WOULD YOU RATHER HAVE A FUTURE PERSONAL INVESTMENT ACCOUNT,instead of government ...

[UpAndAbout]

I,for one,am responsible for myself only.i will not pay for others,nor expect that for me. Its the power of choice,not imposed imperial force. Thats what a democratic republic is all about.

I'm reading, I'm reading. yes I agree with you. There at least should be a choice. I mean aren't the libs "pro-choice?"

 

[UpAndAbout]

Obviously no ones reading this.
has nothing to do with freakin wallstreet.
its a personal future savings account.

How much money did your investments lose with the Bush recession? I lost a bundle.
And that's money I will never get back.

How much did your SS account lose with the Bush recession? Mine didn't lse even one penny.

Have you looked at the amount of interest your savings I paying right now? Hint: your money will make almost as much if you stuff it under your mattress.

fact is, you cannot understand your own silly ass rants because you don't live in the real world.

I lost my bundle right after 9/11. Don't think we haven't thought about stuffing our money under our mattress.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Evidence is there,josefk.
even ask meister
as i emailed him one of the recordings
would you like it emailed to you josefk?
i also have a verified article on that site verifying obamas membership the CHICAGO NEW PARTY.
Want to look stupid?
call your bluff,josefk.
try me.

I'M calling YOUR bluff. I keep asking, yet you are unable or unwilling to deliver. Ball's in your court, Vampy.

Don't hold your breath. He asked me for my email so he could send me his 143 page PDF but then weaseled out when I took him up on it. I'm still waiting for him it send it.

Right about now, he will start calling you some very foul names he heard out on the playground and, after saying you don't "debate" him, he will disappear long enough for this to scroll off.

 

[Foxfyre]

Obviously no ones reading this.
has nothing to do with freakin wallstreet.
its a personal future savings account.

How much money did your investments lose with the Bush recession? I lost a bundle.
And that's money I will never get back.

How much did your SS account lose with the Bush recession? Mine didn't lse even one penny.

Have you looked at the amount of interest your savings I paying right now? Hint: your money will make almost as much if you stuff it under your mattress.

fact is, you cannot understand your own silly ass rants because you don't live in the real world.

I lost my bundle right after 9/11. Don't think we haven't thought about stuffing our money under our mattress.

We took a hit of more than 50% of our more aggressive investment. And 15 to 25% of our more conservative investments.

Even with the market being as flat as it often is these days, with careful and smart investments, we have recouped not all, but a significant portion of those losses.

But even with that horrendous hit, our private investments have still done fourfold better than anything we get from Social Security.

 

[Listening]

Considering the fact that government Social security results in me having more money to retire with I'd go with SS.
http://tcf.org/media-center/pdfs/pr46/12badideas.pdf
^Privatized SS in Chile and UK resulted in administration cost increasing by 13-20 times.

You’re in good hands with Social Security: But Privatization Proposals Would Unravel Its Ability to Insure Against Loss of Income, Disability, and Death | Economic Policy Institute
^SS keeps 39% of the elderly out of poverty
^SS returns are 26% higher than private alternatives

More lies...you can't even summarize these links without crapping out falsehoods.

You're a pro.

You keep your SS. I'll take my chances.

 

[Listening]

Monthly Statistical Snapshot, March 2012

Average SS check is 1230 for retired workers.

That is the average. Assuming the mean is close by, that means 50% of people get less...based on what ?

Does anyone really think that is enough. I am way past that in my personal savings (assuming a modest return).

I'd be a lot further if I had the 12.5% every year I dumped in this program.

 

[Ed Spacer]

My point exactly.

 

[Ed Spacer]

I posted links for other items the distractors are talking about.
in any event,let me clarify with the program.
3% APY account,backed by YOUR MONEY.
YOU CHOOSE DEPOSIT AMOUNT.
FREQUENCY.
YOU HAVE THE POWER TO CHANGE AT ANY TIME.
COMPLETELY ELECTIVE.
IN FIVE YEARS,YOU CAN WITHDRAW.
AT 65,get a monthly draw,and still make unlimited money.
a statement,quarterly...

 

[NYcarbineer]

Getting rid of SS and thinking that everyone will be responsible enough to save on their own is like getting rid of all traffic laws and thinking everyone will be responsible enough to drive carefully voluntarily.

 

[Listening]

Getting rid of SS and thinking that everyone will be responsible enough to save on their own is like getting rid of all traffic laws and thinking everyone will be responsible enough to drive carefully voluntarily.

I would amend the Constitution to allow a smaller form of S.S.....

People could do what they want after that. But the idea of a 12.5% burden is simply to stupid to comprehend.

 

[Foxfyre]

Getting rid of SS and thinking that everyone will be responsible enough to save on their own is like getting rid of all traffic laws and thinking everyone will be responsible enough to drive carefully voluntarily.

I would amend the Constitution to allow a smaller form of S.S.....

People could do what they want after that. But the idea of a 12.5% burden is simply to stupid to comprehend.

I have no problem with a system in which people can choose for the government to hold their money for them - OR - can choose to forego a government program and manage their own retirement. A lot of us did that for years with Savings Bonds. It helped the government out and encouraged people to save. The difference between government Savings Bonds and Social Security, though, is that the bonds are purely voluntary and, once you buy one, it is your property to do with whatever and whenever you wish. Not so with Social Security.

But if we are going to continue to have a Social Security program, we need a Constitutional Amendment ensuring that the money the people invest in it is their money and it cannot be confiscated by the government, and further the government may use it for responsible investments--loan it out to be repaid with interest for instance--but cannot use it for day to day government operations.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

Getting rid of SS and thinking that everyone will be responsible enough to save on their own is like getting rid of all traffic laws and thinking everyone will be responsible enough to drive carefully voluntarily.

I'm fairly sure that most folks that care about this issue at all would do reasonably well with their own retirement funds. The problem is literally the rest of the population that would lose the money in a heartbeat and end up destitute.

 

[Foxfyre]

Getting rid of SS and thinking that everyone will be responsible enough to save on their own is like getting rid of all traffic laws and thinking everyone will be responsible enough to drive carefully voluntarily.

I'm fairly sure that most folks that care about this issue at all would do reasonably well with their own retirement funds. The problem is literally the rest of the population that would lose the money in a heartbeat and end up destitute.

Which they do anyway which happens with or without a social security program. People without jobs aren't paying into the system. People on perpetual welfare aren't building a social security account.

But basically isn't that the core of the difference between modern day conservatives and modern day liberals? Conservatives trust in the human spirit to figure out how to live their lives in a system that values liberty and freedom to choose one's own destiny.

Liberals don't trust people to be smart enough or capable of managing their lives, and want government to do that for them.

 

[Ed Spacer]

But that would be an incentive to charge of ones own future.the sooner people realize it the better.

 

[Ed Spacer]

My plan takes itto the height if complete citizen control.

 

[daws101]

Evidence is there,josefk.
even ask meister
as i emailed him one of the recordings
would you like it emailed to you josefk?
i also have a verified article on that site verifying obamas membership the CHICAGO NEW PARTY.
Want to look stupid?
call your bluff,josefk.
try me.

I'M calling YOUR bluff. I keep asking, yet you are unable or unwilling to deliver. Ball's in your court, Vampy.

here's the site: Obama - New World Order - Bilderberg Group - Council on Foreign Relations - Trilateral Commission none of vamps shit is there.

 

[BillyV]

Billy,that leads to part 2.
eliminating the wilsonian federal income tax slavery
taxpayers will evolve to citizen government investors.
where with a partnership between citizens and leaders,following the citizens majority vote,
Each level of government jurisdiction is run like a business.
profitable and controlled by the citizen investors.

But you don't refute the assumption, you just dismiss it

I dont need to refute it; you need to support it.

You guys have fun in your fantasy land.

Run along, son, and be sure to tuck that tail real tight.

Ah, yes, the personal attack; last refuge of the losing argument. My work is done here.

 

[Ed Spacer]

Thats not where i put it...
what is public is on commieblasters.
other stuff pending.

 

[Ed Spacer]

Im going to be an architect in restoring the democratic republic and save it from the shadow of its now socialist influence. ending globalization,and restoring its power as leader of the free world

 

[Ed Spacer]

You libs just dont know what name its under or anything,but,the article about obamas connection with the new chicago party is MINE.