+- Twitist Forums (http://twitist.com)
+-- Forum: General Social Media & Marketing Forums (/forum-8.html)
+--- Forum: Social Marketing (/forum-10.html)
+--- Thread: Would we need Social Security if we properly regulated Wall Street? (/thread-122339.html)
Pages: 1 2
- BILL - 03-27-2014 09:53 AM
ah, but you have to get people to invest responsibly. tough act.
- flower - 03-27-2014 10:04 AM
The purpose of Social Security are many in addition to retirement -- divorce, survivor, disability, death, indigence. It is also what many seniors have to live on. The average is around $1200 a month for people to live on with nothing else. Only about half of people have any money in the market, and many are because of employer 401Ks that the employer contributes to. Most seniors do not have investments or savings. You are very badly mistaken about the situation.
There are a couple dozen different types of benefits from Social Security and many should be eliminated other than seniors who actually paid into the fund or some disabled adults who also worked.
Financial markets were regulated but oversight was lacking. Unethical maneuvers is mostly what led to the crisis in 2008. Dodd-Frank bill was passed to deal with the problem of deregulation but Congress wont enforce it since bankers and investors make these decisions, not Congress, not the President. Many kinds of regulation was passed in the aftermath of the financial scandals and bad deals before 2008. Credit card fees, irregular banking practices and others were implemented under Obama but the most effective ones are not.