Retirement Crisis: Impoverished Seniors on the Horizon

It was planned and the republican party wanted it this way ONLY worse

Solution is Republican private accounts so an average American can retire rich (after saved 15% of life time income) with $1.4 million rather than with liberal dog food money.

When liberals bigots talk about their compassion they must think stealing millions from citizens is an example!!
 
your party fought to privatize SS then crashed the world markets.

That right there is FACT
 
your party fought to privatize SS then crashed the world markets.

That right there is FACT

too stupid and liberal!! Our great newspapers and economists disagree with you!!


our great newspapers and economists on left and right agree it was liberal government that caused the current depression.

"First consider the once controversial view that the crisis was largely caused by the Fed's holding interest rates too low for too long after the 2001 recession. This view is now so widely held that the editorial pages of both the NYTimes and the Wall Street Journal agree on its validity!"...John B. Taylor


" The Federal reserve having done so much to create the problems in which the economy is now mired, having mistakenly thought that even after the housing bubble burst the problems were contained, and having underestimated the severity of the crisis, now wants to make a contribution to preventing the economy from sinking into a Japanese Style malaise....... - "Joseph Stiglitz"( uber left economist)

You may not have heard of the Federal Reserve system but it exists to inflate and deflate the currency supply through the housing market. They inflated too much for too long. This caused what they call a housing bubble. While the bubble was inflating all the big banks and many insurance companies bought bubble mortgages thinking they were sound rather than merely purchased or made possible by newly printed funny money. When the bubble deflated they all lost money on the mortgages. It would be analogous to the government making cars and giving them to GM so everyone could have a car. If GM got them by the ton and for very little money of course they would find a way to move them . This is essentially what the Banks did with the free money. In addition to the Federal Reserve System you had Fanny and Freddie which bought and guaranteed many of the mortgages so no one had to worry about them failing. Then you had CRA, FHA, Federal Home Loan Bank Board( 3% down payment loans) and several others that were designed to get everybody in their own home.

When the states tried to move against predatory lending by national banks they were blocked by the bank's federal regulator, the office of the comptroller of the currency, That empowered money lenders say Lynn Turner.

Just as significantly you had very badly conceived accounting rules that hid the problems from everyone until it was too late. Accounting rules are supposed to do the opposite, not move billions in potential liabilities off the balance sheet onto tiny footnote on the bottom of a page as happened at Citibank, or onto on sentence at the end of a 10-Q report as happened at AIG, or as generally happened with SIVs (structured investment vehicles). Then you had gov't rules from the last crisis, the Enron Crisis, the created mark-to- market accounting rules for this crisis that many believe greatly exacerbated this crisis.

Then you had the problem with the government backed ratings agencies that simply failed to rate the mortgage backed and related securities, properly. Sorry, it had little to do with Bush, but had everything to do with inane attempts by the liberal to regulate the free market!


Warren Buffett: "There are significant limits to what regulation can accomplish. As a dramatic illustration, take two of the biggest accounting disasters in the past ten years: Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. We're talking billions and billions of dollars of misstatements at both places".

Now, these are two incredibly important institutions. I mean, they accounted for over 40% of the mortgage flow a few years back. Right now I think they're up to 70%. They're quasi-governmental in nature. So the government set up an organization called OFHEO. I'm not sure what all the letters stand for. [Note to Warren: They stand for Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight.] But if you go to OFHEO's website, you'll find that its purpose was to just watch over these two companies. OFHEO had 200 employees. Their job was simply to look at two companies and say, "Are these guys behaving like they're supposed to?" And of course what happened were two of the greatest accounting misstatements in history while these 200 people had their jobs. It's incredible. I mean, two for two!

“Whatever regulatory changes are made, they will pale in comparison to the change already evident in today’s markets,” he said. “Those markets for an indefinite future will be far more restrained than would any currently contemplated new regulatory regime.”-Alan Greenspan

Courtesy A. Smith:FDR created Fannie.
LBJ Privatized Fannie - creating an "enron" like environment:
Greg Mankiw's Blog: Thanks, LBJ

Carter's Community Reinvestment Act - accelerated by Clinton - pushed risky loans:
Community Reinvestment Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Clinton pushed Fannie into Subprime - the most critical mistake:
Andrew Cuomo and Fannie and Freddie - Page 1 - News - New York - Village Voice

Even the NY Times figured this out: Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending - NYTimes.com

Bush and McCain attempted to reform Fannie on 17 occasions
Bush Called For Reform of Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac 17 Times in 2008 Alone Only To Have Dems Ignored His Warnings :: Political News and commentaries :: Hyscience

The risky subprime loans fueled another layer of risk - derivatives
https://www.istockanalyst.com/article/viewarticle/articleid/2947518

The LA Times reported on Clinton's "subprime" success in 1999:
Minorities' Home Ownership Booms Under Clinton but Still Lags Whites' - Los Angeles Times
 
.

What happen to people who invested too conservatively over the span of their life and end up with far too little in retirement?

they'd still have far more than the dog food money the get from liberal SS!!
Prove it. Show me the math on how someone who put their savings savings accounts, CDs, and money market funds during their career would have more than they would have versus social security at retirement.

.
What would have happened to people who had most of their money in the stock market right and reached retirement age in 2008?

too stupid!! they'd wait a couple of years until the market hit new highs and retire richer than expected plus leave a $2 millon estaste to their kids!!
They'd have to wait? But they retired right before the crash. Maybe it Special-Ed land people easily just "oops" and unretire back into their careers but here in non-Special-Ed land that isn't a reasonable plan.

Their net worth got cut in half right when they retired and need to start drawing from their stash to support themselves. That can have a devastating effect on the survivability of a portfolio. Furthermore the market didn't hit new highs in a couple years, we are now hitting it four years later.

Forget real estate, many people reach retirement age with zero in accumulated real estate you are just throwing additional smoke grenades because you can't support your own argument.

.
I'm not saying social security is always the better deal for people who know how to manage their finances
it not always better its about 90% worse!!!! $1.4 million is better than 1200 a month!!!!! Are you stupid?????
Okay, show me how you arrived at 1.4 million and 1200/month. I've seen you make this claim before and you had used future today's dollars for the 1.4 million without considering inflation erosion on that amount over 45 years, or what the average social security payout would be 40 years from now.

Than again, you're not much of a deep thinker, you mainly just regurgitate talking points you can't support.


.
but lets face it there are a lot of really stupid people out there and anyone who believes the availability of private accounts would make most people retire rich is naive.

too stupid!! investments would be restricted to A rated investments and no more than 20% in one place
Ah so this is your plan, to free us from the chains of social security so you can tightly regulate what people can invest in? What five asset classes (you'd need at least five for your Special Ed plan) have ratings systems like that? How do you rate stocks, what do you go with the prevailing buy/hold/sell recommendations of the pundits who are wrong as often as right?

Every time I think you can't come up with more dumb shit you do, it is amazing.
 
Solution is Republican private accounts so an average American can retire rich (after saved 15% of life time income) with $1.4 million rather than with liberal dog food money.
Show me how an average American retires rich saving 15% of their income.

Since you're saying it is an absolute (they will be rich and have 1.4 million) don't forget the investments must have a guaranteed rate of return, otherwise it is just speculation they might be rich they might be poor or they might be somewhere in-between.

But hey that doesn't matter you say they'll be rich! So show us.
 
Show me how an average American retires rich saving 15% of their income.

are you too slow to run the numbers yourself?????

Since you're saying it is an absolute (they will be rich and have 1.4 million) don't forget the investments must have a guaranteed rate of return, otherwise it is just speculation they might be rich they might be poor or they might be somewhere in-between.

too stupid and perfectly liberal as if there are any guarantees under SS when the money has to come from a government that is $16 trillion in debt just as the baby boomers start to retire and we face deadly serious competition from China India and Brazil!!
 
are you too slow to run the numbers yourself?????
Nope, but you are the one making the claim. Given your clear history on these forums as a pathological liar I don't think it is too much to ask for you to support the numbers you bring up.

You won't do the numbers because all you are an idiot who can only regurgitate talking points, you are incapable of supporting your only claims.

too stupid and perfectly liberal as if there are any guarantees under SS when the money has to come from a government that is $16 trillion in debt just as the baby boomers start to retire and we face deadly serious competition from China India and Brazil!!
It has nothing to do with political ideology as your narrow chimp mind can perceive things. You are comparing apples and oranges when taking a guaranteed return versus a speculative return. Bottom line is SS has never missed a check, ever, if you think that is the same as you stupid claims of "everyone would be rich" you are even more childish than I thought. Lets see your numbers man, you as the known forum liar where do you get em?
 
You are comparing apples and oranges when taking a guaranteed return versus a speculative return. Bottom line is SS has never missed a check, ever,

Except , most young people don't think that will continue for them!!too stupid and perfectly liberal as if there are any guarantees under SS when the money has to come from a government that is now for first time $16 trillion in debt just as the baby boomers start to retire and we face deadly serious competition from China India and Brazil!!
 
Except , most young people don't think that will continue for them!!
What most young people think has nothing to do with the fact you have a very poor misunderstanding of investing if you believe a guaranteed payout can be compared to a speculative one. You also can't grasp what inflation erosion does to your cute but childishly naive "everyone would become rich" buffoonery that you keep touting about private investment plans.

You seriously post like someone with the mind of a child, man you've come some serious challenges to overcome both puddle deep reasoning and a compulsive liar. Sucks to be you.
 
guaranteed payout can be compared to a speculative one.
too stupid of course!! SS has no guarantee from a $16 trillion debt, while a private account would have FDIC or SIPCC insurance


You also can't grasp what inflation erosion does to your cute but childishly naive "everyone would become rich" buffoonery that you keep touting about private investment plans.

too stupid!! of course earnings inflate too!!! so 15% of an average Americans lifetime income would come to more than $1.4 million.



You seriously post like someone with the mind of a child, man you've come some serious challenges to overcome both puddle deep reasoning and a compulsive liar. Sucks to be you.

and now don't you feel like a very foolish liberal???
 
too stupid of course!! SS has no guarantee from a $16 trillion debt, while a private account would have FDIC or SIPCC insurance
Ahh so now you are using a private account with FDIC insurance that will make the average American rich for retirement. SIPCC is protecting your securities firm from collapsing, not guaranteeing your investment returns. You little child mind can't grasp what risk is and how flatly stating what people will accumulate in private accounts doesn't work.

Sheesh I hope your mommy handles your finances and issues you an allowance.


too stupid!! of course earnings inflate too!!! so 15% of an average Americans lifetime income would come to more than $1.4 million.
Okay, show me your numbers. Remember from your post above we are enjoying the protection of FDIC insurance so lets throw that bank account savings rate at your income and see how it turns out.



and now don't you feel like a very foolish liberal???
No, ideological labels don't bother me in the least, it is only the shallow minded like you who must lack the depth to look at the world in anything but shades of their team my team.

Counter-question, you aren't embarrassed of being identified as a pathological liar?
 
Ahh so now you are using a private account with FDIC insurance that will make the average American rich for retirement. SIPCC is protecting your securities firm from collapsing, not guaranteeing your investment returns.

you said SS was guaranteed while I said no sane person believes that because of $16 trillion debt, trillions in unfunded liabilities, a communist president, and baby boom retirement.

I said private accounts with FDIC and SIPCC insurance guarantees would make an average workers rich ($1.4 million estate )at retirement with 10 times what they'd get out of SS if SS paid anything.
 
you said SS was guaranteed while I said no sane person believes that because of $16 trillion debt, trillions in unfunded liabilities, a communist president, and baby boom retirement.
SS is guaranteed, it has never missed a payment. Historically I am correct and you are wrong.

Then again I seem to be arguing with someone who thinks FDIC and SIPC guarantee investment performance.

I said private accounts with FDIC and SIPCC insurance guarantees would make an average workers rich ($1.4 million estate )at retirement with 10 times what they'd get out of SS if SS paid anything.
Yes, FDIC covers bank deposits, not investments. So now you seem to believe people who stash money in savings counts will become rich by the time they retire. You are obviously the reason they need to do so much hand holding at the little 401k meetings.

Now you've introduced another EdwardBiamonte point of dumbassedry: you are claiming the 1.4 million would be 10 times what people would get out of social security. In other words you are saying people would get 140k our of social security, care to rethink that?
 
SS is guaranteed, it has never missed a payment.

too stupid!! the government has never been $16 trillion in debt, never had 50 trillion in unfunded liabilities,never had the boomers about to retire, and never had competition like this from China and India. All agree it has to be reformed and that for starters means advancing retirement age to 67 and beyond to guarantee shrinking monthly dog food SS payments.

Private accounts yield $1.4 million estate, not $1200/month dog food money SS if you live long enough to collect a penny.
 
[ you are claiming the 1.4 million would be 10 times what people would get out of social security.

Yes, 15% of life time income invested in private accounts would yield
$1.4 million estate at age 65 for average worker. Social security would yield no estate or principle, just $1200 a month.

Does the goof liberal have the IQ to know which is better???
 
[ you are claiming the 1.4 million would be 10 times what people would get out of social security.

Yes, 15% of life time income invested in private accounts would yield
$1.4 million estate at age 65 for average worker
. Social security would yield no estate or principle, just $1200 a month.

Does the goof liberal have the IQ to know which is better???

Assuming, of course, that workers actually saved that money instead of pissing it away on a lot of useless shit.
 
15th post
[ you are claiming the 1.4 million would be 10 times what people would get out of social security.

Yes, 15% of life time income invested in private accounts would yield
$1.4 million estate at age 65 for average worker
. Social security would yield no estate or principle, just $1200 a month.

Does the goof liberal have the IQ to know which is better???

Assuming, of course, that workers actually saved that money instead of pissing it away on a lot of useless shit.

dear we'd make it the law just like SS
 
Ahh so now you are using a private account with FDIC insurance that will make the average American rich for retirement. SIPCC is protecting your securities firm from collapsing, not guaranteeing your investment returns.

you said SS was guaranteed while I said no sane person believes that because of $16 trillion debt, trillions in unfunded liabilities, a communist president, and baby boom retirement.

I said private accounts with FDIC and SIPCC insurance guarantees would make an average workers rich ($1.4 million estate )at retirement with 10 times what they'd get out of SS if SS paid anything.


Private accounts are working out very well in Chile. They have the added benefit of not being available for the government to loot and replace with IOUs.

And perhaps the situation would not be so dire for some seniors if the government hadn't ruined the ability to earn a return on one's savings accounts with its ZIRP policy.
 
Yes, 15% of life time income invested in private accounts would yield
$1.4 million estate at age 65 for average worker.
You still have said which investment vehicle gives the guaranteed return to reach your 1.4 million.

Since you are stating it as a fact, not "might" or "could" then surely you know can link to which investment your are referring. What is the investment return you used in your calculations and where can I get this guaranteed rate of return over 45 years, sounds like a great deal.

Social security would yield no estate or principle, just $1200 a month.
Earlier you said $1400, as least try to keep track of yourself.

And again stating a lie, any people earn more than $1200/month. You state things as absolutes that are either speculative or depend on other factors, and you do this because you only think puddle deep.

Does the goof liberal have the IQ to know which is better???
I have the IQ to see that the one with the low IQ doesn't understand the basics of investing and what a guaranteed return is.
 
Last edited:
You still have said which investment vehicle gives the guaranteed return to reach your 1.4 million.

Lets say it would be more guaranteed than SS. Stocks would be an investment vehicle, for example.

Over your head????
 

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom