Re: Refresher Course on Social Security
- From: "mg" <mgkelson@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 10 Mar 2007 20:32:47 -0800
On Mar 10, 11:12 am, "Jerry Okamura" <okamuraj...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
"mg" <mgkel...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message-> Tell that to those who only have a
news:1173545582.727981.77660@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Mar 9, 8:10 pm, "Jerry Okamura" <okamuraj...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"mg" <mgkel...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1173487909.684085.249260@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Mar 9, 8:43 am, "Jerry Okamura" <okamuraj...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"mg" <mgkel...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1173410035.175824.315600@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Mar 8, 2:29 pm, "California Poppy" <GoldenStatePo...@xxxxxxx>
wrote:
I am still working part-time for a city rec & park department.
They
have their own retirement program rather than SS, which is what I
think all should be. I was given 19 choices of mutual funds.
They
are labeled as growth, income, and stability. We were given their
3-
year average % increase. I chose a Conservative Growth Lifestyle
Fund for 50% of my retirement and a Core Bond Fund for 50%, but I
could have chose any fund and any percentage, and I could change
any
year. This is what should be available for everyone.
A "city rec & park department" is a government agency that feeds
from
the public trough. They're not subject to the ups and downs of the
free-enterprise system. They don't have to make a profit. If you are
suggesting they're system should be extended to private
corporations,
you're comparing apples and oranges.
No she is saying that what is good for the goose is good for the
gander.
She is saying she works for a government agency who offers her an
opportunity to invest her money and provide her with a chance to make
a
better return on her investment.
She also said:
"They have their own retirement program rather than SS, which is what
I think all should be."
In otherwords what she is apparently saying is that state and local
government employees don't participate in the SS program, therefore it
should be eliminated.
Well, either fix it, or do away with it, and start from scratch..because
it
ain't doing such a good job right now.- Hide quoted text -
I don't know if it is such a big problem in the overall scheme of
things. To me it looks a lot like Bush tried to pull the same sort of
Chicken Little thing with Social Security that he did with the WMDs in
Iraq and then solve the problem in the same way--by destroying it.
-> social security income to live on....-
Do you think people would get more under the Bush plan, for instance?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Refresher Course on Social Security
- From: Alan Lichtenstein
- Re: Refresher Course on Social Security
- From: Jerry Okamura
- Re: Refresher Course on Social Security
- References:
- Refresher Course on Social Security
- From: California Poppy
- Re: Refresher Course on Social Security
- From: Jerry Okamura
- Re: Refresher Course on Social Security
- From: California Poppy
- Re: Refresher Course on Social Security
- From: mg
- Re: Refresher Course on Social Security
- From: Jerry Okamura
- Re: Refresher Course on Social Security
- From: mg
- Re: Refresher Course on Social Security
- From: Jerry Okamura
- Re: Refresher Course on Social Security
- From: mg
- Re: Refresher Course on Social Security
- From: Jerry Okamura
- Refresher Course on Social Security
- Prev by Date: Re: The Defeatist Democrats
- Next by Date: Re: 50th.
- Previous by thread: Re: Refresher Course on Social Security
- Next by thread: Re: Refresher Course on Social Security
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|