Communist California to require Solar Panels on all new homes

[bripat9643]

The government paid $87 billion to the government? Remember the post where I asked you to take $20 from one pocket and put it in your other pocket?

The government paid $87 billion to the government?

You got it!!

The US Treasury part of government paid $87 billion to the Trust Fund part of government.
Keeping it all in the family.

Remember the post where I asked you to take $20 from one pocket and put it in your other pocket?

Remember the post where I paid interest to my family member?
Or isn't that allowed?

How much money would the government have saved if the Trust fund had a $1 trillion stack of $20s in a vault?

There's no interest, moron. How does a piece of paper in your pocket generate interest?

The government would have saved nothing, since the government prints federal reserve notes.

There's no interest

Except for the $87 billion in 2016...…

How does a piece of paper in your pocket generate interest?

Or $1 trillion in a vault?

The government would have saved nothing, since the government prints federal reserve notes.

If the government takes perfectly good payroll tax receipts and instead of investing them in T-Bills, buys $20s and puts the $20s in a vault, there is no opportunity cost there?

Both the T bills and the notes are worthless pieces of paper that the government prints. They are of no value to the government. They only have value to the public because they can be used to extract things of value from other members of the public.

Both the T bills and the notes are worthless pieces of paper that the government prints.

I have both T-Bills (<<< they don't actually print T-Bills, book entry only) and $20s and I can tell you, none of them are worthless.

They are of no value to the government.

Well, the extra money the payroll taxes bring in, over and above benefits paid out, ARE of value to the government because they reduce the number of T-Bills the Treasury has to sell to China.
That means less taxes have to be collected from me and you, to mail a check to furriners.
In 2016, $87 billion less was sent to furriners, thanks to those "worthless pieces of paper" the
Trust Fund bought from the Treasury.

I'm done discussing this with someone who is immune to logic.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

WTG Communists. Wiping out the Middle Class in California. It's so sad and ironic that the Leftists who supposedly despise the Rich, are only hurting the Non-Rich with this awful legislation. Middle Class folks will struggle bigtime to handle the costs of adding solar panels.

California is headed for disaster. Only the very rich and very poor will be welcome there. The Middle Class, which pays the bills, will no longer be welcome. They'll be forced to leave the state. California will eventually resemble Communist messes like Venezuela, Cuba, and so on. It's very sad.

liberalism is a failed ideology, never works, never will. What's amazing is that the liberal mind is unable to comprehend that simple truth.

This type of awful legislation only hurts the folks the Left claims they're fighting for. The very rich can easily afford the added costs of solar panels. It's the Middle Class that won't be able to afford it. The Communists are killing the California Golden Goose.

In California the medium price of a new home is about a half million in most cities. The cost of a solar system as required by the legislation will be about $10,000 to $12,000 but will result in utility bill savings. Anybody that can afford a new half million home can certain afford $10,000 up front for solar.

I don't see that the state forcing new construction to include solar is going to be a huge burden on new home buyers.

So government force is okay as long as you determine that it's not much of a burden?

Useful Idiots are so lost. If he or she wants solar panels, so be it. But don't force them on all Citizens.

They keep saying if you don't like California's laws, build your house somewhere else. How about if I tell them the same thing about states with liberal gun control laws? I bet they wouldn't suggest the anti-gunners move somewhere else.

 

[bripat9643]

liberalism is a failed ideology, never works, never will. What's amazing is that the liberal mind is unable to comprehend that simple truth.

This type of awful legislation only hurts the folks the Left claims they're fighting for. The very rich can easily afford the added costs of solar panels. It's the Middle Class that won't be able to afford it. The Communists are killing the California Golden Goose.

In California the medium price of a new home is about a half million in most cities. The cost of a solar system as required by the legislation will be about $10,000 to $12,000 but will result in utility bill savings. Anybody that can afford a new half million home can certain afford $10,000 up front for solar.

I don't see that the state forcing new construction to include solar is going to be a huge burden on new home buyers.

So government force is okay as long as you determine that it's not much of a burden?

Useful Idiots are so lost. If he or she wants solar panels, so be it. But don't force them on all Citizens.

They keep saying if you don't like California's laws, build your house somewhere else. How about if I tell them the same thing about states with liberal gun control laws? I bet they wouldn't suggest the anti-gunners move somewhere else.

Or marriage laws. I don't recall them saying, if queers don't like our marriage laws, they can just move somewhere else.

 

[Andylusion]

I hate to break it to you, but that's alway been my view of SS. But I'm happy to hear how accurate your crystal ball is when you say all those people would be in poverty today without SS. That's because my parents are both on SS, and THEY WOULD be in poverty today if that was all they had. However my father planned well ahead of time for these years.

Oh, I don't question this has always been your belief, as unpopular as it is. What I want you to do is keep preaching about it and be sure to identify yourself as a conservative. Thanks!

Remember what I said about the two words "government" and "force" when combined. There is a reason we never had the option of paying into SS instead of it being mandated.

Oh know, the government is forcing people to save for retirement, the horror. Good, it's helped keep people out of poverty.

Poverty is an arbitrary word and if your goal is to stay above that line (just above it), enjoy. Most of us look forward to more.

No, we already established it;s the poverty limit, that's what we are going by.

The 22 million who would be in poverty might not be if they had saved and not depended on it.

All 22 million? Most?

In that sense, it is simply shifting money and did not do anything independent of what a private program would do.

But we already know the poverty rate dropped among the elderly with the introduction of social security. You seem to want to ignore this point.

With the exception of the really poor...but even then I am not so sure.

A good friend is living in India because her S.S. can't even pay for an apartment in the U.S.

Social Security was never meant to be lived on solely, you;'re still expected to save, I'm sue you know this and not sure what your friends lack of planning has to do with this.

Social Security was never meant to be lived on solely, you;'re still expected to save,

Saving is a lot harder when the government takes 12.4% of your lifetime earnings...…..

Social Security IS savings that you can count on come retirement and it makes it VERY easy for people to put into these savings instead of spending it on something more immediate.

Are you aware that you do not even have a legal right to Social Security? The Supreme court of this country, directly ruled on this, and said that Social Security has the legal standing of welfare. Meaning, the government can deny you social security at any moment that it deems you shouldn't get it.

If I put money into my Mutual fund, I have legal rights to the assets purchased on my behalf. If the mutual fund tries to deny my legal rights to the investments I made, I can take them to court, and sue the crap out of them.

Same with an insurance policy. If my insurance company denies my claims, I can take them to court and legally force them to compensate me.

If the Federal Government decides that it can't pay you.... there is nothing you can do about it, no matter how much money you paid in taxes. The people of Greece found that out the hard way.

And here's the other side.....

If I put millions into investments, when I die, I can pass that money onto whomever I choose. If you die, the money you put in is gone.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

A fiction that earned $87 billion in 2016.

Really? Who paid the $87 billion?

The same entity that pays interest on all outstanding US Treasury securities, the US Treasury.

The government paid $87 billion to the government? Remember the post where I asked you to take $20 from one pocket and put it in your other pocket?

The government paid $87 billion to the government?

You got it!!

The US Treasury part of government paid $87 billion to the Trust Fund part of government.
Keeping it all in the family.

Remember the post where I asked you to take $20 from one pocket and put it in your other pocket?

Remember the post where I paid interest to my family member?
Or isn't that allowed?

How much money would the government have saved if the Trust fund had a $1 trillion stack of $20s in a vault?

Unless you share all your accounts with your relative, such as your wife, your analogy is senseless. BRIPAT9643's analogy is legitimate.

Unless you share all your accounts with your relative

I don't have to share any of my accounts with my relative.
I'm borrowing their excess $20 and paying them interest.
Reducing the amount I need to borrow from and the interest I need to pay to the public (non-family).

BRIPAT9643's analogy is legitimate

Which one do you feel is legitimate?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The government paid $87 billion to the government?

You got it!!

The US Treasury part of government paid $87 billion to the Trust Fund part of government.
Keeping it all in the family.

Remember the post where I asked you to take $20 from one pocket and put it in your other pocket?

Remember the post where I paid interest to my family member?
Or isn't that allowed?

How much money would the government have saved if the Trust fund had a $1 trillion stack of $20s in a vault?

There's no interest, moron. How does a piece of paper in your pocket generate interest?

The government would have saved nothing, since the government prints federal reserve notes.

There's no interest

Except for the $87 billion in 2016...…

How does a piece of paper in your pocket generate interest?

Or $1 trillion in a vault?

The government would have saved nothing, since the government prints federal reserve notes.

If the government takes perfectly good payroll tax receipts and instead of investing them in T-Bills, buys $20s and puts the $20s in a vault, there is no opportunity cost there?

Both the T bills and the notes are worthless pieces of paper that the government prints. They are of no value to the government. They only have value to the public because they can be used to extract things of value from other members of the public.

Both the T bills and the notes are worthless pieces of paper that the government prints.

I have both T-Bills (<<< they don't actually print T-Bills, book entry only) and $20s and I can tell you, none of them are worthless.

They are of no value to the government.

Well, the extra money the payroll taxes bring in, over and above benefits paid out, ARE of value to the government because they reduce the number of T-Bills the Treasury has to sell to China.
That means less taxes have to be collected from me and you, to mail a check to furriners.
In 2016, $87 billion less was sent to furriners, thanks to those "worthless pieces of paper" the
Trust Fund bought from the Treasury.

I'm done discussing this with someone who is immune to logic.

I already told you, you're a good guy, even if you don't understand accounting.

 

[OnePercenter]

They both get paid money because of the effort and sweat of others.

No. One gets paid by doing a job. The others get paid by risking their own money to create a profit. Their paycheck is that profit, and they decide on what to do with it.

So your answer to employees making a living wage is they should open their own business?

That's one way. The other is to join our military and earn college benefits. Another is to work for a few years and then attend college. Another is to take up a trade and pay for that training yourself. Another is to gain employment where a company will pay for an advanced education. There are all kinds of ways.

I do pay my employees at least twice as much as my competitors AND I don't rob them by making them pay for part of their benefits package.

How can I do this?

1) I own my suppliers and pay substantially less than they do for the same product.
2) I don't have investors.
3) Business make much more money than they tell you.

Look.......not to be insulting, but judging from your posts, you never even so much as ran a hotdog stand. I know wealthy people. I have wealthy people and business owners in my family. You don't talk like any one of them. You don't even know the basics of business. If you did, you would understand foreign competition. You would understand domestic competition. You would understand that many business owners are barely squeaking by and only living on the pittance that's left after they meet payroll. You would understand that most businesses fail within five years.

You can't refute anything I write so you attack the poster?

 

[WEATHER53]

When did the State get it’s name put on the deed?

 

[Flopper]

You can't pay interest to yourself.

Why not?

They pay nothing.

In 2016, OASI was paid $87 billion.

Write yourself an interest bearing note. Set the interest rate at 10000000000000000000000%. Wait 10 years. Now, how much money do you have?

I need $20. My kid has $20.
I can borrow from my bank and pay them 5% or I can borrow from my kid and pay them 5%.
Their $20 was just sitting there, earning no interest.
Next year, how much does my kid have?

You can't borrow from yourself. That's what the bonds in the so-called "Trust Fund" are: the government borrowing from itself. If you take $20 out of one pocket, and put it in another pocket, next year, how much mone do you have? Even if you pay yourself 10000000000000000000000% interest, you've still got only $20.

You simply can't seem to grasp the fact that the S.S. Trust fund and General Fund are totally separate entries. The General Fund contains tax payer dollars. The S.S Trust Fund contains beneficiary dollars. The two can not be commingled. The only transactions allow by law between the funds are purchases and sale of treasury bills and interest payment. The law specifies that S.S Trust Fund balances will be invested in treasures. The S.S. Trust Fund can redeem treasuries only to pay benefits. The treasury bills are recorded as assets by the S.S. Trust as they are loans and Federal goverment records them as liabilities because they are debts.

Looking at the two funds from an ownership standpoint. The S.S. Trust Fund would be owned by the beneficiaries and General Fund would be owned by the taxpayers.

You are the one who doesn't seem to grasp anything. What you are saying..... IS NOT TRUE.

The money is collected by the IRS, and is spent like any other tax money.

I'm sorry. Until you understand that you have been lied to, you can't really continue this discussion with any credibility. You are have been lied to.

This has been documented many places.
https://www.amazon.com/High-Cost-Go...ment/dp/1503603547/&tag=ff0d01-20?tag=usmb-20

Read the book.

Contributions to Social Security are collected by the IRS. Truth ends at this point and fantasy begins in your post. The money collected by the IRS is credited to the Social Security Trust Fund account daily. Interest on treasuries owned by the fund are also credited daily. Benefits are paid out of contributions. Since all assets in the fund are invested in treasuries to maximize interest, any benefits that cannot be pay out contributions and interest will automatically trigger the sale of treasures needed to meet benefit payments. Currently contributions and interest exceed benefit payments by about 4.5%. This amount is invested in treasuries. The remainder is paid in benefits. So there is a grain of truth in what you say. Currently 4.5% of contributions are used to purchase treasuries and the remainder pays benefits. The Treasury uses the proceeds from the sale of these treasuries to run the government.

The following is a link that shows the balance by year in the trust fund along with receipts (contributions and interest), and expenditures (benefit payments and overhead).
Trust Fund Data

 

[OnePercenter]

When did the State get it’s name put on the deed?

If you're referring to solar, the regulations put in place are for contractors/land developers.

 

[Flopper]

The same entity that pays interest on all outstanding US Treasury securities, the US Treasury.

The government paid $87 billion to the government? Remember the post where I asked you to take $20 from one pocket and put it in your other pocket?

The government paid $87 billion to the government?

You got it!!

The US Treasury part of government paid $87 billion to the Trust Fund part of government.
Keeping it all in the family.

Remember the post where I asked you to take $20 from one pocket and put it in your other pocket?

Remember the post where I paid interest to my family member?
Or isn't that allowed?

How much money would the government have saved if the Trust fund had a $1 trillion stack of $20s in a vault?

There's no interest, moron. How does a piece of paper in your pocket generate interest?

The government would have saved nothing, since the government prints federal reserve notes.

There's no interest

Except for the $87 billion in 2016...…

How does a piece of paper in your pocket generate interest?

Or $1 trillion in a vault?

The government would have saved nothing, since the government prints federal reserve notes.

If the government takes perfectly good payroll tax receipts and instead of investing them in T-Bills, buys $20s and puts the $20s in a vault, there is no opportunity cost there?

Both the T bills and the notes are worthless pieces of paper that the government prints. They are of no value to the government. They only have value to the public because they can be used to extract things of value from other members of the public.

If T-Bills are worthless pieces of paper please don't tell my bank, insurance company, retirement plan, and over a 100,000 businesses who have in excess of 20 trillion dollars invested in them.

 

[bripat9643]

The government paid $87 billion to the government? Remember the post where I asked you to take $20 from one pocket and put it in your other pocket?

The government paid $87 billion to the government?

You got it!!

The US Treasury part of government paid $87 billion to the Trust Fund part of government.
Keeping it all in the family.

Remember the post where I asked you to take $20 from one pocket and put it in your other pocket?

Remember the post where I paid interest to my family member?
Or isn't that allowed?

How much money would the government have saved if the Trust fund had a $1 trillion stack of $20s in a vault?

There's no interest, moron. How does a piece of paper in your pocket generate interest?

The government would have saved nothing, since the government prints federal reserve notes.

There's no interest

Except for the $87 billion in 2016...…

How does a piece of paper in your pocket generate interest?

Or $1 trillion in a vault?

The government would have saved nothing, since the government prints federal reserve notes.

If the government takes perfectly good payroll tax receipts and instead of investing them in T-Bills, buys $20s and puts the $20s in a vault, there is no opportunity cost there?

Both the T bills and the notes are worthless pieces of paper that the government prints. They are of no value to the government. They only have value to the public because they can be used to extract things of value from other members of the public.

If T-Bills are worthless pieces of paper please don't tell my bank, insurance company, retirement plan, and over a 100,000 businesses who have in excess of 20 trillion dollars invested in them.

They are worth something to your bank. They are worth nothing to the government. To the government they are an obligation. What you are saying is that the so-called Trust Fund (part of the government) is full of government obligations, and somehow that reduces the total obligations of the government.

 

[james bond]

Cali has an energy problem . Also has a lot of sunlight !

Seems like a smart idea .

This law will be an energy problem. It's PC overriding energy regulation. This kind of thing happened in 2000 and 2001 and people went away from PG&E and bought their own energy. We are doing that now with energy consolidators taking away business from PG&E. It led to an energy shortage and market manipulation. This from the CPUC's head. You want PG&E to keep an energy reserve for lean times. The market won't do that. It will sell to the highest bidder.

 

[Flopper]

Oh, I don't question this has always been your belief, as unpopular as it is. What I want you to do is keep preaching about it and be sure to identify yourself as a conservative. Thanks!

Oh know, the government is forcing people to save for retirement, the horror. Good, it's helped keep people out of poverty.

Poverty is an arbitrary word and if your goal is to stay above that line (just above it), enjoy. Most of us look forward to more.

No, we already established it;s the poverty limit, that's what we are going by.

The 22 million who would be in poverty might not be if they had saved and not depended on it.

All 22 million? Most?

In that sense, it is simply shifting money and did not do anything independent of what a private program would do.

But we already know the poverty rate dropped among the elderly with the introduction of social security. You seem to want to ignore this point.

With the exception of the really poor...but even then I am not so sure.

A good friend is living in India because her S.S. can't even pay for an apartment in the U.S.

Social Security was never meant to be lived on solely, you;'re still expected to save, I'm sue you know this and not sure what your friends lack of planning has to do with this.

Social Security was never meant to be lived on solely, you;'re still expected to save,

Saving is a lot harder when the government takes 12.4% of your lifetime earnings...…..

Social Security IS savings that you can count on come retirement and it makes it VERY easy for people to put into these savings instead of spending it on something more immediate.

Are you aware that you do not even have a legal right to Social Security? The Supreme court of this country, directly ruled on this, and said that Social Security has the legal standing of welfare. Meaning, the government can deny you social security at any moment that it deems you shouldn't get it.

If I put money into my Mutual fund, I have legal rights to the assets purchased on my behalf. If the mutual fund tries to deny my legal rights to the investments I made, I can take them to court, and sue the crap out of them.

Same with an insurance policy. If my insurance company denies my claims, I can take them to court and legally force them to compensate me.

If the Federal Government decides that it can't pay you.... there is nothing you can do about it, no matter how much money you paid in taxes. The people of Greece found that out the hard way.

And here's the other side.....

If I put millions into investments, when I die, I can pass that money onto whomever I choose. If you die, the money you put in is gone.

Social security guarantees you that you will be able to survive in retirement provide you have worked most of your life. Private plans make it possible that you will not just survive but live well, if you do the right thing at the right time. However, most people don't do the right thing at the right time. Typically in any year only half of workers participate in a retirement plan at work.

Without Social Security the welfare system would have to increased significantly to provide for those who did not invest in private plans.

 

[bripat9643]

Poverty is an arbitrary word and if your goal is to stay above that line (just above it), enjoy. Most of us look forward to more.

No, we already established it;s the poverty limit, that's what we are going by.

The 22 million who would be in poverty might not be if they had saved and not depended on it.

All 22 million? Most?

In that sense, it is simply shifting money and did not do anything independent of what a private program would do.

But we already know the poverty rate dropped among the elderly with the introduction of social security. You seem to want to ignore this point.

With the exception of the really poor...but even then I am not so sure.

A good friend is living in India because her S.S. can't even pay for an apartment in the U.S.

Social Security was never meant to be lived on solely, you;'re still expected to save, I'm sue you know this and not sure what your friends lack of planning has to do with this.

Social Security was never meant to be lived on solely, you;'re still expected to save,

Saving is a lot harder when the government takes 12.4% of your lifetime earnings...…..

Social Security IS savings that you can count on come retirement and it makes it VERY easy for people to put into these savings instead of spending it on something more immediate.

Are you aware that you do not even have a legal right to Social Security? The Supreme court of this country, directly ruled on this, and said that Social Security has the legal standing of welfare. Meaning, the government can deny you social security at any moment that it deems you shouldn't get it.

If I put money into my Mutual fund, I have legal rights to the assets purchased on my behalf. If the mutual fund tries to deny my legal rights to the investments I made, I can take them to court, and sue the crap out of them.

Same with an insurance policy. If my insurance company denies my claims, I can take them to court and legally force them to compensate me.

If the Federal Government decides that it can't pay you.... there is nothing you can do about it, no matter how much money you paid in taxes. The people of Greece found that out the hard way.

And here's the other side.....

If I put millions into investments, when I die, I can pass that money onto whomever I choose. If you die, the money you put in is gone.

Social security guarantees you that you will be able to survive in retirement provide you have worked most of your life. Private plans make it possible that you will not just survive but live well, if you do the right thing at the right time. However, most people don't do the right thing at the right time. Typically in any year only half of workers participate in a retirement plan at work.

Without Social Security the welfare system would have to increased significantly to provide for those who did not invest in private plans.

That's a claim with no visible means of support.

Private plans don't require you to do the right thing at the right time. You can put all your money into treasury bills if you want. So long as you start contributing the day you start working and continue to contribute until you retire, you will end up with at least a 7 figure retirement nest egg.

 

[HappyJoy]

No, we already established it;s the poverty limit, that's what we are going by.

All 22 million? Most?

But we already know the poverty rate dropped among the elderly with the introduction of social security. You seem to want to ignore this point.

Social Security was never meant to be lived on solely, you;'re still expected to save, I'm sue you know this and not sure what your friends lack of planning has to do with this.

Social Security was never meant to be lived on solely, you;'re still expected to save,

Saving is a lot harder when the government takes 12.4% of your lifetime earnings...…..

Social Security IS savings that you can count on come retirement and it makes it VERY easy for people to put into these savings instead of spending it on something more immediate.

Are you aware that you do not even have a legal right to Social Security? The Supreme court of this country, directly ruled on this, and said that Social Security has the legal standing of welfare. Meaning, the government can deny you social security at any moment that it deems you shouldn't get it.

If I put money into my Mutual fund, I have legal rights to the assets purchased on my behalf. If the mutual fund tries to deny my legal rights to the investments I made, I can take them to court, and sue the crap out of them.

Same with an insurance policy. If my insurance company denies my claims, I can take them to court and legally force them to compensate me.

If the Federal Government decides that it can't pay you.... there is nothing you can do about it, no matter how much money you paid in taxes. The people of Greece found that out the hard way.

And here's the other side.....

If I put millions into investments, when I die, I can pass that money onto whomever I choose. If you die, the money you put in is gone.

Social security guarantees you that you will be able to survive in retirement provide you have worked most of your life. Private plans make it possible that you will not just survive but live well, if you do the right thing at the right time. However, most people don't do the right thing at the right time. Typically in any year only half of workers participate in a retirement plan at work.

Without Social Security the welfare system would have to increased significantly to provide for those who did not invest in private plans.

That's a claim with no visible means of support.

Private plans don't require you to do the right thing at the right time. You can put all your money into treasury bills if you want. So long as you start contributing the day you start working and continue to contribute until you retire, you will end up with at least a 7 figure retirement nest egg.

Not so sure you understood the post.

 

[Flopper]

The government paid $87 billion to the government?

You got it!!

The US Treasury part of government paid $87 billion to the Trust Fund part of government.
Keeping it all in the family.

Remember the post where I asked you to take $20 from one pocket and put it in your other pocket?

Remember the post where I paid interest to my family member?
Or isn't that allowed?

How much money would the government have saved if the Trust fund had a $1 trillion stack of $20s in a vault?

There's no interest, moron. How does a piece of paper in your pocket generate interest?

The government would have saved nothing, since the government prints federal reserve notes.

There's no interest

Except for the $87 billion in 2016...…

How does a piece of paper in your pocket generate interest?

Or $1 trillion in a vault?

The government would have saved nothing, since the government prints federal reserve notes.

If the government takes perfectly good payroll tax receipts and instead of investing them in T-Bills, buys $20s and puts the $20s in a vault, there is no opportunity cost there?

Both the T bills and the notes are worthless pieces of paper that the government prints. They are of no value to the government. They only have value to the public because they can be used to extract things of value from other members of the public.

If T-Bills are worthless pieces of paper please don't tell my bank, insurance company, retirement plan, and over a 100,000 businesses who have in excess of 20 trillion dollars invested in them.

They are worth something to your bank. They are worth nothing to the government. To the government they are an obligation. What you are saying is that the so-called Trust Fund (part of the government) is full of government obligations, and somehow that reduces the total obligations of the government.

The way transactions between the general fund and Social Security Trust are recorded tells us that the Social Security Trust is not a government asset and thus a separate entity form the goverment. Special issue treasury bills are recorded as a liability of the US government and are part of the national debt. The Special Issue treasury bills are not recorded as a government asset. Interest paid to the trust fund is recorded as a government expense. This means the trust fund has to be a separate entity from US government otherwise the movement of funds would have to be handled as a fund transfers because you can't loan money to yourself or pay yourself interest. People go to jail for doing stuff like that.

Balance Sheets

 

[Markle]

Unless you share all your accounts with your relative

I don't have to share any of my accounts with my relative.
I'm borrowing their excess $20 and paying them interest.
Reducing the amount I need to borrow from and the interest I need to pay to the public (non-family).

If you don't share accounts, it is not the same thing.

 

[Markle]

Strayed way off the initial thread. Time to shut this waste down.

 

[Flopper]

No, we already established it;s the poverty limit, that's what we are going by.

All 22 million? Most?

But we already know the poverty rate dropped among the elderly with the introduction of social security. You seem to want to ignore this point.

Social Security was never meant to be lived on solely, you;'re still expected to save, I'm sue you know this and not sure what your friends lack of planning has to do with this.

Social Security was never meant to be lived on solely, you;'re still expected to save,

Saving is a lot harder when the government takes 12.4% of your lifetime earnings...…..

Social Security IS savings that you can count on come retirement and it makes it VERY easy for people to put into these savings instead of spending it on something more immediate.

Are you aware that you do not even have a legal right to Social Security? The Supreme court of this country, directly ruled on this, and said that Social Security has the legal standing of welfare. Meaning, the government can deny you social security at any moment that it deems you shouldn't get it.

If I put money into my Mutual fund, I have legal rights to the assets purchased on my behalf. If the mutual fund tries to deny my legal rights to the investments I made, I can take them to court, and sue the crap out of them.

Same with an insurance policy. If my insurance company denies my claims, I can take them to court and legally force them to compensate me.

If the Federal Government decides that it can't pay you.... there is nothing you can do about it, no matter how much money you paid in taxes. The people of Greece found that out the hard way.

And here's the other side.....

If I put millions into investments, when I die, I can pass that money onto whomever I choose. If you die, the money you put in is gone.

Social security guarantees you that you will be able to survive in retirement provide you have worked most of your life. Private plans make it possible that you will not just survive but live well, if you do the right thing at the right time. However, most people don't do the right thing at the right time. Typically in any year only half of workers participate in a retirement plan at work.

Without Social Security the welfare system would have to increased significantly to provide for those who did not invest in private plans.

That's a claim with no visible means of support.

Private plans don't require you to do the right thing at the right time. You can put all your money into treasury bills if you want. So long as you start contributing the day you start working and continue to contribute until you retire, you will end up with at least a 7 figure retirement nest egg.

I didn't say that. Read what I said, "Private plans make it possible that you will not just survive but live well, if you do the right thing at the right time." You doing the right thing at the right time means buying into the right plan, making contributions at the right time and reinvesting funds when you change jobs.