McCain Would Privatize Social Security

[Gunny]

Chris,

Can I add 'These Republicans would rather the middle class be screwed by the lawyers, the insurance companies, and Big Pharma, than do something sensible.' without offending?...

-Joe

While the Dems would rather the middle class be screwed by the Government? Seems like it doesn't really matter at Ground Zero, does it?

 

[AVG-JOE]

Capitalism does need strong regulation to work. I simply don't understand those who want all regulations removed.

As for the idea that if someone can't afford a house then they shouldn't buy one, I agree.

I might be blindingly simplistic here but housing is about shelter, a basic human need.

When a basic human need becomes a tradeable commodity then people will want to get into one to make money rather than just use it for shelter.

For a lot of ordinary people who aren't wealthy their house will be their biggest financial investment, something they have as an asset. I don't blame people for wanting to have their own, they get a sense of security (shelter, not financial) and they can gradually own an asset. But it really is basically about shelter.

This is not an all or nothing proposition... Most of the problem mortgages are not people in a house at all... they're people in a house they can't afford.

Enough people that there is a reason they didn't know how much they could afford - they were sold something.

Government is supposed to be the difference between 'cut-throat' capitalism and a peaceful free market. Rule of law is the tool it uses. Does anyone on this board actually know all the rules for where they live at this moment? Does anyone know all the codes and rules for their tax bracket? Does it matter?

-Joe

 

[PeterS]

While the Dems would rather the middle class be screwed by the Government? Seems like it doesn't really matter at Ground Zero, does it?

Since government belongs to the people if one is to get screwed it is best to do it yourself...

By the way, a man walks into see his doctor. The doctor takes one look at him and says, "you have to stop masturbating." The man says, "why!?" The doctor says, "so I can examine you."

Sorry, it just seemed to fit...

 

[AVG-JOE]

While the Dems would rather the middle class be screwed by the Government? Seems like it doesn't really matter at Ground Zero, does it?

Did you ever stop to think that if the government is ever going to change with out a revolution that the first thing that needs to change is going to have to be one of the current political parties?

Maybe it is happening... There are no super heros to fly in and clean up our political parties. Whoever begins the clean-up in either of those two pigsties is going to get a little dirty.

-Joe

 

[glockmail]

Are there no functions in society that would be more efficiently run if The People simply pooled resources to perform that service and removed the cost of someone profiting?....

The cost of profit is far outweighed by the reduction in efficiency when that incentive as well as the threat of annihilation from competition is removed.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Given the past few weeks that is a curious position, had there been no government of the people for the people we would today be in a another depression.

One man's retirement math: Social Security wins | csmonitor.com

One man's retirement math: Social Security wins By David R. Francis

"At the heart of President Bush's plan to sell Social Security private accounts is a simple notion: You're always better off investing your retirement money than letting the government do it.

By doing it yourself, you can stow some money in the stock market, and over the long run will get a better return on that investment than today's Social Security system offers.

The idea is broadly accepted. That's why the administration's plan to partially privatize the system sounds appealing to many. But that better return won't always happen.

Just ask Stanley Logue of San Diego."

we had this argument already and your link is easily rebutted. For one the performance of the Dow Jones Industrial Average is a compilation of a mere 20 U.S. stocks yet this is the second time you've trotted that article out as some kind of "proof"

The reason why SS will never be privatized is that the government will lose the best slush fund it ever had. Imagine if we could all just borrow money from ourselves and then according to congressional accounting rules never have the borrowed fund show up on a balance sheet.

So since you trotted out an old argument I'll do the same.

The fact is that if we got rid of SS and everyone of us was to put 7.5 % of what we earn plus a 7.5% employer match (which are the same as we are all paying to the gov't slush fund called social security) from age 18 to age 65 into a retirement account we would all be better off than we would be on SS. here are some simple numbers

lets say that from age 24 to age 65 a person earning the median income of 2004 of just shy or 45 K (we'll call it 45K) and lets assume he gets no increases 15% of his annual income is $6750 his 7.5% contribution is 3375 divide by 12 for a monthly contribution of 281.15 so the total monthly contribution to his retirement account is 562.3 we'll round up to 563

over 41 years that monthly contribution at a mere 10% the resulting retirement fund will be over 3,500,000 bukaroos.

get 13% over that time and you will have over 9.2 million bucks.

for those of you who think 13% is not possible here is just one mutual fund that has averaged over 15% since 1978

http://www.americanfunds.com/funds/d...al-date-select

these numbers don't take into account any increase in income over a 40 year period and using a 10% return is well below what is available so tell me that SS is better than this without sounding like an idiot especially since you don't have to be fucking rich to do it.
__________________

since you are all afraid of the market these days, I'll use a lower interest rate how about 7% like that of a high yield bond using the above scenario you would end up with 1.766 million. If you put that in an account earning a mere 3%, you will receive about 53K per year to live on and never touch the principle.

get rid of SS and force the government to stop cooking the books at our expense.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

"The presidential debate must return to Social Security and other issues that affect people's lives. The sleaze that Senator McCain and his vice-presidential candidate throw out as a distraction should be left to the pigs."

McCain Would Privatize Social Security by Dean Baker

"The Republicans have already turned to sick sexual innuendo and nonsense about their vice-presidential candidate, pigs and lipstick in order to distract the public from the real issues in this campaign. One of the items that should be on top of the list of real issues is Senator McCain's plans to privatize and cut Social Security.

McCain has repeatedly expressed interest in privatizing Social Security along the lines proposed by President Bush. For those who have forgotten that nightmare, Bush's plan would have reduced benefits by approximately one percent a year for many workers.

Workers who retired 10 years after the plan was put in place would see a 10 percent reduction in benefits compared with the currently projected levels. Workers who retired 20 years after the plan was implemented would see approximately a 20 percent cut in benefits and workers who retired 40 years after the plan started would see their benefits cut by close to 40 percent.

This schedule of cuts would apply to workers who earn $100,000 a year. Workers who earn $60,000 a year would see cuts of about half this size.

The losses to retired workers could mean big benefits for the financial industry. Under some versions of the plan, the financial industry would rake in hundreds of billions of dollars in fees and commissions over the next 40 years...."

McCain Would Privatize Social Security | CommonDreams.org

Yes yes, we heard this about Bush too. Has it happened? Even with a Republican Congress he couldn't get what he wanted. Nothing more then leftoid fear mongering.

Now to the point. What is better? Putting our money into a slush fund the Government spends every year on anything it wants? Or into a portfolio we control and Government can not spend?

 

[plt42]

Privatizing SS is a very bad idea.
A choice of opting out is feasable.
A ceiling based on earnings limits the amount of pay-in to the system.

Why not have a limit of net worth to receive benefits.

My former employer is worth more than $10 mil and receives annual dividends from investments equal to more than most of us will see in a lifetime He's about as socially secure as one can get... yet, he receives a SS check every month. Yes, I know... he paid into it all his working life and is entitled. But, afterall, it's called SOCIAL SECURITY. If there's a cap on how much he had to pay in based on his earnings, why not a cap on how much he can take out based on retirement net worth?

He needs an SS check like a hole in the head!

 

[AVG-JOE]

Privatizing SS is a very bad idea.
A choice of opting out is feasable.
A ceiling based on earnings limits the amount of pay-in to the system.

Why not have a limit of net worth to receive benefits.

My former employer is worth more than $10 mil and receives annual dividends from investments equal to more than most of us will see in a lifetime He's about as socially secure as one can get... yet, he receives a SS check every month. Yes, I know... he paid into it all his working life and is entitled. But, afterall, it's called SOCIAL SECURITY. If there's a cap on how much he had to pay in based on his earnings, why not a cap on how much he can take out based on retirement net worth?

He needs an SS check like a hole in the head!

How about a cap on dividends based on how much he put in plus a reasonable rate of return?

-Joe

 

[editec]

My heart goes out to those people who are retiring right now.

They've worked hard and saved for their retirements and they're watching their 401Ks go down in value even faster than the valuation of my house is.

Poor sods.

I hope their social security checks help.

 

[Skull Pilot]

My heart goes out to those people who are retiring right now.

They've worked hard and saved for their retirements and they're watching their 401Ks go down in value even faster than the valuation of my house is.

Poor sods.

I hope their social security checks help.

for one anyone retiring right now should have very little if any of their assets in stocks. so they shouldn't be hurting at all really. in fact if they have allocated correctly they should be seeing modest gains or 3-5% even in this market

 

[Anguille]

Everybody knows it was the Marxist Dems who caused the collapse of Wall Street and they forced our government to rescue the companies. The Marxist Dems wanted to lend mortgages to poor people and others who lacked the resources to put money down. So the banks just did what the Dems told them to do. Of course, the Messiah will blame greed and Sen. Phil Gramm's deregulation plan. That's why we have to vote for our Senator McCain and Gov. Palin, so we can finally dismantle all of the Marxist Dem giveaway programs, like Socialist Security, as well as ALL of the regulations weighing on businesses. This is our big chance to finish off the Socialist Marxist Dem Party for good. Vote McCain/Palin.

 

[Anguille]

That shows your true ignorance right there. The children are the liberal democrats who insist on screwing with a capitalist system. The adults are the private entrepreneurs who will step in, pick up the pieces and make profits.

 

[Anguille]

If we can privatize right now then that's more money I can accumulate to have a nicer retirement.

You think private enterprise doesn't have it's eye on your money?

 

[Anguille]

If that's so then why has the stock market rebounded on the news that the government is nationalising and world banks are pouring money into the economic system? I think it's not so much capitalism in action as capitalism in a monumental crisis. The theory that one company turning turtle can be allowed to fail and then others step in and clear up the mess before the system is humming along nicely again is all very well when it's one company or maybe two but here there is a complete meltdown of the financial system. The truth is that the world, let alone the US government, can't allow capitalism to fail and failing it is right now. Capitalism is being rescued as we watch. This is history being made.

Your posts and midcan's posts are like islands of sanity in a sea of idiocy and irrationality.

 

[Anguille]

Capitalism does need strong regulation to work. I simply don't understand those who want all regulations removed.

They don't really want ALL regulation removed, at least not the halfway sane ones. They just want regulation removed that doesn't slant control into the hands of CEOs and away from consumers. Like midcan says, Socialism for the rich, capitalism for everyone else.

As for the idea that if someone can't afford a house then they shouldn't buy one, I agree.

I might be blindingly simplistic here but housing is about shelter, a basic human need.

I don't think you are being simplistic, just humane. It's not enough for some that they have their own basic needs met. They must have status symbols and luxuries and gated communities, regardless if a growing segment of the population ends up homeless.

When a basic human need becomes a tradeable commodity then people will want to get into one to make money rather than just use it for shelter.

For a lot of ordinary people who aren't wealthy their house will be their biggest financial investment, something they have as an asset. I don't blame people for wanting to have their own, they get a sense of security (shelter, not financial) and they can gradually own an asset. But it really is basically about shelter.

 

[Anguille]

The cost of profit is far outweighed by the reduction in efficiency when that incentive as well as the threat of annihilation from competition is removed.

That's a common misconception.

 

[Anguille]

Now to the point. What is better? Putting our money into a slush fund the Government spends every year on anything it wants? Or into a portfolio we control and Government can not spend?

"a portfolio we control" ???

I suppose you own the deed to the Brooklyn Bridge.

 

[Anguille]

My heart goes out to those people who are retiring right now.

They've worked hard and saved for their retirements and they're watching their 401Ks go down in value even faster than the valuation of my house is.

Poor sods.

I hope their social security checks help.

Mine also. My mother is approaching her eighties but she is still afraid to retire.

 

[glockmail]

That's a common misconception.

Its the absolute a-fucking truth.