Re: OT - Oh, You Mean THOSE Weapons Of Mass Destruction

fredfighter@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

Tim Daneliuk wrote:

fredfighter@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

Tim Daneliuk wrote:


Larry Blanchard wrote:

...

Oh, knock it off.  I sat down one day, converted all my SS contributions
into todays dollars, added interest at 4%, looked up my benefits, and
calculated that I'd have to live to 93 before I got my money back.


So all the analysis that shows that most people will take out more
than they ever put in is incorrect?



I think if you check the arithmetic you will find that they do not
figure  in the employer's contribution


I think this is incorrect - or at least irrelevant - there is *no*
money.  It's been spent on other social do-gooding, servicing the
resultant debt and so forth.



Argument from irrelevency.

That somebody else took it out before the retiree was
allowed to take it out for himself does not make the statement
in question _incorrect_.  In this instance your thinking appears
to gotten off the track of the question at hand.

According to my Uncle the banker, the Federal Government kept
Social Security funding separate from the General Fund, (e.g.
in a 'lockbox') Until the Johnson Administration.  It was looted
to offset expenditures for the Vietnam war.


..
 or even the minimal interest one could

get on a passbook savings account.


I understand this.  But the fact is that there *is* no interest because
the money has never been invested.



Yes, that is the problem indeed.   Had the SSAs been
managed properly instead of looted, we'd all be well
positioned for retirement.  IF retirees withderaw more
than they put in it is only becuase of that mismanagement.

The retirees are NOT the thieves.  They are not demanding
payment beyond what woudl erasonably be expected to be
on account if their acounts had been managed with even
the minimal degree of fiduciary responsibility the pre-
Reagan era government demanded of private pensions.



Well hang on a second.  It is certainly true that people should have
the reasonable expectation of get out what they put in and doing
so is not theft.  But virtually every analysis of the situation I've
read - and I grant they could all be wrong and I'd not know the
difference - notes that *most* people will live long enough to take
out more than they put in (without regard to whether the funds are
actually there or not - this is a technicality at this point having
to do with how the government funds it).

Moreover, the only funds in question are not just Socialist
Security. But the far larger problem is Medicare/Medicaid, the new Drug
Benefit, et al wherein there is pretty much no question that everyone
who consumes these services is drawing out far more than they ever put
in. Entitlements broadly are mooching programs. They steal from one
group of citizens to give to another. It ironic that the same people who
(rightfully) howl about accounting mischief like the cases at Adelphia
and Tyco have no moral problem with half the Federal budget being built
on a not-dissimillar scam.

We have some hope of getting out of the Socialist Security mess by means
of a gradual migration to private retirement funds, but there is no way
to fix the excesses of the rest of the Entitlements other than my simply
declaring an end date. The rate of growth for demand of these
Entitlements exceeds the rate at which we can reasonably expect to pay
for them. At current pace, the only other option is for our children and
grandchildren to morgage this nation at a level that makes today's debt
look like pocket change. Europe is in even worse shape in this regard.

As I said, the only thing the Islamic whackjobs really have to do is sit
back and watch the West spend itself into oblivion with nice little
do-gooder programs...

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk     tundra@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
PGP Key:         http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT - Thank you suckers
    ... Why are you investing your own money privately? ... partial privatization of Social Security plan? ... 5% of their money back and let them invest it privately. ... Saving for retirement is a long-term process. ...
    (alt.sports.basketball.nba.la-lakers)
  • Re: Attention Bush fans ~ Bush says global warming is real
    ... "It isn't the Government's Money." ... violence and incarceration is called "government" how is it that you call it ... Many of the retirees are making more off their non-SSI retirement packages ... Social Security Scheme, so it is in their best interest to keep it as ...
    (sci.energy.hydrogen)
  • Re: Refresher Course on Social Security
    ... have their own retirement program rather than SS, ... Fund for 50% of my retirement and a Core Bond Fund for 50%, ... Chicken Little thing with Social Security that he did with the WMDs in ... would have more money to spend when they retire. ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: OT: Social Security
    ... I don't agree entirely because I think money taken for SS and other high taxes which fund the safety net are a big part of the reason why people are not able to save what they should save, creating a bigger need for the safety net than there would otherwise be. ... I don't think this is necessarily proof positive that it's a bad thing: possibly savings rates went down less than the future value of the social security benefits, ... But let me concede the point and say that SS is there to force people to do what they otherwise would not do which is save for their retirement. ... If $8000 is taken from your paycheck for withholding tax throughout the year, then when it comes time to pay your taxes, there is a real account which has $8000 in it to use. ...
    (misc.fitness.weights)
  • Re: Social Security compromise?
    ... bipartisan compromise on Social Security, ... in a mixture of debt and equity funds. ... Problem is that I've lost a lot of money on these 401K ... There are no contributions from employers to SS? ...
    (soc.retirement)