Republicans have no health care plan

[Andylusion]

Why not just go back to pre ACA and allow the states to do as they wish rather than making it a national issue?

Left-wingers can't allow people to have a different plan, than their plan, because then people will see socialism sucks.

This is why in the 1980s, they allowed people to put their Social Security into private accounts, and they ended that program. The problem was, everyone got tons more money from their private accounts, than Social Security.

It was showing everyone that SS sucks. So they banned that program.

I'm very depressed to hear that. I have been living very well on Social Security for almost 10 years. Hell, I thought I was happy....

Happy is more a result of your internal character. I've met people who lived on $10,000 a year, who were happy.

Equally I've met people who earn double what I do, and they are absolutely miserable.

The idea that money and free stuff makes you happy, is ridiculous

As for your retirement... Again, your retirement might be garbage, and still be very happy with how crappy a retirement you have. I know people who live on Social Security, like they are impoverished Haitians, and seem relatively happy.

But being happy with what you have, doesn't mean what you have is super amazing. I have an 03 Grand Marquis. I love it. But I'm not under the illusion that my Grand Marquis is the best thing on the road.

No matter how you look at Social Security, it sucks. You can be very happy living on Social Security (until we run out of money like Greece), but that still doesn't mean Social Security is a great retirement. It isn't. By every possible measure, every other retirement system is better than social security.

In fact.... If you invest the same amount of money into a Mutual fund of US bonds... which ironically the US would use to pay Social Security.... you end up with a better retirement than Social Security.

That's just a fact. Doesn't mean you can't be happy living on less. Tons of people live on less than I do, and are happy. But that doesn't change the facts. Social Security is a terrible retirement. It'll be even worse when we run out of money and we will, at some point.

Thank you for the guidance, Oprah! Now that I know that my social security retirement here in paradise in my resort retirement community in Southern AZ, I will endeavor to spend less time drinking margaritas while watching the sunset against the mountains, and more time complaining about the government that made that possible!

So both of my grandmothers went to retirement homes. One was a private home, because my grandfather had saved up tons of money in stock, and she lived off that. Wonderful place. Red carpet. Wine on tap 24/7. (not particularly great wine, but nonetheless). Movie theater. Workshops. All kinds of stuff.

Then my other grandma, the one I was closer with ironically, was a life long Democrat. She said the Democrats would take care of her. Her words not mine. She believed this so strongly, that she also believed that after 65 she didn't have to file her taxes. Again, her words, not mine. My parents spent months on months paying accountants, to fix her taxes. She ended up in a government care home. It was so terrible, my parents end up having her live with them until she died.

I don't know what paradise you are living in, but I'm all for it. I want everyone to win. Nothing makes me happier, than to know someone else is doing well.

However, in general terms.... people who live off government, don't end up well.

 

[Andylusion]

No matter how you look at Social Security, it sucks. You can be very happy living on Social Security (until we run out of money like Greece), but that still doesn't mean Social Security is a great retirement. It isn't. By every possible measure, every other retirement system is better than social security.

What retirement system would that be?
It's a hell of a lot better than nothing. And without Social Security...most folks would HAVE nothing

Every retirement. Unless you invest your money into something insane, like corn starch..... or something. But any retirement plan that Forest Gump could pick, will do better than social security.

Let's run some numbers. For the past decade, I averaged an income of just $20,000. Social Security takes 15% of my income.

If I continue and never get a raise, and I retire at age 67, I'll get just $1,000 a month. Poverty.

If I had put the exact same amount of money into a mutual fund, that buys government bonds.... that fund would get a 3% rate of return.... which is TERRIBLE.... and yet, I would end up with $1.5 Million dollars by the time I retired.

The worst possible investment.... $1.5 Million dollars. Or $1,000 a month Social Security. Do you want the calculations, and where I got all those numbers? I'll post them all here for you to see. I was planning to do it right here, but I have to go to work.

 

[edward37]

No matter how you look at Social Security, it sucks. You can be very happy living on Social Security (until we run out of money like Greece), but that still doesn't mean Social Security is a great retirement. It isn't. By every possible measure, every other retirement system is better than social security.

What retirement system would that be?
It's a hell of a lot better than nothing. And without Social Security...most folks would HAVE nothing

Every retirement. Unless you invest your money into something insane, like corn starch..... or something. But any retirement plan that Forest Gump could pick, will do better than social security.

Let's run some numbers. For the past decade, I averaged an income of just $20,000. Social Security takes 15% of my income.

If I continue and never get a raise, and I retire at age 67, I'll get just $1,000 a month. Poverty.

If I had put the exact same amount of money into a mutual fund, that buys government bonds.... that fund would get a 3% rate of return.... which is TERRIBLE.... and yet, I would end up with $1.5 Million dollars by the time I retired.

The worst possible investment.... $1.5 Million dollars. Or $1,000 a month Social Security. Do you want the calculations, and where I got all those numbers? I'll post them all here for you to see. I was planning to do it right here, but I have to go to work.

Hope you went for the 1.5 million

 

[Maxdeath]

You really have to wonder about the IQ of the left. They worry that ACA, which is nothing but poorly implemented Rommney care, will be taken away. But cry that the Republicans have no and do not want healthcare. To date they have been the only ones to put forward any healthcare plans that do not include trillions in added debt every year.

The ACA as written adds nothing to the debt. Trump is trying to make it run up the debt.

When will you quit lying?

As soon as you realize that it costs the federal government billions of dollars each year. When you realize that it is badly implemented Romneycare which is named after Mit Romney which was the Republican that first proposed it. Once you realize that it took the democrats to screw up Romneycare so badly.

Read this if you really don't think that it costs. Here's How Many Billions Obamacare Will Cost in 2016. Of course only someone badly educated would think that you can subsidize insurance from an insurance company would not want money for that subsidy.

What did it say about the revenues? Nothing

Of course costs go up, healthcare costs & premiums go up.

The real questions if Trump & the Republicans cut enough revenue to make it start to lose money.

They cut the funding from people not being insured. They are trying, if not already done, to cut the medical device tax.

Damn you really have a problem with English. I chose that particular article because it was done by a non bias point. Also because 2016 was prominently written about. The reason 2016 was important was that Trump was not even in office yet so all parts of the ACA was still in force. At that point it was costing over a hundred Billion.

 

[Vandalshandle]

No matter how you look at Social Security, it sucks. You can be very happy living on Social Security (until we run out of money like Greece), but that still doesn't mean Social Security is a great retirement. It isn't. By every possible measure, every other retirement system is better than social security.

What retirement system would that be?
It's a hell of a lot better than nothing. And without Social Security...most folks would HAVE nothing

Every retirement. Unless you invest your money into something insane, like corn starch..... or something. But any retirement plan that Forest Gump could pick, will do better than social security.

Let's run some numbers. For the past decade, I averaged an income of just $20,000. Social Security takes 15% of my income.

If I continue and never get a raise, and I retire at age 67, I'll get just $1,000 a month. Poverty.

If I had put the exact same amount of money into a mutual fund, that buys government bonds.... that fund would get a 3% rate of return.... which is TERRIBLE.... and yet, I would end up with $1.5 Million dollars by the time I retired.

The worst possible investment.... $1.5 Million dollars. Or $1,000 a month Social Security. Do you want the calculations, and where I got all those numbers? I'll post them all here for you to see. I was planning to do it right here, but I have to go to work.

I think I have gotten to the root of your problem. I live off of Social Security. I do NOT live off of the government. I paid for my SS out of every paycheck I ever made starting with when I started working at a grocery store for $.75 per hour in 1959. The "government" did not contribute a single dime.

 

[RealDave]

You really have to wonder about the IQ of the left. They worry that ACA, which is nothing but poorly implemented Rommney care, will be taken away. But cry that the Republicans have no and do not want healthcare. To date they have been the only ones to put forward any healthcare plans that do not include trillions in added debt every year.

The ACA as written adds nothing to the debt. Trump is trying to make it run up the debt.

When will you quit lying?

As soon as you realize that it costs the federal government billions of dollars each year. When you realize that it is badly implemented Romneycare which is named after Mit Romney which was the Republican that first proposed it. Once you realize that it took the democrats to screw up Romneycare so badly.

Read this if you really don't think that it costs. Here's How Many Billions Obamacare Will Cost in 2016. Of course only someone badly educated would think that you can subsidize insurance from an insurance company would not want money for that subsidy.

What did it say about the revenues? Nothing

Of course costs go up, healthcare costs & premiums go up.

The real questions if Trump & the Republicans cut enough revenue to make it start to lose money.

They cut the funding from people not being insured. They are trying, if not already done, to cut the medical device tax.

Damn you really have a problem with English. I chose that particular article because it was done by a non bias point. Also because 2016 was prominently written about. The reason 2016 was important was that Trump was not even in office yet so all parts of the ACA was still in force. At that point it was costing over a hundred Billion.

The article said NOTHING about the ACA's effect on the deficit. What part of that are you too stupid to get?

There is cost of a program & there is revenue for that program.

The article talked only about the costs.

 

[Maxdeath]

You really have to wonder about the IQ of the left. They worry that ACA, which is nothing but poorly implemented Rommney care, will be taken away. But cry that the Republicans have no and do not want healthcare. To date they have been the only ones to put forward any healthcare plans that do not include trillions in added debt every year.

The ACA as written adds nothing to the debt. Trump is trying to make it run up the debt.

When will you quit lying?

As soon as you realize that it costs the federal government billions of dollars each year. When you realize that it is badly implemented Romneycare which is named after Mit Romney which was the Republican that first proposed it. Once you realize that it took the democrats to screw up Romneycare so badly.

Read this if you really don't think that it costs. Here's How Many Billions Obamacare Will Cost in 2016. Of course only someone badly educated would think that you can subsidize insurance from an insurance company would not want money for that subsidy.

What did it say about the revenues? Nothing

Of course costs go up, healthcare costs & premiums go up.

The real questions if Trump & the Republicans cut enough revenue to make it start to lose money.

They cut the funding from people not being insured. They are trying, if not already done, to cut the medical device tax.

Damn you really have a problem with English. I chose that particular article because it was done by a non bias point. Also because 2016 was prominently written about. The reason 2016 was important was that Trump was not even in office yet so all parts of the ACA was still in force. At that point it was costing over a hundred Billion.

The article said NOTHING about the ACA's effect on the deficit. What part of that are you too stupid to get?

There is cost of a program & there is revenue for that program.

The article talked only about the costs.

You keep talking there. The fact is ACA as it was implemented was costing over 100 billion a year because it needed to be paid for. Funny thing about insurance companies is they do not give insurance away for free. What the article talked about was what the government had to pay even after the fines levied against those who could or would not pay for crap insurance.

It does not matter if it costs a dollar or a trillion dollars it all goes toward the budget. When the budget is lower then what is actually spent that creates a deficit.

 

[Maxdeath]

You really have to wonder about the IQ of the left. They worry that ACA, which is nothing but poorly implemented Rommney care, will be taken away. But cry that the Republicans have no and do not want healthcare. To date they have been the only ones to put forward any healthcare plans that do not include trillions in added debt every year.

The ACA as written adds nothing to the debt. Trump is trying to make it run up the debt.

When will you quit lying?

As soon as you realize that it costs the federal government billions of dollars each year. When you realize that it is badly implemented Romneycare which is named after Mit Romney which was the Republican that first proposed it. Once you realize that it took the democrats to screw up Romneycare so badly.

Read this if you really don't think that it costs. Here's How Many Billions Obamacare Will Cost in 2016. Of course only someone badly educated would think that you can subsidize insurance from an insurance company would not want money for that subsidy.

What did it say about the revenues? Nothing

Of course costs go up, healthcare costs & premiums go up.

The real questions if Trump & the Republicans cut enough revenue to make it start to lose money.

They cut the funding from people not being insured. They are trying, if not already done, to cut the medical device tax.

Damn you really have a problem with English. I chose that particular article because it was done by a non bias point. Also because 2016 was prominently written about. The reason 2016 was important was that Trump was not even in office yet so all parts of the ACA was still in force. At that point it was costing over a hundred Billion.

The article said NOTHING about the ACA's effect on the deficit. What part of that are you too stupid to get?

There is cost of a program & there is revenue for that program.

The article talked only about the costs.

Here let me post another little item that you may find acceptable.
Conflating Costs of the ACA - FactCheck.org

If you can get through all the words you will notice that it brings up the revenue and cost that you seem unable to comprehend.

 

[Andylusion]

No matter how you look at Social Security, it sucks. You can be very happy living on Social Security (until we run out of money like Greece), but that still doesn't mean Social Security is a great retirement. It isn't. By every possible measure, every other retirement system is better than social security.

What retirement system would that be?
It's a hell of a lot better than nothing. And without Social Security...most folks would HAVE nothing

Every retirement. Unless you invest your money into something insane, like corn starch..... or something. But any retirement plan that Forest Gump could pick, will do better than social security.

Let's run some numbers. For the past decade, I averaged an income of just $20,000. Social Security takes 15% of my income.

If I continue and never get a raise, and I retire at age 67, I'll get just $1,000 a month. Poverty.

If I had put the exact same amount of money into a mutual fund, that buys government bonds.... that fund would get a 3% rate of return.... which is TERRIBLE.... and yet, I would end up with $1.5 Million dollars by the time I retired.

The worst possible investment.... $1.5 Million dollars. Or $1,000 a month Social Security. Do you want the calculations, and where I got all those numbers? I'll post them all here for you to see. I was planning to do it right here, but I have to go to work.

Hope you went for the 1.5 million

Not allowed. Government does not allow me to opt out of social security, like those in Texas were able to in the 1980s.

Like I said before, socialist cannot allow people the options to choose their system or another, or everyone would choose another system.

This is why every socialists system, now or later, ends up a tyranny like Venezuela.

This is why the Berlin wall wasn't to keep people out of their Utopia, but rather to keep people inside their gulag. Same with Cuba. You don't see people swimming to Cuba from Miami. But rather people are imprisoned for wanting out of their socialist Utopia.

So no, I can't go for the $1.5 Million if I wanted to. Neither can you. Nor can anyone else. We must live in poverty paying 15% of our income in taxes, so we can die in poverty on $1,000 a month.

I'm saving what I can in a 401K... but with how insane left-wingers are, it's just a matter of time before they try and confiscate private retirement plans, to pay for the failing public retirement plan.

If I can see it coming, I'll move to Canada.

 

[Andylusion]

No matter how you look at Social Security, it sucks. You can be very happy living on Social Security (until we run out of money like Greece), but that still doesn't mean Social Security is a great retirement. It isn't. By every possible measure, every other retirement system is better than social security.

What retirement system would that be?
It's a hell of a lot better than nothing. And without Social Security...most folks would HAVE nothing

Every retirement. Unless you invest your money into something insane, like corn starch..... or something. But any retirement plan that Forest Gump could pick, will do better than social security.

Let's run some numbers. For the past decade, I averaged an income of just $20,000. Social Security takes 15% of my income.

If I continue and never get a raise, and I retire at age 67, I'll get just $1,000 a month. Poverty.

If I had put the exact same amount of money into a mutual fund, that buys government bonds.... that fund would get a 3% rate of return.... which is TERRIBLE.... and yet, I would end up with $1.5 Million dollars by the time I retired.

The worst possible investment.... $1.5 Million dollars. Or $1,000 a month Social Security. Do you want the calculations, and where I got all those numbers? I'll post them all here for you to see. I was planning to do it right here, but I have to go to work.

I think I have gotten to the root of your problem. I live off of Social Security. I do NOT live off of the government. I paid for my SS out of every paycheck I ever made starting with when I started working at a grocery store for $.75 per hour in 1959. The "government" did not contribute a single dime.

If I retire with a 401K, I'll be living off my money. A 401K and Roth IRA (I have both), are in fact assets I have purchased with my money. It's my money, with my assets, that I paid for. When I withdraw money from my IRA and 401K, it is actually my own assets that I am selling off, and taking the money from.

That is not true of Social Security.

When Obama said that if the debt ceiling was not raised, that Social Security would be cut, that wasn't a joke or a lie. That was fact.

If you were living off your own money, why would government have to borrow money to pay your benefits?

Because when I withdraw my money from my 401K and IRA... no one has to borrow anything. It's my assets being sold.

This is because, it isn't your money. Social Security tax, is just like any other tax. That money collected from you, is not saved in a fund, nor is it used to purchase assets, nor is it invested in something that gains a return.

Your Social Security money, went to the government, just like your income tax, and your medicare tax, and the corporate tax, and any other taxes. There it was spent. It was spent on Sylondra, or cash for clunkers, or the military, or food stamps, or to fund the train unions during the stimulus.

And now your money is gone.

The money you are collecting from Social Security, is not the money you put in. That money is spent and long gone. The money you are collecting today, is merely taxes and borrowed cash. The next 2 generations of people, are paying the benefits for your generation.

Equally, unlike my 401K or Roth IRA, I have a legal right to the assets I purchased in my funds. You, have no rights to social security. If we as a country decide to cut your benefits, you have no grounds to sue. You have no more legal rights to our tax money, than a welfare queen has rights to welfare, or food stamps, or public housing.

In 1954, a man named Nestor sued the government for Social Security. The Supreme Court ruled there is no legal right to any citizen, for Social Security, whether you paid in or not.

Not only that, but 1937, the government was sued on the basis that Social Security is unconstitutional, and it is. There is no provision in the Constitution for the Federal government to run an insurance or pension scheme. It is not constitutional.

Nevertheless, the lawsuit failed because the government itself argued that Social Security was not a pension system or an insurance system. It was a tax and welfare system. Your Social Security tax, is just that... a tax, named "social security". That's it. We could name it anything else, and would still just be an income tax.

Equally, your Social Security checks, are nothing more than a welfare program. You are just a ward of the state, collecting welfare benefits that are named "social security". You have no more of a right to it, than a welfare queen has a right to food stamps.

So, the reality sir, is that no, you are not collecting the money you paid in. You are collecting the taxes of other people. It's that simple.

 

[Lesh]

Not allowed. Government does not allow me to opt out of social security, like those in Texas were able to in the 1980s.

Like I said before, socialist cannot allow people the options to choose their system or another, or everyone would choose another system.

This is why every socialists system, now or later, ends up a tyranny like Venezuela.

This is why the Berlin wall wasn't to keep people out of their Utopia, but rather to keep people inside their gulag. Same with Cuba. You don't see people swimming to Cuba from Miami. But rather people are imprisoned for wanting out of their socialist Utopia.

So no, I can't go for the $1.5 Million if I wanted to. Neither can you. Nor can anyone else. We must live in poverty paying 15% of our income in taxes, so we can die in poverty on $1,000 a month.

I'm saving what I can in a 401K... but with how insane left-wingers are, it's just a matter of time before they try and confiscate private retirement plans, to pay for the failing public retirement plan.

If I can see it coming, I'll move to Canada.

The goldfish are swimming again...and like goldfish, have no memories

A. We just had a Wall Street meltdown. Anyone retiring in that period had their retirement cut in HALF. It could have been worse. Every dollar removed until the market came back locked in that loss.

B. It's not like this wasn't tried before. Chile tried this and it was a friggin disaster. Maintenance fees ate up big chunks of the "savings" (love those bank huh) and people ended up pulling their money out for various reasons...and were left with nothing. 401Ks are a decent way to increase/supplement retirement...but without the SECURITY of Social Security...we're screwed.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Andy, I admit that I did not read past the paragraph where you claim that the government is borrowing money to pay for my SS. That is so incredibly false that I see no point in reading further. The government borrowed my SS money and replaced it with government bonds. They are now borrowing money to repay that to SS. I don't know whether you get your economic info from AM radio, or you just don't understand it. Either way, carry on with your complaints about the government. I think that I will prepare another pineapple margarita for my guests this afternoon.

 

[g5000]

These poor dumb rubes will never get it. They are willfully stupid. They DESERVE to be lied to.

The Republican party has no plan. Nada. NOTHING.

Just as they always have.

One day we will have single payer health care, and these credulous tards will have no clue it is their own fault.

I predict that Trump will sign single payer into law in his second term.

I've been saying for a long time now that if Trump is given a Democratic Congress, he will announce a plan for single payer, and all the Trumptards will be in favor of single payer exactly three milliseconds later.

 

[Andylusion]

Not allowed. Government does not allow me to opt out of social security, like those in Texas were able to in the 1980s.

Like I said before, socialist cannot allow people the options to choose their system or another, or everyone would choose another system.

This is why every socialists system, now or later, ends up a tyranny like Venezuela.

This is why the Berlin wall wasn't to keep people out of their Utopia, but rather to keep people inside their gulag. Same with Cuba. You don't see people swimming to Cuba from Miami. But rather people are imprisoned for wanting out of their socialist Utopia.

So no, I can't go for the $1.5 Million if I wanted to. Neither can you. Nor can anyone else. We must live in poverty paying 15% of our income in taxes, so we can die in poverty on $1,000 a month.

I'm saving what I can in a 401K... but with how insane left-wingers are, it's just a matter of time before they try and confiscate private retirement plans, to pay for the failing public retirement plan.

If I can see it coming, I'll move to Canada.

The goldfish are swimming again...and like goldfish, have no memories

A. We just had a Wall Street meltdown. Anyone retiring in that period had their retirement cut in HALF. It could have been worse. Every dollar removed until the market came back locked in that loss.

B. It's not like this wasn't tried before. Chile tried this and it was a friggin disaster. Maintenance fees ate up big chunks of the "savings" (love those bank huh) and people ended up pulling their money out for various reasons...and were left with nothing. 401Ks are a decent way to increase/supplement retirement...but without the SECURITY of Social Security...we're screwed.

That is actually not true.

First, my example from before was of Government Bonds. Bonds actually went up in value, during the crash. So my prior example is dead on accurate.

You don't have to invest in stocks if you don't want to. My prior example was of Government Bonds, not stocks. So even if you invest your money in bonds, you will still do better off than Social Security. Again, $1,000 a month, verses $1.5 Million. Which is better?

Second, even if you invest in stocks, and there is a crash, you will still do better off. I know this, because I was investing in the stock market from 2008 till now.

If the prices of a house goes down, and you buy the house at a really good price... how is this not good? You got a house at a lower price. Right?

When stocks go down in value, that's when you buy. More Millionaires are created during a down turn, than during a boom. When Apple computers stock price went down, I didn't run away... I started buying stock.

People don't go broke from a down turn. They make money during a down turn. You need to stop freaking out over the news media. The news media makes money on making people like you freak out because "The stock market crash!". I didn't even really crash. It was a massive dive, but it came back up. My stocks have doubled in value.

Even then.... still, which is better? If I had $1.5 Million in stock, and the stock market loses half it's value....

Ok now I have $750,000. Which is better.... $1,000 a month, or $750K? And the kicker is, if I just leave that $750,000 in there, by 2013, it had completely recovered. I'd be back up to $1.5 Million, plus whatever dividends and growth happened during that time.

No matter how you look at it, no matter what crash happens in the short term.... you will still be better off with a private retirement, than social security.

There is only one exception to this.... if you refuse to be and adult, and you choose to take your money out of retirement, and blow it all on gambling or drugs or whatever. If you do that, then you would be better off as a ward of the state.

That's great for children... but for the rest of us that are adults, we'd rather have our own retirement.

 

[The Irish Ram]

Trump is smarter than you are, Centrista. He will campaign with a healthcare plan that targets the insurance companies instead of us, and will propose that pre-existing conditions be covered in part by insurance companies and partly by the government, so no one is left out.
He'll win again because Democrats with continue to insist on the Non-affordable Care Act and insist we all pay up. And up and up....

 

[Indeependent]

Republican Health Plan...
Establish a career.
Buy Health Insurance.

 

[Andylusion]

Not allowed. Government does not allow me to opt out of social security, like those in Texas were able to in the 1980s.

Like I said before, socialist cannot allow people the options to choose their system or another, or everyone would choose another system.

This is why every socialists system, now or later, ends up a tyranny like Venezuela.

This is why the Berlin wall wasn't to keep people out of their Utopia, but rather to keep people inside their gulag. Same with Cuba. You don't see people swimming to Cuba from Miami. But rather people are imprisoned for wanting out of their socialist Utopia.

So no, I can't go for the $1.5 Million if I wanted to. Neither can you. Nor can anyone else. We must live in poverty paying 15% of our income in taxes, so we can die in poverty on $1,000 a month.

I'm saving what I can in a 401K... but with how insane left-wingers are, it's just a matter of time before they try and confiscate private retirement plans, to pay for the failing public retirement plan.

If I can see it coming, I'll move to Canada.

The goldfish are swimming again...and like goldfish, have no memories

A. We just had a Wall Street meltdown. Anyone retiring in that period had their retirement cut in HALF. It could have been worse. Every dollar removed until the market came back locked in that loss.

B. It's not like this wasn't tried before. Chile tried this and it was a friggin disaster. Maintenance fees ate up big chunks of the "savings" (love those bank huh) and people ended up pulling their money out for various reasons...and were left with nothing. 401Ks are a decent way to increase/supplement retirement...but without the SECURITY of Social Security...we're screwed.

By the way, as a side note, with social security you lose the money when you die.

Both my Roth IRA and my 401K have defined beneficiaries. If I have $1.5 Million, and I die, the money will go to my sister and her husband's family, which will get the money.

Where does your money go? To political supporters of those in power. You just lose the money. If you made just $20,000 a year over your life, you will have put in no less than $900,000 in taxes supposedly for Social Security. Who will get that money? The government.

If you have a spouse, they will get some of that in survivor benefits, but a lesser amount, and when they die, it's gone.

So once again, you are better off with a private retirement, by every possible measure. It's just the facts.

As for Chili... I'm always baffled when they look at a system that has nearly identical results to our Social Security, and then complain about it.

With Pensions Like This ($315 a Month), Chileans Wonder How They’ll Ever Retire

The payout for low-wage earners is $315 a month. That sounds terrible, except the minimum wage in Chili is $384 a month. The relative pay-out compared to the pay in, is about the same.

The low-income social security check is barely $800 a month. The minimum wage per month is $1,250.

There are some problems with the Chilean system. Namely that it isn't a free-market. There are 6 investment companies, that the entire population is trapped into using. When everyone in the entire country, has no freedom of choice, the result is people don't need to compete as much. If they don't have to compete, then they can charge fees.

The problem isn't "evil banks". The problem is locking people into the banks. If anyone could open a retirement fund, and charge lower fees, they would do so. This would force all the other retirement funds to reduce their fees as well.

But the reality is, that isn't really the problem. The fees are exceptionally small in the Chilean system. That's an excuse. The real problem is, people who worked for very little money, end up with very little return. It's that simple.

The article above, talks about a guy only collecting $150 a month from his retirement. But then you read, he wasn't working a full time job. Well yeah, if you work little, and put in little, you'll end up with little.

And that's the way it should be. Why should the rest of us be forced to pay taxes, to fund you who refused to work?

So I think the Chilean system is working, fairly close to as it should. People who don't work, shouldn't eat.

 

[Andylusion]

Republican Health Plan...
Establish a career.
Buy Health Insurance.

Yeah... earn what you want. Or stop crying.

I'm with you.

 

[Andylusion]

These poor dumb rubes will never get it. They are willfully stupid. They DESERVE to be lied to.

The Republican party has no plan. Nada. NOTHING.

Just as they always have.

One day we will have single payer health care, and these credulous tards will have no clue it is their own fault.

I predict that Trump will sign single payer into law in his second term.

I've been saying for a long time now that if Trump is given a Democratic Congress, he will announce a plan for single payer, and all the Trumptards will be in favor of single payer exactly three milliseconds later.

No. We wouldn't.

One of the reasons I did not vote for Mitt Romney was because of his Romney care program.

You are saying that, because you know that if Obama had pushed a free-market health care system, you'd be supporting it, and saying how evil Republicans were.

We're not like you. We're better than you.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Did you know that because of silly federal regulations, doctors cannot simply e-mail you directly? They are required to use a system where you sign up on a message website, create a username and password, and then your doctor posts messages to your account--instead of simply e-mailing you directly. Under Obama, Utah sought an exemption from this, noting that it would save some $2 million in administrative costs, but HHS said "nope."