Started By
Message

re: Taking people's savings (SS) away would be no different than cleaning out bank accounts

Posted on 5/25/19 at 1:08 pm to
Posted by sneakytiger
Member since Oct 2007
2472 posts
Posted on 5/25/19 at 1:08 pm to
You are doing this your contributions or distributions?
Posted by Buckeye Jeaux
Member since May 2018
17756 posts
Posted on 5/25/19 at 1:15 pm to
Walk in to a social security waiting room. Estimate the percentage of people waiting there who speak English.

Vast majority do not. THAT's the "unsolvable" problem.
This post was edited on 5/25/19 at 1:16 pm
Posted by Auburn1968
NYC
Member since Mar 2019
19467 posts
Posted on 5/25/19 at 1:27 pm to
quote:

If you are referring to social security, it was always just a tax. It was never your savings or retirement account.


Despite what politicians and political bureaucrats have promised publicly for decades, you are right. Of course, it would be a suicidal political shell game.

SS has also been a Washington budgetary slush fund that has averaged a real -2% interest on its "Trust Fund" (average inflation of 4% and tabulated interest of 2%).
This post was edited on 5/25/19 at 2:10 pm
Posted by Auburn1968
NYC
Member since Mar 2019
19467 posts
Posted on 5/25/19 at 1:45 pm to
quote:

How do you want to see it touched? I started taking at 62 so I could receive my benefit before hysteria built to take it away or reduce it. Now Senator Grassley is suggesting the benefit should start at 72. It will be hard to take it away from those receiving it. I agree SS is a mess. Our politicians are incapable of coming up with a solution.


SS should have been converted to a regulated private system of actual retirement investment decades ago, but Dems in particular wanted to keep it in a "lock box."

Had SS been a private plan with a negative return on investment, the managers would be in jail.

An average stock index over the last 40 years has grown at a rate of nearly 10% or about 6% over the average yearly rate of inflation.

The Social Security "Trust Fund" pays 2% or about -2% relative to inflation. In constant dollars, a "contribution" from 40 years ago, is repaid with money with about 2/5th of its original value.

That's quite a racket.
Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
57222 posts
Posted on 5/25/19 at 1:51 pm to
quote:

Taking people's savings (SS) away would be no different and stock accounts and nationalizing those funds.
Entirely different. The government has no obligation to return your taxes to you. There is no constitutional guarantee what the SS payout must be. It's entirely arbitrary.

Not saying that doesn't suck. But that's what happens when you surrender your autonomy and become dependent on the government. They dictate the rules.

The golden rule.... he that has the gold makes the rules.
Posted by Auburn1968
NYC
Member since Mar 2019
19467 posts
Posted on 5/25/19 at 1:52 pm to
quote:

Knowing what we know about SS, if you haven't started your own 401k or IRA then you only have yourself to blame


Too bad those 15% contributions were going into a Washington Ponzi Scheme and slush fund instead of actual private retirement accounts invested in the productive economy.

Going forward going into regulated private accounts is perhaps the only way out.

Of course, the "Trust Fund" is very much dependent on the economy and most of the dire warnings were centered in the Obama economy not the booming Trump economy.
Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
57222 posts
Posted on 5/25/19 at 1:54 pm to
quote:

But that's not the point. The point is I was forced by threat payed in to a system that said "you'll get this back when you retire" when in fact I'll never see any of it because i'll be told "you were too successful, so your money is now their money."
It's worse than that. See my emphasis. Unfortunately, the government has never guaranteed a what the return would be. It became "their" money the day you paid your taxes.

SS is a terrible deal for just about everyone.

It's a good example of why we should never trust the government for our personal well-being.
This post was edited on 5/25/19 at 2:05 pm
Posted by Auburn1968
NYC
Member since Mar 2019
19467 posts
Posted on 5/25/19 at 2:04 pm to
quote:

I'd be perfectly happy to give up what I've put in so far to be able to opt out starting with my next check


And that is exactly what should happen along with repayment of money you "contributed." Chile had a program that allowed SS to go to a selection of real private retirement accounts. The returns were very good and the money, stocks and investments were actually owned.

Perhaps, that should happen the next time the stock market has a major correction. Now that would be some productive major investment and a sure winner for stimulus too.

Posted by jimdog
columbus, ga
Member since Dec 2012
6636 posts
Posted on 5/25/19 at 3:17 pm to
I kinda sorta understand how you feel based upon the socialist push from leftists democrats. If they do somehow manage to steal America away from it's position of the best and most blessed nation the Almighty ever allowed on this earth then who knows...maybe your forced savings and those of your spouse will be shorted.

I never once felt that way as a working guy since people were basically sane only a few years ago. One of the worst things you could call someone then was a leftist and it never occurred to insult using the socialist word. But odds are it'll still be alive and kicking in 25 years or so. If not it won't matter anyway since that will mean the country did not survive.
Posted by jimdog
columbus, ga
Member since Dec 2012
6636 posts
Posted on 5/25/19 at 3:21 pm to
Well it doesn't feel like welfare. I paid in now I want to be paid back and I am. But life is not fair. My dad died at 61 when retirement was 62 and he had worked since 15 and served in WWII when he was drafted at 39. The age had increased to 66.5 when I came along but I worked on a bit after that. The way to save it is simple. (1) People are living longer, raise the retirement age to 69 for anyone over 15 years out. And adjust every 10 years or so. (2) Inflation is real and steady. Raise the cap on salary contributions to about $175K (or more) and adjust that every few years. and most importantly (3) Quit voting for democrats.
This post was edited on 5/25/19 at 3:52 pm
Posted by aTmTexas Dillo
East Texas Lake
Member since Sep 2018
15052 posts
Posted on 5/25/19 at 6:09 pm to
quote:

You are doing this your contributions or distributions?



I get $2,220 per month from SS. Soon my wife will start getting 50% of my amount. I have it deposited into a brokerage account through an investment firm. I pay my income tax out of other funds. It is invested monthly or bi-monthly into equities. The plan is to invest in higher yielding yet riskier funds. I am only trying to get 5% and perhaps somewhat higher return on average with the money. This is just like a current worker would do in a 401K. I will not touch the money until I need it for long term care at say 85 years old. I am doing in some ways what GW Bush recommended years ago except after retirement, later in life. Trying to get some return on this money given the power of compound interest and the time value of money and dollar cost averaging into the market. In 25 to 30 years it will be a reasonable pile of money. And we will choose a charity for any remainder after our deaths. This is not money I want to pass along in an estate. And the politicians would hate someone doing this and would want to means test someone like me out. But I paid in to the system for years.

And when the government starts taking out payment for medicare, I will replace those funds with withdrawal from my IRA funds. I guess I'm a bit of a saver and I know what investment can return in the market.
first pageprev pagePage 4 of 4Next pagelast page
refresh

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