+- Twitist Forums (http://twitist.com)
+-- Forum: General Social Media & Marketing Forums (/forum-8.html)
+--- Forum: Social Marketing (/forum-10.html)
+--- Thread: With the stock market crash, isn't it a good thing we didn't privatize Social Security? (/thread-7032.html)
- mooyang - 10-12-2012 09:37 AM
Not privatizing SocSec has only prolonged the inevitable -- the government is hardly in a position to be able to continue SocSec funding at its current levels.
- Bob - 10-12-2012 09:37 AM
Certainly. That is fairly obvious. Anyone who tells you otherwise has adverse interests to the security of America's collective old age. Some would rather investment in the short term increase than to have more security for retirement.
- Steve - 10-12-2012 09:37 AM
Depends on how you look at it.
1. We had a simular run until about 1980, the dow was at 800 then. If the Dow is at 8000 today, and if it is 80,000 in 30 years.
2. If taxes run lower Social Security will loose just as much as this market drop!
- JEFF S - 10-12-2012 09:37 AM
You got it backwards. We would be better off if we had privatized social security. The banks may have been in better shape too.
- pack f - 10-12-2012 09:37 AM
How about we stop social security and stop giving the government trillions of dollars interest free. It is just one more mechanism of wealth transfer.
Do you guys, ladies and gentlemen, like being taxed 75% upon death.
The Obama nation will make it 110%. You might actually owe money when you die when he is through socializing and nationalizing everything in sight.
What do you expect from a Marxist Muslim like O?
- Mr. Pelosi - 10-12-2012 09:37 AM
Look at it this way if your SS was in the market you would have lost 40% and have 60% left. But instead the government took your money and spent it ALL there is no SS trust fund.
- Joe Finkle - 10-12-2012 09:37 AM
Yes, yes it is. That's not to say Social Security is safe. As another poster pointed out not long ago, it is a giant ponzi scheme. The Federal Government does protect it from collapse, but there aren't enough protections in place for the impending retirement of the baby boomers, which will cause an increase in those drawing on the fund and a decrease on those paying in. Those are the circumstances that cause ponzi schemes to collapse. Without a giant cash infusion, the system is in tremendous trouble.
There's nothing wrong with investing social security in general, but it must be done the way many states invest their retirement funds, as one source of the revenue used to pay the retirees, supplementing direct contributions, because as the economy goes up and down these funds have trouble paying off their recipients. If you truly privatize, as Republicans have long advocated, you screw over people who retire in bad economic times and reward those who retire in good economic times, which is often just a matter of luck.
- u_bin_called - 10-12-2012 09:37 AM
There's no difference between abdicating all your responsibility to the government and abdicating it to a broker....it's a simple character issue.
All I know is that my private investments have outpaced the market and Social Security over the past 10 years....including the many market drops. Any smart investor will tell you they account for the ups and downs.
- Logan - 10-12-2012 09:37 AM
Hell yes. When he was talking about that crap, I looked at the young adults in this country and shivered. I was very afraid of what they were going to do with my generations money. Ohh, scary! lol
- thomas p - 10-12-2012 09:37 AM
If the private assets were managed properly the market offered great opportunities in the last 7 months. Politicians will not face the certain bankruptcy of Social Security within 20 years. Privatization was one option. Reducing benefits is another. Government is using debt to pay its pensioners. Now, that is not Truth In Advertising.