Do you feel anyone under 55 be able to direct SS deductions

[onecut39]

to their local bank savings account? Or to be allowed to accumulate over 35 years to $300,000?

Almost anyone with financial acumen know that if a person is allowed to accumulate their Social security deductions at a modest 3% tax sheltered for 35 years would amass over $300,000. (See this simple savings calculator
Simple savings calculator -- Bankrate.com

Now if this same person directed the monthly payments of $400 deducted automatically each month for 35 years into vehicles accumulating at the average of 6%.. almost $600,000!

Again this would be CONTRARY to DEMOCRATS NOT invested in the "stock market" unless directed! NOT go in affect for anyone over 55. NOT go into affect if the person chooses NOT to be self directed.
But of course the DEMOCRATS aren't telling people that!
All the plans of knowledgeable financially aware people is that if left alone and saving at the rate of simple compound interest at 3% to 6% the INDIVIDUAL can have their OWN estate of at least $300,000 to as much as possible without the Government having to pay a dime!
NO money out by the government for these accounts directed by the employee!

You might want to note that the payroll tax is covering Social Security AND most of your Medicare.

$300,000 is not that big a number if you're paying for your retirement AND medical care past age 65.

It is fine if you get neither sick nor hurt. I had six days in the hospital and the bill was about $70,000. I wonder what the health insurance premium would be for someone over 65 with a heart condition?

 

[Douger]

I think Americans should be able to control a percentage of their SS withholdings.

Too bad there's no Americans up there. Only murkins.
Hastings family on 'Extreme Makeover' about to lose home the television show built | jacksonville.com

 

[Political Junky]

to their local bank savings account? Or to be allowed to accumulate over 35 years to $300,000?

Almost anyone with financial acumen know that if a person is allowed to accumulate their Social security deductions at a modest 3% tax sheltered for 35 years would amass over $300,000. (See this simple savings calculator
Simple savings calculator -- Bankrate.com

Now if this same person directed the monthly payments of $400 deducted automatically each month for 35 years into vehicles accumulating at the average of 6%.. almost $600,000!

Again this would be CONTRARY to DEMOCRATS NOT invested in the "stock market" unless directed! NOT go in affect for anyone over 55. NOT go into affect if the person chooses NOT to be self directed.
But of course the DEMOCRATS aren't telling people that!
All the plans of knowledgeable financially aware people is that if left alone and saving at the rate of simple compound interest at 3% to 6% the INDIVIDUAL can have their OWN estate of at least $300,000 to as much as possible without the Government having to pay a dime!
NO money out by the government for these accounts directed by the employee!

You might want to note that the payroll tax is covering Social Security AND most of your Medicare.

$300,000 is not that big a number if you're paying for your retirement AND medical care past age 65.

It is fine if you get neither sick nor hurt. I had six days in the hospital and the bill was about $70,000. I wonder what the health insurance premium would be for someone over 65 with a heart condition?

Exactly, imagine how far that $300,000. will go if you have to pay day to day living expenses plus catastrophic medical costs.

 

[boedicca]

I believe we should privatize SS asap. SS should be wound down with funding from the federal tax base. Considering that the SS lockbox is stuffed with IOUs, retiring those IOUs should be sufficient to cover a wind down.

Medicare is a scam which is Not Health care. Get rid of it.

 

[B. Kidd]

I turned 59 today. Retired at age 55. I can withdraw my 401K without penalty in 6 months. Back in 2007 when the market tanked to 6600, they were into my hard earned principle. So, I'm gonna let it ride for 6 months without taking a tax penalty as I'm way ahead at this point. Europe could tank this September and my principle may be in jeopardy if it does, 6 months from now. If it happens, so be it....Que Sera.......

In these global uncertain economic times, does not matter much if 'murkins' were in control of their SS holdings, or not!

 

[uscitizen]

Damn right. The dirty little secret is that there is no SS trust fund. Politicians have been stealing FICA taxes since the system started and LBJ made it official that SS would be placed in the general fund. Black males have the highest percentage of dying before being able to collect Social Security but when republican president Bush offered them a chance to will a fraction of the amount they paid in Social Security to their heirs the democrat party convinced the fools to rally against it without thinking it through. Bush didn't call for anything radical in the Social Security restructuring but democrats wanted it all and a fraction that Americans would be able to control was not an opeion to a party that was used to stealing it.

The govt would not owe 2+ trillion to the SS recipients if Reagan had not increased the SS withholding roo much so there was a big surplus to squander.

 

[boedicca]

You might want to note that the payroll tax is covering Social Security AND most of your Medicare.

$300,000 is not that big a number if you're paying for your retirement AND medical care past age 65.

It is fine if you get neither sick nor hurt. I had six days in the hospital and the bill was about $70,000. I wonder what the health insurance premium would be for someone over 65 with a heart condition?

Exactly, imagine how far that $300,000. will go if you have to pay day to day living expenses plus catastrophic medical costs.

It's absolutely moot if there are not enough doctors because ObamaCare has driven them out of practice.

 

[B. Kidd]

Damn right. The dirty little secret is that there is no SS trust fund. Politicians have been stealing FICA taxes since the system started and LBJ made it official that SS would be placed in the general fund. Black males have the highest percentage of dying before being able to collect Social Security but when republican president Bush offered them a chance to will a fraction of the amount they paid in Social Security to their heirs the democrat party convinced the fools to rally against it without thinking it through. Bush didn't call for anything radical in the Social Security restructuring but democrats wanted it all and a fraction that Americans would be able to control was not an opeion to a party that was used to stealing it.

The govt would not owe 2+ trillion to the SS recipients if Reagan had not increased the SS withholding roo much so there was a big surplus to squander.

This is sooooo............yesterday, whiner!

 

[boedicca]

Damn right. The dirty little secret is that there is no SS trust fund. Politicians have been stealing FICA taxes since the system started and LBJ made it official that SS would be placed in the general fund. Black males have the highest percentage of dying before being able to collect Social Security but when republican president Bush offered them a chance to will a fraction of the amount they paid in Social Security to their heirs the democrat party convinced the fools to rally against it without thinking it through. Bush didn't call for anything radical in the Social Security restructuring but democrats wanted it all and a fraction that Americans would be able to control was not an opeion to a party that was used to stealing it.

The govt would not owe 2+ trillion to the SS recipients if Reagan had not increased the SS withholding roo much so there was a big surplus to squander.

Actually, it's LBJ who allowed SS receipts to be co-mingled with the general fund in "times of emergency". That's what funded the Vietnam War - and set the stage for The Lock Box.

 

[Full-Auto]

Damn right. The dirty little secret is that there is no SS trust fund. Politicians have been stealing FICA taxes since the system started and LBJ made it official that SS would be placed in the general fund. Black males have the highest percentage of dying before being able to collect Social Security but when republican president Bush offered them a chance to will a fraction of the amount they paid in Social Security to their heirs the democrat party convinced the fools to rally against it without thinking it through. Bush didn't call for anything radical in the Social Security restructuring but democrats wanted it all and a fraction that Americans would be able to control was not an opeion to a party that was used to stealing it.

The govt would not owe 2+ trillion to the SS recipients if Reagan had not increased the SS withholding roo much so there was a big surplus to squander.

Actually, it's LBJ who allowed SS receipts to be co-mingled with the general fund in "times of emergency". That's what funded the Vietnam War - and set the stage for The Lock Box.

Thats right democrats are the ones who put SS into the general fund.


Results.......... we have to borrow to make the payments.

 

[healthmyths]

Yep how did all yer 401K's do?

Wow.. 2, 4 years makes a lifetime???
You realize of course MOST people that are smart start young investing in high risk and as get older mover to lower risks... makes sense doesn't it?

So yes.. I'm sure some 401Ks are losers BUT most people were smart enough to use the old fashion triangle approach... older you get the less risk you take!

But of course people like you are EXCEPTIONALISTAs... i.e. you take the EXCEPTION blow it out of proportion like the MSM does and make it the RULE!

I really truly feel sorry for people like you that "Feel" and not think what you are writing!

By the way over the LAST 70 years the average rate of return yes down years included and up years MOSTLY... has been about 6%!

Average Stock Market Return per year: Last 5, 10, 20 ... Years
Since 1900 (end-of-year 1899), through 2011, I estimate the average total return/year of the DJIA (Dow Jones Industrial Average) was approximately 9.4% -- 4.8% in price appreciation, plus approx 4.6% in dividends. (Some numbers won't add up due to rounding.)
Since 1929 (year-end 1928 -- i.e., before the crash), thru 2011, the return was 8.8% (4.6%, plus 4.3%) [note: see The 1929 Stock Market Crash]

Since end-of-year 1932 (i.e., after the crash): 11.1% (7.0%, plus 4.2%)
The average annual stock market return for the past twenty-five calendar years, was 10.5% (7.7%, plus 2.7%)

Stock market returns for the last 20 years: 9.4% (7.0%, plus 2.4%) [see below for additional 20-year periods]

Returns for the last 10 years, 4.5% (2.0%, plus 2.5%) [see below for additional 10-year periods]

For the last 5 years, 2.3% (-0.4%, plus 2.7%)

For 2011 the stock market (Dow/DJIA) total return was 8.3% (5.5% plus 2.7%)
2011 year-end dividend yield was 2.6%

Observations: Average Stock Market Return Since 19xx

 

[B. Kidd]

The govt would not owe 2+ trillion to the SS recipients if Reagan had not increased the SS withholding roo much so there was a big surplus to squander.

Actually, it's LBJ who allowed SS receipts to be co-mingled with the general fund in "times of emergency". That's what funded the Vietnam War - and set the stage for The Lock Box.

Thats right democrats are the ones who put SS into the general fund.


Results.......... we have to borrow to make the payments.

Gotta luv it.............another U.S. Cit. smackdown .

 

[healthmyths]

to their local bank savings account? Or to be allowed to accumulate over 35 years to $300,000?

Almost anyone with financial acumen know that if a person is allowed to accumulate their Social security deductions at a modest 3% tax sheltered for 35 years would amass over $300,000. (See this simple savings calculator
Simple savings calculator -- Bankrate.com

Now if this same person directed the monthly payments of $400 deducted automatically each month for 35 years into vehicles accumulating at the average of 6%.. almost $600,000!

Again this would be CONTRARY to DEMOCRATS NOT invested in the "stock market" unless directed! NOT go in affect for anyone over 55. NOT go into affect if the person chooses NOT to be self directed.
But of course the DEMOCRATS aren't telling people that!
All the plans of knowledgeable financially aware people is that if left alone and saving at the rate of simple compound interest at 3% to 6% the INDIVIDUAL can have their OWN estate of at least $300,000 to as much as possible without the Government having to pay a dime!
NO money out by the government for these accounts directed by the employee!

You might want to note that the payroll tax is covering Social Security AND most of your Medicare.

$300,000 is not that big a number if you're paying for your retirement AND medical care past age 65.

SO what is wrong with a young person being in high risk great appreciation and older they get go into more secure investments??? THAT's what would allow accumulations of
double the $300,000 and you are forgetting ONE MAJOR benefit!!!
NOT everyone is alike! Not everyone's health is BAD..
I just saw an 87 year old grass grower in colorado who had full head of hair and looked in his 60s!
My point is the government has to be monolithic in nature and humans by nature are NOT all the same! So why not let humans determine their expenditures?
Maybe some people at 70 seeing their accumulation dwindling will want to expire so their family can benefit! That's their choice... NOT the government! Or should be!

 

[Political Junky]

to their local bank savings account? Or to be allowed to accumulate over 35 years to $300,000?

Almost anyone with financial acumen know that if a person is allowed to accumulate their Social security deductions at a modest 3% tax sheltered for 35 years would amass over $300,000. (See this simple savings calculator
Simple savings calculator -- Bankrate.com

Now if this same person directed the monthly payments of $400 deducted automatically each month for 35 years into vehicles accumulating at the average of 6%.. almost $600,000!

Again this would be CONTRARY to DEMOCRATS NOT invested in the "stock market" unless directed! NOT go in affect for anyone over 55. NOT go into affect if the person chooses NOT to be self directed.
But of course the DEMOCRATS aren't telling people that!
All the plans of knowledgeable financially aware people is that if left alone and saving at the rate of simple compound interest at 3% to 6% the INDIVIDUAL can have their OWN estate of at least $300,000 to as much as possible without the Government having to pay a dime!
NO money out by the government for these accounts directed by the employee!

You might want to note that the payroll tax is covering Social Security AND most of your Medicare.

$300,000 is not that big a number if you're paying for your retirement AND medical care past age 65.

SO what is wrong with a young person being in high risk great appreciation and older they get go into more secure investments??? THAT's what would allow accumulations of
double the $300,000 and you are forgetting ONE MAJOR benefit!!!
NOT everyone is alike! Not everyone's health is BAD..
I just saw an 87 year old grass grower in colorado who had full head of hair and looked in his 60s!
My point is the government has to be monolithic in nature and humans by nature are NOT all the same! So why not let humans determine their expenditures?
Maybe some people at 70 seeing their accumulation dwindling will want to expire so their family can benefit! That's their choice... NOT the government! Or should be!

Wall Street thinks it's great for their bottom line.

 

[Harry Dresden]

I think Americans should be able to control a percentage of their SS withholdings.

Too bad there's no Americans up there. Only murkins.
Hastings family on 'Extreme Makeover' about to lose home the television show built | jacksonville.com

how would a cobarde like you know Gordo?....

 

[healthmyths]

You might want to note that the payroll tax is covering Social Security AND most of your Medicare.

$300,000 is not that big a number if you're paying for your retirement AND medical care past age 65.

SO what is wrong with a young person being in high risk great appreciation and older they get go into more secure investments??? THAT's what would allow accumulations of
double the $300,000 and you are forgetting ONE MAJOR benefit!!!
NOT everyone is alike! Not everyone's health is BAD..
I just saw an 87 year old grass grower in colorado who had full head of hair and looked in his 60s!
My point is the government has to be monolithic in nature and humans by nature are NOT all the same! So why not let humans determine their expenditures?
Maybe some people at 70 seeing their accumulation dwindling will want to expire so their family can benefit! That's their choice... NOT the government! Or should be!

Wall Street thinks it's great for their bottom line.

And so??? IDIOT!!!
WHAT do you think those "evil" wealthy wall street people DO with their filthy MONEY???
Do they bury it in their backyard? Do they put under their mattress?
Just what happens to all that filthy money???

 

[Too Tall]

Yep how did all yer 401K's do?

Mine took a dive for a few years and has recovered, just as it has done in previous down markets. The best part is buying stocks and bonds when the market is down and watching them grow.

 

[Too Tall]

Where would the money come from to pay current benefits? We're talking about trillions. That train really left the station with the election of 2,000. When we were entering a period of surpluses, and the demand for t-bills were decreasing, Clinton proposed that part of a persons SS be put into the Federal Thrift Saving plan, which offers a variety of investments, including mutual funds to money market funds. Bush chose to give a tax break to the rich instead.

Wrong, Bush pushed a SS program to put a small portion of SS funds into the market, not Clinton. The Democrats and some Republicans wouldn't pass his proposal.

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) – In the State of the Union address Wednesday evening, President Bush answered some important questions about his plans for Social Security reform and the creation of individual investment accounts.

Bush's plan for Social Security - Mar. 4, 2005

And the Bush tax cuts reduced taxes for EVERY person that worked for wages.

 

[healthmyths]

Where would the money come from to pay current benefits? We're talking about trillions. That train really left the station with the election of 2,000. When we were entering a period of surpluses, and the demand for t-bills were decreasing, Clinton proposed that part of a persons SS be put into the Federal Thrift Saving plan, which offers a variety of investments, including mutual funds to money market funds. Bush chose to give a tax break to the rich instead.

Wrong, Bush pushed a SS program to put a small portion of SS funds into the market, not Clinton. The Democrats and some Republicans wouldn't pass his proposal.

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) – In the State of the Union address Wednesday evening, President Bush answered some important questions about his plans for Social Security reform and the creation of individual investment accounts.

Bush's plan for Social Security - Mar. 4, 2005

And the Bush tax cuts reduced taxes for EVERY person that worked for wages.

Once again YOU and others AGAINST people SAVING their OWN money are grossly misleading!
YES THE worker HAS the choice to put money into the stock market... KEY WORD CHOICE
but of course idiots FORGET that!
All they hear is "stock market" and they stupidly JUMP to GAMBLING!
Again over 36 years since 1975 DJIA increased 9.6% SOME f..ing... RISK!!!

 

[Listening]

Self employed farmers are the worst SS scroungers. Pay no SS until about 55 and then pay for 5 years so they can go on the draw.

Another corruption of the system.