- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 10/10/17 at 10:17 am to SCLSUMuddogs
quote:
Give me your SSN real quick and I can find the answer
You first.
Posted on 10/10/17 at 10:17 am to 50_Tiger
quote:
On top of actually seeing that buck when I turn 60 (God willing.)
60?!? You think you're going to see SS money when you're 60? You plan on becoming disabled?
You'll be lucky to see a dime of SS money before you're 70, dude.
Posted on 10/10/17 at 10:17 am to Pecker
quote:
To be fair...these are not close to the same thing.
They would both be considered entitlements. Would you not agree?
Posted on 10/10/17 at 10:20 am to 50_Tiger
A student loan is an entitlement?
Posted on 10/10/17 at 10:20 am to 50_Tiger
This post was edited on 10/10/17 at 11:07 am
Posted on 10/10/17 at 10:20 am to 50_Tiger
Here's the problem:
The people in this thread would certainly invest better than the government. But, for everyone in this thread that would invest the extra money, 99 people that opt out would buy a new Gucci bag or a new lift kit for their truck. Then when they get to 65, we (the smart ones) would be paying their welfare.
There would have to be a check and balance to make sure people are investing. And I'm sure the government wouldnt frick that up at all.
The people in this thread would certainly invest better than the government. But, for everyone in this thread that would invest the extra money, 99 people that opt out would buy a new Gucci bag or a new lift kit for their truck. Then when they get to 65, we (the smart ones) would be paying their welfare.
There would have to be a check and balance to make sure people are investing. And I'm sure the government wouldnt frick that up at all.
Posted on 10/10/17 at 10:21 am to TigerGrad2011
quote:
In the future they will probably end up not allowing those who have a certain amount of wealth built up through personal retirement vehicles be eligible for participation. This will really piss off those people who actually planned and saved for their retirement and were good with their money when they were younger.
I'm pretty sure this is what's going to happen at some point, but that's still not going to be enough to save the program. Unfortunately, most people outside of the wealthiest 10% aren't saving for retirement.
This post was edited on 10/10/17 at 10:22 am
Posted on 10/10/17 at 10:22 am to Martini
quote:
A student loan is an entitlement?
In terms of the government excusing student loans (if this were such a program).
Yes.
Old people want their SSec (which is propped up and paid for by young people)
Young people want their SLoans reduced. (paid for by tax payers).
They would both be considered entitlements in my eyes.
Posted on 10/10/17 at 10:22 am to Pecker
On a related note, student loans aren't the issue. The issue is the inflation that has happened in higher education millennials have gotten murdered on.
The 'well I worked at outback and paid my way through school' days are long gone but you still see Boomers and some Gen X throw it around while on their soap box.
The 'well I worked at outback and paid my way through school' days are long gone but you still see Boomers and some Gen X throw it around while on their soap box.
Posted on 10/10/17 at 10:23 am to 50_Tiger
quote:
They would both be considered entitlements. Would you not agree?
You're comparing SS to the absolving of student loan debt?
Posted on 10/10/17 at 10:24 am to 50_Tiger
quote:not propped up, completely funded as an entitlement. There isn't some pot of money funding SSec
SSec (which is propped up and paid for by young people)
Posted on 10/10/17 at 10:24 am to 50_Tiger
quote:
In terms of the government excusing student loans (if this were such a program).
Yes.
Old people want their SSec (which is propped up and paid for by young people)
Young people want their SLoans reduced. (paid for by tax payers).
They would both be considered entitlements in my eyes.
Those people would have also paid into it...
Posted on 10/10/17 at 10:25 am to Pecker
quote:
Those people would have also paid into it...
True but has stated before, their money has long been gone.
Posted on 10/10/17 at 10:26 am to SuperSaint
quote:
On a related note, student loans aren't the issue. The issue is the inflation that has happened in higher education millennials have gotten murdered on.
That's very true and would have to be changed as well.
Posted on 10/10/17 at 10:27 am to 50_Tiger
quote:
Should people under 35 be allowed to opt out of Social Security
Hell no, now that I'm getting closer you youngsters need to pay in so I can get mine.
Honestly it wouldn't be a bad idea but unfortunately the vast majority of people would never put anything aside and would depend on the Government even more when older.
Posted on 10/10/17 at 10:28 am to 50_Tiger
quote:
True but has stated before, their money has long been gone.
It's not an entitlement if you paid into it though... that's the difference between the absolving of student loan debt and SS.
Yes, I understand that there is an entitlement aspect to it because not everyone is getting out what the paid into it, but by its very nature it's different than student load debt.
Posted on 10/10/17 at 10:29 am to 50_Tiger
quote:
Old people want their SSec (which is propped up and paid for by young people)
So old people didn't pay SS? I've paid in for 50 years. And on top of that I've owned my own business so not only did I pay my 6.2% out of my check I also as an owner paid the 6.2% match.
I wish they would get rid of it to reduce my 6.2% SS mandatory employee match.
You are paying in 7.65% for Social Security and Medicare out of your check. Your employer is also paying a full match of 7.65% for those same two (FICA) so don't think junior is the only one paying for senior.
Posted on 10/10/17 at 10:29 am to 50_Tiger
Completely? No.
People 45 and under should be able to do the following:
a) "opt out" of SS and waive/forego what they have put in to that point;
b) continue to allow the "employer's half" (or 1/2 of the self-employment taxes) to SS;
c) of the other "half," 50% is to be invested in US Treasuries with the other 50% invested as the person chooses (with that being 100% deductible, regardless of income.
Also, raise the retirement age to 68, with early retirement available at 65.5 years.
People 45 and under should be able to do the following:
a) "opt out" of SS and waive/forego what they have put in to that point;
b) continue to allow the "employer's half" (or 1/2 of the self-employment taxes) to SS;
c) of the other "half," 50% is to be invested in US Treasuries with the other 50% invested as the person chooses (with that being 100% deductible, regardless of income.
Also, raise the retirement age to 68, with early retirement available at 65.5 years.
Posted on 10/10/17 at 10:30 am to 50_Tiger
I wish we could also opt of Medicare. That will be spent when we get old enough to use it.
Page 4 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News