- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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
re: Trump looking 'very strongly' at Australia-style retirement system
Posted on 7/9/26 at 10:06 am to Auburn1968
Posted on 7/9/26 at 10:06 am to Auburn1968
If he’s talking about replacing the current 401k etc system with superannuation that is a good idea. This essentially takes the employer out of it other than making a matching contribution. They no longer have to offer a retirement plan to employees and deal with the potential litigation that comes with that. This would allow individuals to establish accounts at any one of a variety of platforms and choose from a wide variety of investments on the platform. This would be a win for employers and employees.
This post was edited on 7/9/26 at 10:32 am
1
Posted on 7/9/26 at 10:11 am to coolpapaboze
quote:
Of he’s talking about replacing the current 401k etc system with superannuation that is a good idea. This essentially takes the employer out of it other than making a matching contribution. They no longer have to offer a retirement plan to employees and deal with the potential litigation that comes with that. This would allow individuals to establish accounts at any one of a variety of platforms and choose from a wide variety of investments on the platform. This would be a win for employers and employees.
So, essentially deregulation in a way similar to school choice. I’d be able to make the same contributions to a retirement plan. Those plans are already heavily scrutinized by the state, but now I can go directly to financial institutions instead of having to go through my employer.
That at least sounds like an improvement. The question is how the transition would happen as now we would need new systems to withhold the pretax contributions from our paychecks. How we handle that could make or break.
Posted on 7/9/26 at 10:11 am to jrodLSUke
quote:
If you had been saving 12% for the past 26 years earning compounding interest, you’d be sitting on a small fortune for your retirement by now.
Well, they'll just need to increase taxes then.
Posted on 7/9/26 at 10:51 am to Auburn1968
yay. more payroll taxes. I thought Trump wanted to bring back American manufacturing. This disincentivizes hiring.
Posted on 7/9/26 at 11:04 am to LawTalkingGuy
quote:
Sounds nice, but if everyone has a fortune, then no one has a fortune.
But would everyone have a fortune?
Sounds like you have to be gainfully employed with a healthy salary for it to work for you.
Posted on 7/9/26 at 11:10 am to Auburn1968
I have posted more than once on this board at the change to Social Security needs to take place and I have propose that when you register for Social Security government deposits $10,000 into an account that is managed outside of the government
As you work the government collects towards repayment and then when you have paid back that money you no longer get that tax
The money does not vast until 55 years of age. If you die before that all of the money goes back to the Government at 55 it vests
As you work the government collects towards repayment and then when you have paid back that money you no longer get that tax
The money does not vast until 55 years of age. If you die before that all of the money goes back to the Government at 55 it vests
Posted on 7/9/26 at 11:17 am to Auburn1968
Idk, if my money is invested poorly, I much rather count on a gov't that can just print some cash to cover my loss.
Posted on 7/9/26 at 11:19 am to Auburn1968
I really like what Galveston did by opting out long ago from the SS theft.
Posted on 7/9/26 at 11:21 am to Auburn1968
quote:
SS Trust Fund
There is no trust fund. There is no lockbox. There never was.
Posted on 7/9/26 at 11:23 am to Aubie Spr96
quote:
How about the gov’t get out of the retirement business altogether?
If you let people opt out of paying social security, it would be insolvent in approximately 3 days.
Posted on 7/9/26 at 11:33 am to Woolfpack
Well, I already send 15.3% to the GOV in the form of FICA tax, half me, half my employer.
Get rid of that, make it 12%, 6&6, into a mandatory, privately owned, S&P 500 fund and that would be great, for future generations.
How about all the money I've been paying into SS for the last 30+ years? I want my SS payout that I have earned through their theft of my money.
Get rid of that, make it 12%, 6&6, into a mandatory, privately owned, S&P 500 fund and that would be great, for future generations.
How about all the money I've been paying into SS for the last 30+ years? I want my SS payout that I have earned through their theft of my money.
Posted on 7/9/26 at 11:35 am to Auburn1968
Small government, pro business...
Hey you owe 12% more in labor taxes... you know, from your pro business small government.
Just taco rambling with his dementia, nothing will come of it like 99.9999999% of the other nonsense.
Hey you owe 12% more in labor taxes... you know, from your pro business small government.
Just taco rambling with his dementia, nothing will come of it like 99.9999999% of the other nonsense.
Posted on 7/9/26 at 11:36 am to Auburn1968
Read “ The Richest Man in Babylon”……..none of this is new……
Posted on 7/9/26 at 12:09 pm to SoDakHawk
That’s the problem. You can’t just tell all the oldies that they’ve been paying in their whole lives and ain’t getting squat. Whoopsie.
We need everyone paying in. But, it’s going to be hard to keep people born after around 2010 that they will have to pay but they don’t get squat until they are 90.
Part of the problem is people are living longer than when Ss was created nearly 100 years ago.
We need everyone paying in. But, it’s going to be hard to keep people born after around 2010 that they will have to pay but they don’t get squat until they are 90.
Part of the problem is people are living longer than when Ss was created nearly 100 years ago.
Posted on 7/9/26 at 12:20 pm to Woolfpack
This would be absolutely terrible in practice. Even lower wage growth and more monopolization of industry. Hard pass. You think bail outs are bad now? 
Posted on 7/9/26 at 12:27 pm to Aubie Spr96
quote:
How about the gov’t get out of the retirement business altogether?
Yeah, Trump has been shopping in the Socialism Bargain Bin lately.
Posted on 7/9/26 at 12:40 pm to Woolfpack
quote:
If you let people opt out of paying social security, it would be insolvent in approximately 3 days.
Good.
Posted on 7/9/26 at 12:52 pm to Auburn1968
quote:
a mandatory savings program that requires employers to contribute 12% of a worker’s ordinary earnings into tax-favored retirement accounts managed largely by private funds
So…in this system, is every employer required to fork over this money? If so, does such a requirement end up resulting in more companies just hiring folks off 1099 contract basis rather than as full time employees? What happens with 16 year olds working 30 hours a week at Winn Dixie or Piggly Wiggly bagging groceries?
Posted on 7/9/26 at 12:56 pm to jrodLSUke
quote:
That was in 2000. If you had been saving 12% for the past 26 years earning compounding interest, you’d be sitting on a small fortune for your retirement by now.
Wish I put in 12%, but I put in more than what my employer matched, and the way the stock market is today... Things are definitely looking good...
Posted on 7/9/26 at 1:30 pm to Auburn1968
Australia has a $27/hr minimum wage. I don’t think I want any of their ideas lol
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News