If Social Security Had Been In Private Accounts The Stock Market Drop Could Have Been A Disaster

[CrusaderFrank]

But YOU don't gamble over 40 years! You invest in equities from your 20s to 40s and obviously accumulations.
There have been MORE UPS that Downs obviously I guess you idiots don't think about that or else THERE would never be a DJI!
Then from your 40s to 60s... moving more from high risk securities to lower risk investments and finally at retirement most of
it in highly secure investments. I mean you being a government lover why not have treasury bills?
See that is why if WE the vast majority of people had been GIVEN the CHOICE see you keep referring to "privatizing" it was always
going to be a CHOICE... i.e. I would have the POWER to choose... Do I want to tell SS where to put my money when I'm in my 20s i.e. high risk great appreciation, then in my 40s tell SS to put in lower risk and then retire all in to secured.. OR if I didn't want to choose that the traditional SS. EITHER WAY I would have the choice. NOT as it is now.
If I'd had the choice when I first started SS deductions in the 60s, today I'd had a million dollars in SS. Of which maybe half would be used in retirement, 1/4 medical bills and the rest a nest egg for my SON and his family to build on!

BUT selfish ignorant people like you without the benefit of the FACTS think privatizing was all investing in the market and that was the stupid ass meme put out by ignorant selfish people!

Typical right wing stupidity and brain washed regurgitation. The stock market IS a gambling casino......The zero-sum syndrome is very applicable...for every "gained" dollar from someone, there is a "lost" dollar by someone else.

Who took it in the gut during this latest stock market plunge? Holders of 401K plans.

LOL

Just LOL

 

[Contumacious]

Well, no shit.
If Social Security Had Been In Private Accounts The Stock Market Drop Could Have Been A Disaster

The stock market continued a period of volatility on Monday. Media reports sounded the alarm as the DOW opened 1,000 points down and other indexes took huge hits, only to climb back up a bit later in the day. While that performance, which had some people calling it black Monday, may have knocked a good deal of money out of people’s 401(k) retirement accounts, Social Security benefits remain by and large untouched by such fluctuations.

Some Republicans, however, are interested in changing that.

In June, presidential candidate Jeb Bush said that he thinks the next president will have to try to privatize Social Security. Others have gotten behind the idea as well: Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) drafted a plan in 2013 that included partial privatization, and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) is in favor of using private accounts. Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) has included privatization in his budget blueprints.

The market drop, and ones before, expose the dangers of such a plan, which usually entails diverting some or all of the money workers contribute to Social Security through their paychecks into private investment accounts. That would put individuals in charge of making smart enough investment choices in the market to make big enough returns to support themselves in retirement.

But the reality is that’s not within reach for most individual people. During a market rout like Monday’s, many people will panic and sell. “We know a lot of people do what economists say is irrational, they sell at a low point,” said Dean Baker, co-director of the Center on Economic and Policy Research. Research shows that the best thing to do during a downturn is to hold out if possible. But that’s not how most people will react. “People see something like this and go, ‘I better get out,'” Baker said. “When they see the market start to go up, they say, ‘I better buy in,’ and then they’ve lost a lot.”

This is one of the big problems with privatizing Social Security: individual investors don’t tend to be that savvy in chasing higher returns. “A lot of people make wrong decisions,” Baker said. This is even true when it comes to retirement planning: Many people leave money on the table with their 401(k)s by not taking advantage of employer matches or cash out when they switch jobs and incur taxes. The point of Social Security contributions is to make saving for retirement mandatory, he pointed out. But “if you do that and then just tell people to do whatever you want [with the money], then a lot of people will make mistakes and end up with not very much in retirement.”

On a larger level, putting people’s Social Security contributions into private accounts makes them far more exposed to the irrationality of the market. “What’s beautiful about Social Security is that in the long the return workers get on contributions is linked to productivity growth and wage growth,” said Monique Morrissey, an economist at the Economic Policy Institute. “Whereas markets are notoriously volatile and often behave in ways that are not based on the fundamental strength and weakness of the economy.”

MR DINGLE BERRY SIR

THE US DECLARED BANKRUPTCY FOR THE FIRST TIME IN 1935 FROM WHICH IT NEVER RECOVERED. WE ARE NOW 17 TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTrillion "dollars" in the hole. SO CEASE AND DESIST BULLSHITTING.

 

[healthmyths]

But YOU don't gamble over 40 years! You invest in equities from your 20s to 40s and obviously accumulations.
There have been MORE UPS that Downs obviously I guess you idiots don't think about that or else THERE would never be a DJI!
Then from your 40s to 60s... moving more from high risk securities to lower risk investments and finally at retirement most of
it in highly secure investments. I mean you being a government lover why not have treasury bills?
See that is why if WE the vast majority of people had been GIVEN the CHOICE see you keep referring to "privatizing" it was always
going to be a CHOICE... i.e. I would have the POWER to choose... Do I want to tell SS where to put my money when I'm in my 20s i.e. high risk great appreciation, then in my 40s tell SS to put in lower risk and then retire all in to secured.. OR if I didn't want to choose that the traditional SS. EITHER WAY I would have the choice. NOT as it is now.
If I'd had the choice when I first started SS deductions in the 60s, today I'd had a million dollars in SS. Of which maybe half would be used in retirement, 1/4 medical bills and the rest a nest egg for my SON and his family to build on!

BUT selfish ignorant people like you without the benefit of the FACTS think privatizing was all investing in the market and that was the stupid ass meme put out by ignorant selfish people!

Typical right wing stupidity and brain washed regurgitation. The stock market IS a gambling casino......The zero-sum syndrome is very applicable...for every "gained" dollar from someone, there is a "lost" dollar by someone else.

Who took it in the gut during this latest stock market plunge? Holders of 401K plans.

LOL

Just LOL

So you like an ostrich ignore the simple graph I just put up that shows THERE ARE MORE PERIODS over the last 115 years of UP then Down?
Why? What is so hard to comprehend that if something was a constant loser why would there be trillions of dollars now when there use to be
millions? Why are there millions of investors when there use to be hundreds?
If the market was such an evil ON-GOING losing venture why are people still investing?
Again here is the chart...argue with the simple facts it has gone up more then gone down!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

When you read the OP, you realize why Progressive economies have a 100% fail rate and always end up with mass graves

 

[Andylusion]

The OP is spewing nonsense.

Over a lifetime a properly BALANCED portfolio will yield far better returns than the Fed's phony b'loney lockbox. The typical pattern after a correction is that portfolios recover in 4 months.

SS for truly indigent people is WELFARE. It would be far better for the vast majority to control their own retirement investments (similar to the program in Chile), while reserving a WELFARE program for destitute seniors. Having personally owned accounts would result in LESS DESTITUTE seniors. There is the added benefit that the accounts could be passed along to heirs instead of squandered by the government on crap.

You assume everyone would balance a portfolio properly.

Good grief..... .Then that is THEIR fault.

Why should arrogant people like you, punish people like us, because someone somewhere might not invest wisely?

You would never apply that to any other situation. Someone might not drive their car safely and wisely, and may hurt someone. We should ban people from having cars. No one has a car, no one will run anyone else over.

Absolute stupidity.

And it's not like investing wisely is super difficult. Look at how long the mutual fund has been open. 1 year.... skip it. 10 years or longer... ok.

Look at what the average return on the investment was over the last 10 to 20 years. -2.8%... that's bad. Skip it.
6.8% growth... that's good. Ok.

Which part of this is so freaking difficult that you left-winger can't possibly do it on your own? Which of these concepts do you need a government funded college course to help you with?

Actually, the moronic OP's ideology does support preventing people from making tons of personal decisions ranging from what the ingest...to where they live...to the features their care has to have...to what benefits their health care should provide...and on and one.

He's a Nanny Stater.

Yeah... which is another way of saying he's a total spineless wimp. That's what leftism is all about "I don't want to have to take responsibility for my life!" and then justify it with moral hand-ringing... "And that's what a civilized society should do, is take care of everyone who doesn't live responsibly!" which is followed up by some leftardian crap involving the word 'greed' and such.

The thing that is always baffling to me, is that you would think..... that after years and years of disaster following left-wing policies around the world, with Greece being the latest victim.... don't these people ever learn anything? Even dog.... even a freakin rat... will eventually learn that if I put my nose in there, I get swatted. You can train the dumbest of animals to do tricks.

But people like this.... decades and decades of destruction and.... "It'll work! You just have to try it! It's moral!" Seriously.... Sometimes the greatest proof there is intelligent life on other planets, is that they refuse to contact us.

 

[Andylusion]

But YOU don't gamble over 40 years! You invest in equities from your 20s to 40s and obviously accumulations.
There have been MORE UPS that Downs obviously I guess you idiots don't think about that or else THERE would never be a DJI!
Then from your 40s to 60s... moving more from high risk securities to lower risk investments and finally at retirement most of
it in highly secure investments. I mean you being a government lover why not have treasury bills?
See that is why if WE the vast majority of people had been GIVEN the CHOICE see you keep referring to "privatizing" it was always
going to be a CHOICE... i.e. I would have the POWER to choose... Do I want to tell SS where to put my money when I'm in my 20s i.e. high risk great appreciation, then in my 40s tell SS to put in lower risk and then retire all in to secured.. OR if I didn't want to choose that the traditional SS. EITHER WAY I would have the choice. NOT as it is now.
If I'd had the choice when I first started SS deductions in the 60s, today I'd had a million dollars in SS. Of which maybe half would be used in retirement, 1/4 medical bills and the rest a nest egg for my SON and his family to build on!

BUT selfish ignorant people like you without the benefit of the FACTS think privatizing was all investing in the market and that was the stupid ass meme put out by ignorant selfish people!

Typical right wing stupidity and brain washed regurgitation. The stock market IS a gambling casino......The zero-sum syndrome is very applicable...for every "gained" dollar from someone, there is a "lost" dollar by someone else.

Who took it in the gut during this latest stock market plunge? Holders of 401K plans.

LOL

Just LOL

So you like an ostrich ignore the simple graph I just put up that shows THERE ARE MORE PERIODS over the last 115 years of UP then Down?
Why? What is so hard to comprehend that if something was a constant loser why would there be trillions of dollars now when there use to be
millions? Why are there millions of investors when there use to be hundreds?
If the market was such an evil ON-GOING losing venture why are people still investing?
Again here is the chart...argue with the simple facts it has gone up more then gone down!
View attachment 48801

He was laughing at nat4900, not you.

 

[KissMy]

If they invested on the day before the drop. Otherwise you're talking out of your ass

LOL. Sure.

You just proved yourself to be ignorant.

You do know about the Texas Opt-Out plan?

How Three Texas Counties Created Personal Social Security Accounts and Prospered

In Texas they allowed three specific counties to Opt-Out of Social Security. They invested in the Stock Market, through specific approved investments.

From the article:

• A lower-middle income worker making about $26,000 at retirement would get about $1,007 a month under Social Security, but $1,826 under the Alternate Plan, according to First Financial’s calculations.
• A middle-income worker making $51,200 would get about $1,540 monthly from Social Security, but $3,600 from the banking model.
• And a high-income worker who maxed out on his Social Security contribution every year would receive about $2,500 a month from Social Security vs. $5,000 to $6,000 a month from the Alternate Plan.

The bottom line is that in every single instance, despite the ups-and-downs of the market, everyone who Opt-Out of socialist insecurity, did better, and by a wide margin.

This is undeniable fact.

Not only is Social Security going broke, not only does it take up 15% of your income, and not only are benefits going to be cut in the future without any question, but you would be better off investing your money in any conventional stock market investment.

A bunch of hocus-pocus models & projections. Many pension funds & cities have bankrupted because of those projection fantasies. How are you going to bail out all the old people starving & freezing in their homes after most of them go belly up? Sure there will be some winners who wind up with all the contributions from the losers.

 

[TooTall]

There would be no 'social security' if all citizens had were private accounts – whether there was a stock market drop or not.

The raison d'etre of Social Security is to safeguard retirement funds from the capricious volatility of private markets.

Hence the clueless idiocy of conservative advocacy of 'privatizing' Social Security.

If Social Security had been privatized, the stock market drop in 2008 would have been the biggest money maker in history. You would have been buying stocks as they were on the way to record heights and what you owned prior to the drop would have completely regained their value.

Those already drawing Soc Sec would not have noticed it since they were already under the old plan and getting a monthly stipend that would not have changed.

Even a liberal should know that, but I guess that is asking too much.

 

[KissMy]

There would be no 'social security' if all citizens had were private accounts – whether there was a stock market drop or not.

The raison d'etre of Social Security is to safeguard retirement funds from the capricious volatility of private markets.

Hence the clueless idiocy of conservative advocacy of 'privatizing' Social Security.

If Social Security had been privatized, the stock market drop in 2008 would have been the biggest money maker in history. You would have been buying stocks as they were on the way to record heights and what you owned prior to the drop would have completely regained their value. Even you should know that.

Every DOW stock from the Great Depression has been bankrupted or bailed out & then swapped out.

 

[nat4900]

Explain something.
How come there are more periods when the market goes up then when goes down if it is a "casino"???
So in case you can't figure it out... when over the last 115 years the DJIA has gone up more then going down why is that wrong?

Actually the answer is rather simple.....The Market is very capitalistic when the profits are up...........and very socialistic when the market slumps.

In other words, it is the FEDS that bailout the "casino" in bad times....sort of like your uncle picking up the casino's IOUs.

 

[Darkwind]

Well, no shit.
If Social Security Had Been In Private Accounts The Stock Market Drop Could Have Been A Disaster

The stock market continued a period of volatility on Monday. Media reports sounded the alarm as the DOW opened 1,000 points down and other indexes took huge hits, only to climb back up a bit later in the day. While that performance, which had some people calling it black Monday, may have knocked a good deal of money out of people’s 401(k) retirement accounts, Social Security benefits remain by and large untouched by such fluctuations.

Some Republicans, however, are interested in changing that.

In June, presidential candidate Jeb Bush said that he thinks the next president will have to try to privatize Social Security. Others have gotten behind the idea as well: Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) drafted a plan in 2013 that included partial privatization, and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) is in favor of using private accounts. Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) has included privatization in his budget blueprints.

The market drop, and ones before, expose the dangers of such a plan, which usually entails diverting some or all of the money workers contribute to Social Security through their paychecks into private investment accounts. That would put individuals in charge of making smart enough investment choices in the market to make big enough returns to support themselves in retirement.

But the reality is that’s not within reach for most individual people. During a market rout like Monday’s, many people will panic and sell. “We know a lot of people do what economists say is irrational, they sell at a low point,” said Dean Baker, co-director of the Center on Economic and Policy Research. Research shows that the best thing to do during a downturn is to hold out if possible. But that’s not how most people will react. “People see something like this and go, ‘I better get out,'” Baker said. “When they see the market start to go up, they say, ‘I better buy in,’ and then they’ve lost a lot.”

This is one of the big problems with privatizing Social Security: individual investors don’t tend to be that savvy in chasing higher returns. “A lot of people make wrong decisions,” Baker said. This is even true when it comes to retirement planning: Many people leave money on the table with their 401(k)s by not taking advantage of employer matches or cash out when they switch jobs and incur taxes. The point of Social Security contributions is to make saving for retirement mandatory, he pointed out. But “if you do that and then just tell people to do whatever you want [with the money], then a lot of people will make mistakes and end up with not very much in retirement.”

On a larger level, putting people’s Social Security contributions into private accounts makes them far more exposed to the irrationality of the market. “What’s beautiful about Social Security is that in the long the return workers get on contributions is linked to productivity growth and wage growth,” said Monique Morrissey, an economist at the Economic Policy Institute. “Whereas markets are notoriously volatile and often behave in ways that are not based on the fundamental strength and weakness of the economy.”

Think progress....what a surprise.

The article is clueless, like most progressives..

I made back everything I lost in the crash by the end of that summer.....I"m now up 4 fold over where I would have been....

So would everyone else who would have had their SS invested.....

Plus they can leave it to someone when they pass......The government has no right to it.

 

[nat4900]

You would have been buying stocks as they were on the way to record heights and what you owned prior to the drop would have completely regained their value.

What folks like you...(after taking Eco. 101 ad thinking they've figured out how the Market works........) fail to understand is this: For every gain that someone receives, some other dummy has to have taken a loss....be one from the US or from overseas. There is not an ever-expanding money pie (unless, of course, you just print additional less valuable currency.)

 

[healthmyths]

There would be no 'social security' if all citizens had were private accounts – whether there was a stock market drop or not.

The raison d'etre of Social Security is to safeguard retirement funds from the capricious volatility of private markets.

Hence the clueless idiocy of conservative advocacy of 'privatizing' Social Security.

You act like conservatives would care about seniors when they can't work.

It's about a 54 year old father of 4 who did everything he was supposed to do according to conservatives: go to college, earn a degree, start a rewarding career, invest and save for retirement – only to lose his job through no fault of his own as a consequence of the December 2007 Recession, along with his life's savings.

YES too bad..too sad! BUT you are sharing ONE story. ONE anecdote! And you then make it sound like EVERYONE is a 54 year old father!
The problem with people like you is YOU TAKE the EXCEPTION and pump it up to be the RULE!
The 54 year old is ONE person of 300 million!
It is just too bad the 54 year old loses his job. Sad. But that has NOT happened to everyone!
What kind of degree? Music? Let me know who he is cause there is an opportunity for him right now! There are jobs galore out there for people like him...except he sounds like he may be too picky! When I was 35 I was divorced. Working from 3 to 12PM at a beer gas and wine store
with a shotgun under the counter at night wearing a pinstripe suit during the day at no salary calling on banks to start a brand new business.
YEA rough! Today after many years I get a check from my business experiences that is MANY times what my SS is.
YES I was an exception but so is your 54 year old example! There are plenty of jobs if he isn't too picky that can lead to more money for him!

 

[healthmyths]

You would have been buying stocks as they were on the way to record heights and what you owned prior to the drop would have completely regained their value.

What folks like you...(after taking Eco. 101 ad thinking they've figured out how the Market works........) fail to understand is this: For every gain that someone receives, some other dummy has to have taken a loss....be one from the US or from overseas. There is not an ever-expanding money pie (unless, of course, you just print additional less valuable currency.)

NO that is NOT true for every gain there is a loser! DUMMY! If there were there never would be then over 100 million adults are invested in securities.

 

[Darkwind]

You would have been buying stocks as they were on the way to record heights and what you owned prior to the drop would have completely regained their value.

What folks like you...(after taking Eco. 101 ad thinking they've figured out how the Market works........) fail to understand is this: For every gain that someone receives, some other dummy has to have taken a loss....be one from the US or from overseas. There is not an ever-expanding money pie (unless, of course, you just print additional less valuable currency.)

Zero sum neophytes have always been losers.....so I can see how that would be your only perspective.

 

[Andylusion]

There would be no 'social security' if all citizens had were private accounts – whether there was a stock market drop or not.

The raison d'etre of Social Security is to safeguard retirement funds from the capricious volatility of private markets.

Hence the clueless idiocy of conservative advocacy of 'privatizing' Social Security.

If Social Security had been privatized, the stock market drop in 2008 would have been the biggest money maker in history. You would have been buying stocks as they were on the way to record heights and what you owned prior to the drop would have completely regained their value. Even you should know that.

Every DOW stock from the Great Depression has been bankrupted or bailed out & then swapped out.

A: So what?
B: Doesn't change the truth of what he said.

 

[Andylusion]

If they invested on the day before the drop. Otherwise you're talking out of your ass

LOL. Sure.

You just proved yourself to be ignorant.

You do know about the Texas Opt-Out plan?

How Three Texas Counties Created Personal Social Security Accounts and Prospered

In Texas they allowed three specific counties to Opt-Out of Social Security. They invested in the Stock Market, through specific approved investments.

From the article:

• A lower-middle income worker making about $26,000 at retirement would get about $1,007 a month under Social Security, but $1,826 under the Alternate Plan, according to First Financial’s calculations.
• A middle-income worker making $51,200 would get about $1,540 monthly from Social Security, but $3,600 from the banking model.
• And a high-income worker who maxed out on his Social Security contribution every year would receive about $2,500 a month from Social Security vs. $5,000 to $6,000 a month from the Alternate Plan.

The bottom line is that in every single instance, despite the ups-and-downs of the market, everyone who Opt-Out of socialist insecurity, did better, and by a wide margin.

This is undeniable fact.

Not only is Social Security going broke, not only does it take up 15% of your income, and not only are benefits going to be cut in the future without any question, but you would be better off investing your money in any conventional stock market investment.

A bunch of hocus-pocus models & projections. Many pension funds & cities have bankrupted because of those projection fantasies. How are you going to bail out all the old people starving & freezing in their homes after most of them go belly up? Sure there will be some winners who wind up with all the contributions from the losers.

What specific pension fund, or city, was bankrupted by free-market capitalist based retirement fund? (trick question, but good luck).

 

[The Rabbi]

Well, no shit.
If Social Security Had Been In Private Accounts The Stock Market Drop Could Have Been A Disaster

The stock market continued a period of volatility on Monday. Media reports sounded the alarm as the DOW opened 1,000 points down and other indexes took huge hits, only to climb back up a bit later in the day. While that performance, which had some people calling it black Monday, may have knocked a good deal of money out of people’s 401(k) retirement accounts, Social Security benefits remain by and large untouched by such fluctuations.

Some Republicans, however, are interested in changing that.

In June, presidential candidate Jeb Bush said that he thinks the next president will have to try to privatize Social Security. Others have gotten behind the idea as well: Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) drafted a plan in 2013 that included partial privatization, and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) is in favor of using private accounts. Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) has included privatization in his budget blueprints.

The market drop, and ones before, expose the dangers of such a plan, which usually entails diverting some or all of the money workers contribute to Social Security through their paychecks into private investment accounts. That would put individuals in charge of making smart enough investment choices in the market to make big enough returns to support themselves in retirement.

But the reality is that’s not within reach for most individual people. During a market rout like Monday’s, many people will panic and sell. “We know a lot of people do what economists say is irrational, they sell at a low point,” said Dean Baker, co-director of the Center on Economic and Policy Research. Research shows that the best thing to do during a downturn is to hold out if possible. But that’s not how most people will react. “People see something like this and go, ‘I better get out,'” Baker said. “When they see the market start to go up, they say, ‘I better buy in,’ and then they’ve lost a lot.”

This is one of the big problems with privatizing Social Security: individual investors don’t tend to be that savvy in chasing higher returns. “A lot of people make wrong decisions,” Baker said. This is even true when it comes to retirement planning: Many people leave money on the table with their 401(k)s by not taking advantage of employer matches or cash out when they switch jobs and incur taxes. The point of Social Security contributions is to make saving for retirement mandatory, he pointed out. But “if you do that and then just tell people to do whatever you want [with the money], then a lot of people will make mistakes and end up with not very much in retirement.”

On a larger level, putting people’s Social Security contributions into private accounts makes them far more exposed to the irrationality of the market. “What’s beautiful about Social Security is that in the long the return workers get on contributions is linked to productivity growth and wage growth,” said Monique Morrissey, an economist at the Economic Policy Institute. “Whereas markets are notoriously volatile and often behave in ways that are not based on the fundamental strength and weakness of the economy.”

StinkProgress=Automatic Fail.
Someone paying into mutual funds invested in the market would earn far greater returns than contributing it to Social Security. And it would keep the government from going broke. No wonder libs hate it.

 

[Mac1958]

Anyone who points at a normal stock market correction as evidence that it's a bad place to invest for retirement is either (a) ignorant, (b) lying, or (c) both.
.

 

[bripat9643]

Explain something.
How come there are more periods when the market goes up then when goes down if it is a "casino"???
So in case you can't figure it out... when over the last 115 years the DJIA has gone up more then going down why is that wrong?

Actually the answer is rather simple.....The Market is very capitalistic when the profits are up...........and very socialistic when the market slumps.

In other words, it is the FEDS that bailout the "casino" in bad times....sort of like your uncle picking up the casino's IOUs.

The feds bailed out the banks. How did they bail out the stock market?
If you're so opposed to bail outs, then why don't you vote out the politicians who approve them. You know, like Hillary and Obama?