re: Myth- “social security is guaranteed”.

quote:

---

Had that $1000 been invested in the stock market which has an average 9% increase over the last 40 years, you would have around $31,400.

---

Exactly.

My example was "for every $1 put in as a 22y/o 45yrs ago, a current 67y/o receives ~$3.60 as a return on that $1." Taking inflation into account, $1 in 1981 is worth $3.69 today. SS ROI does not even keep up with inflation.

quote:

---

But that’s no comfort if the debt is paid off in worthless inflated dollars.

---

That's the problem. Government is spending at light speed, tossing benefits at the lower and middle (to some extent) classes in exchange for votes. The spending will force inflation upward. Inflation kills the middle & lower classes. Not good!

quote:

---

Of all the waste and grift in the Fed budget why start with screwing people that actually worked and payed into the system?

---

Because ss and Medicare are the only things that could be cut that would make a difference

quote:

---

Still…

---

Yeah, I hear you.

So far we've been very resistant to the types of problems that can occur with a large and growing national debt—inflation, devaluing of the currency, high interest rates, etc. Probably because the US is the reserve currency for the world and that affords a lot of stability despite poor choices.

But I have to think there's a limit, and I don't want to find out what that limit is.

Because the only way to find out is the hard way.

But back to the specific discussion, sure, one can say the Boomers were in charge during the deficit/debt explosion.

I just personally think that people obsessed with assigning generational blame like that are not only engaging in a pointless exercise, but also revealing a weak and cowardly character (not aiming that at you). It's become a very popular narrative among younger victim-minded populists these days.

Which Matt Walsh can often be.

First of all, it's silly because it treats every generation as a monolith. Saying that the Boomers are at fault for the exploding debt is like saying that Gen Y is trying to convert the country to socialism.

Well, some people in Gen Y are. Some aren't. Some people in the Boomer Generation were in favor of massive government spending. Probably most weren't.

Some Boomers were hippies. Some were corporate raiders. Some got rich. Some stayed poor. Some were politically active. Some weren't.

Just like today and every other generation that has ever lived.

Secondly, it's a stupid narrative because it implies that other generations wouldn't have—had they grown up under the same conditions, without the benefit of hindsight—made different decisions. They probably wouldn't have. Human nature seems pretty consistent.

Third, every generation has had difficulties. This idea that Boomers had everything handed to them easily is simply and demonstrably not true.

You want to know the generation who lived in the most comfortable, least oppressive time in history with the most opportunity for the most people and the least racism, sexism, and any other minority bias, with the most leisure time and disposable income in history?

The ones living today. That includes Gen Y, Gen Z, etc.

Life is easier now than it has ever been. In large part due to Boomers.

You know why you can carry a computer with many times the processing power of the computers that sent a rocket to the moon in your pocket?

Boomers. And some Silent Generation people. But mostly Boomers.

They have been responsible for the vast explosion of technology that we call the Information Technology/Digital Age. And it has transformed society.

So people running around screaming "Boomer" are contemptible whiners IMO. And no, I am not a Boomer, nor were my parents. I just think the whole narrative is a Loser Alert.

quote:

---

Nope
Wrong again
You’re so old and stupid and dependent on the govt you forgot where I proved everything you are saying wrong in a similar thread 3 months ago with linked/cited facts

---

Dude, youre wrong. A case brought forward today, would not achieve the same result. Many scholars, including dissenting justices, said the decision was reached using communist bias. Heres your proof:

One of the chief critics of the decision was Charles A Reich. In fact, Reich used that argument in 1970 in Goldberg v Kelly, and won. The court determined that the govt could not take entitlements without a due process finding. You cant due process 360M Americans

Congress made an insurance contract with each of us. They simply cannot pass a bill to remove the benefits of that contract. They can deny future enrollment, but they simply cannot strip an entitlement from you

Your benefits are guaranteed, and Nestor wont stand the test of time before future courts. Remember Roe v Wade, yeah like that

They arent my kids luckily and you're correct my experience is anecdotal as is yours and everyone elses on this thread. So what was your point again other than how unfair life is?

I literally showed several of them how to set up and contribute to their 401ks. Youre the one with no idea what you're talking about. No wonder life seems so difficult to you.

quote:

---

Exactly.

My example was "for every $1 put in as a 22y/o 45yrs ago, a current 67y/o receives ~$3.60 as a return on that $1." Taking inflation into account, $1 in 1981 is worth $3.69 today. SS ROI does not even keep up with inflation.

---

Yes, it's actually like earning a negative interest rate when inflation exceeds the return.

I asked Grok if you put $1000 into Spy stock 40 years ago and left it there how much would it be today?

quote:

---

Roughly $80,000–$90,000 (with dividends reinvested), as of early October 2026.

historyofmarket.com +1

SPY (the SPDR S&P 500 ETF) did not exist 40 years ago—it launched in January 1993. The natural interpretation of “SPY stock” is the S&P 500 index that it tracks. Calculations therefore use the S&P 500 total return (price appreciation + dividends reinvested).

---

quote:

---

2nd try.. what’s the guaranteed amount?

---

The full national promissory.