of "equitable".
Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
57453 posts
Posted on 5/28/14 at 9:22 pm to
quote:

Call it a reward for lasting so long in life.
Not dying isn't much if a feat.

quote:

Payment for building and maintaining society.
"You didn't build that"

quote:

It's a safety net for senior citizens.
False. It's a safety net for ungrateful children that don't want to take care of their parents.
Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
57453 posts
Posted on 5/28/14 at 9:24 pm to
quote:

eliminating the cap on taxes makes the whole system for equitable for all Americans.


No. Equitable is paying for what you use. Soaking off your wealthier neighbor is mooching.
Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
57453 posts
Posted on 5/28/14 at 9:28 pm to
quote:

In short, total compensation has not kept pace with increases in productivity.
Why should it?

Modern increases in productivity come largely from automation and mechanization. Both of which are provided by capital investment--not increased labor.

Because a worker that cranked out 2 widgets an hour by hand, can crank out 10 widgets by using a computer controlled machine doesn't make the worker more valuable. It makes the machine more valuable.

quote:

Suppose you turned 65 on September 16, 2008? Young people have time to recoup their losses after a market crash, but retirees don't.
If you're near retirement and 100% in stocks, you get what you deserve. Being stupid carries a high price.
This post was edited on 5/28/14 at 9:30 pm
Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
57453 posts
Posted on 5/28/14 at 9:34 pm to
quote:

Wrong. If you and I pay a tax to build a bridge that we both can drive over it is not theft.

If the govt taxes me 100 bucks so that you can buy food because you're too damn lazy then it is theft.
This. I have no problem with taxes that go toward public goods. Taxes used for personal expenses... are nothing more that state-sanctioned theft.
Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
57453 posts
Posted on 5/28/14 at 9:36 pm to
quote:

We all live in society and thus must contribute to society.
I agree. Why do the poor get away with paying less?

quote:

Excessive Corp profits are theft.
how do corporations force you to buy their products?
Posted by WildTchoupitoulas
Member since Jan 2010
44071 posts
Posted on 5/29/14 at 6:53 am to
quote:

Why should it?

I didn't assign a value judgement, just postulating on a cause. But if you think it's a good thing, then you would have to conclude that growing wealth disparity is a good thing.
quote:

If you're near retirement and 100% in stocks, you get what you deserve. Being stupid carries a high price.

And ultimately, there is the problem with privatizing Social Security.

There would be a LOT of stupid people suffering from their poor choice to leave their investments in stocks. Unfortunately, that's exactly what would happen. The entire reason SS exists is because we as a society decided that all that suffering is unacceptable, regardles of how stupid the sufferers are.

Our market system, economy and government exist to serve US, we do not exist to serve the market. Regardles of how fair or unfair something is in the marketplace, if it doesn't serve society, it should be changed - regardless of ideology. We're human beings, not economic automatons.

There is a similar sargument with those who would admonish the poor for their so-called bad decisions to have children. You simply cannot tell human beings that they are not rich enough to have a family. It is unrealistic. You cannot expect people to pull out of a bull market wholesale just prior to retirement. It is unrealistic.
Posted by Strannix
District 11
Member since Dec 2012
49111 posts
Posted on 5/29/14 at 7:02 am to
quote:

Taxes are not theft. Excessive Corp profits are theft.


You're an idiot
Posted by NC_Tigah
Carolinas
Member since Sep 2003
124430 posts
Posted on 5/29/14 at 7:09 am to
quote:

But if you think it's a good thing
Is it a factual thing?
Posted by WildTchoupitoulas
Member since Jan 2010
44071 posts
Posted on 5/29/14 at 7:15 am to
quote:

Is it a factual thing?

TA was assuming for arguments sake that it is. Did you read his post?
Posted by SmackoverHawg
Member since Oct 2011
27385 posts
Posted on 5/29/14 at 7:19 am to
quote:

Excessive Corp profits are theft. (I know how do you define this). War profiteering is theft.

Profit is what drives all work. No one works for free. Why can't people realize this? You want new technology, cheap food, cheaper energy, cars, healthcare, and everthing better and faster. Yet, profits are bad? What else drives innovation. Need? Yes, to some degree. But only to the point to satisfy a minimal standard. And the person that provides even the minimum wants reimbursement. The best you can hope for is a level playing field for all.

Why not give tax credits for passing profits along? Figure out ways to make it a win-win situation. Some think higher taxes promote this, but that's bullshite. If anything it makes employers hold more profits to offset loses in taxes. It may promote capital improvements, but companies want do things that aren't needed just to "save" on taxes. Money spent is money spent. Hell, I'd be fine if I could give a portion of my tax bill directly to employees of my choosing.
Posted by ShortyRob
Member since Oct 2008
82116 posts
Posted on 5/29/14 at 7:21 am to
quote:


There would be a LOT of stupid people suffering from their poor choice to leave their investments in stocks
And, there would be a LOT of people who would end up in significantly higher tax brackets due to NOT fricking up. Then, you could have the straight up old people welfare program that people seem to want SS to become.
Posted by NC_Tigah
Carolinas
Member since Sep 2003
124430 posts
Posted on 5/29/14 at 8:03 am to
quote:

Is it a factual thing?

TA was assuming for arguments sake that it is. Did you read his post?
There was an earlier one regarding personal income vs inflation.
quote:

quote:

Wages have been out-paced by inflation since 1970. The purchasing power of the working class has consequently gotten smaller.

Per capita personal income was $3893 in 1970 ( LINK)
Adjusted for inflation that would equate to an income of $23,036.33 in 2012.

But,

Per capita personal income was actually $42,693 in 2012.
Posted by Matrixman
Texas
Member since Apr 2010
719 posts
Posted on 5/29/14 at 8:27 am to
quote:

All they need is a private property right to keep and invest what they are contributing to Social Security right now.


Thanks to the crooks in Congress Social Security is nothing more than a Ponzi Scheme....a slush fund for politicans to use as they please. I was there in the eighties when politicians lied to the American people and raised S/S taxes. The crooks warned that the ratio of workers-to-retirees was dropping and we needed to "build up" the S/S Trust Fund in anticipation of the 'all those retiring babyboomers' coming over the horizon. So they raised S/S Taxes to 12% [6% employee matched by 6% employer]. The resulting infusion of $$ created surplus. Seemed like a workable solution until Congress voted to 'steal the S/S Trust Fund' and include [and account] the monies as part of the general fund. Neat trick which allowed the crooks [excuse me politicans] in Congress to gain access to all that S/S money, and spend to their hearts content, and hide the true $$ of the annual deficit. Pay the money back? No fear....just issue IOU's.

Make matters worse....America elects the ultimate crook.....one Barack Hussein Obama. Pookie sets about spending money like a drunk sailor. Now we're trillions of dollars in debt, with the annual deficit of between $ 1 - 1.5 trillion. No problem! Get the Treasury Secretary to fire up the printing press at treasury and print some 'funny money'. Then let the Fed Chairman roll out something called Quantative Easing. Sounds all official and comforting. You know another supposedly viable solution.

So Congress comes along an adds other goodies to Social Security like Supplmental Security Income {SSI} and starts paying out generous Disability Payments. Believe those folks on Disability Payments are now up to 10+ mlllion {did I read that right?} Imagine that....all those benefits for S/S, SSI and Disability paid with borrowed and QE money. Did I mention Earned Income Credit or THE Affordable Healthcare Act? Life is great and the democrats [and some RINO's] keep getting elected on something called Compassionate Conservatism.

So you complain about a poor rate of return on the government Social Security. Maybe we should be asking our politicans in Washington what is the true condition of the so-called Social Security TRUST Fund? Notice I said the government S/S......remember S/S belongs to the government. That S/S account to have with S/S is an illusion. The projected benefit figure you see on your annual S/S Statement is just a number....a promise to pay. The money has been spent by your pal NOBAMA and his blood sucking thieve buddies in Congress.

Sleep on that tonight.

Have a great day!
This post was edited on 5/29/14 at 8:51 am
Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
57453 posts
Posted on 5/29/14 at 8:38 am to
quote:

I didn't assign a value judgement, just postulating on a cause. But if you think it's a good thing
I also don't see it as a value judgement. The again I don't see wealth as value judgment to begin with.

quote:

then you would have to conclude that growing wealth disparity is a good thing.
Nope. "Wealth disparity" is a stupid measure-- because it isn't a measure at all. It's a comparison. It tells you nothing about whether one is richer, or poorer. It only serves to measure how jealous and envious of "the rich" one should be.

As noted by the corrected stats... We are generally all more wealthy than we were in 1970. Who cares if someone else got more? No one ever got rich counting his neighbors' wealth.

quote:

And ultimately, there is the problem with privatizing Social Security.

There would be a LOT of stupid people suffering from their poor choice to leave their investments in stocks.
How is that better? As it is... smart people suffer from the poor choices of the stupid. What did the smart people do to deserve the burden?

quote:

Regardles of how fair or unfair something is in the marketplace, if it doesn't serve society, it should be changed
Dangerous way of thinking. Do old people soaking off wealth of others serve society? (See the OP!) Maybe we should just kill them off? What about the disabled? Do they serve society?

quote:

You simply cannot tell human beings that they are not rich enough to have a family. It is unrealistic. You cannot expect people to pull out of a bull market wholesale just prior to retirement. It is unrealistic.
Sorry. I will never share the view that man cannot govern himself. Even taking that view... Why do certain men have dominion to govern others? Are they somehow a superior group without he same flaws?

Your argument is the same justification used for slavery and segregation. We can't possibly have those inferior people running around loose out the streets!

This post was edited on 5/29/14 at 9:02 am
first pageprev pagePage 4 of 6Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram