This Forum has been archived there is no more new posts or threads ... use this link to report any abusive content
==> Report abusive content in this page <==
Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
I wonder if privatizing Social Security means a loss of money already paid in?
03-23-2014, 12:35 AM
Post: #1
I wonder if privatizing Social Security means a loss of money already paid in?
I wonder if Senator John McCain has his way about privatizing Social Security would it be a strong investment or would it be like the Stock Market like we have had for the last eight years. If you will look at the Stock investments you will see a strong downturn and a serious loss of revenue over the last eight years. Now let me ask you can you personally afford to lose your tails when it comes time for you to retire. I think that if you will look around that everyone will retire or work until they drop dead of a old age. I believe that this is what the McCain's want ; what is good for business.

Ads

Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-23-2014, 12:36 AM
Post: #2
 
McCain has never said he was going to privatize social security. I wish he would, because I'd be all for such a move. But he has made no such proposal, the statement last night that he had was a democrat lying, as usual.

The market has it's ups and downs, but if you look at it on the long term, 40 year periods, the trend has always been up. Personally I'd be for being able to opt out of it all together and have the ability to put that money in my 401k instead. Why shouldn't we be able to have that choice? Isn't it our money after all? I don't know about you, but I worked hard for that money.

I believe Social Security was a bad idea in the first place. It probably seemed like a great idea at the time when FDR implemented it. People pretty much died off in their 50's back then and never collected it. Also, the families were huge back then. My grandmother was one of 13 children, my grandfather had 7 siblings. These days people are having no more than 2 kids and they are living into their 90's. The situation has flipped now, there will soon be just as many people collecting it as there are people paying in. It wasn't designed for this, and there is no way it can remain economicaly viable that way.

Ads

Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-23-2014, 12:40 AM
Post: #3
 
how else does one help out the stock market but to make social security a private matter
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-23-2014, 12:52 AM
Post: #4
 
I was told when I was young to never, ever, depend solely on social security when I'm older. I will have to continue paying in to the government for it, but I am in charge of my own financial security already. I will depend on myself to be secure when I'm ready to retire, not wait on the government to take care of me.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-23-2014, 01:04 AM
Post: #5
 
Sorry to tell you this, but the Social Security money you put in is being spent as fast and faster than you are putting it in.
I is ALREADY gone!
You can blame the "Great Society" programs started by President LBJ for starting that trend of using Social Security money for things that it was never intended to cover.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-23-2014, 01:06 AM
Post: #6
 
I would think if they are trying to make it a private organization that it will cost us,the tax payer,some kind of penalty.They will use the 10,000,000,000$ that we owe monthly on this Middle Eastern war effort.I believe instead of smashing our SSI benefit's they need Iraq too fork over some of that 79,000,000,000$ oil surplus they get every other month.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-23-2014, 01:09 AM
Post: #7
 
There was a time when Social Security was a good idea and it made a lot of sense but it was never intended that it should be the only source for your retirement, it was only meant to subsidize your savings for retirement. At one time there was plenty of money in it to take care of the people who retired as they got only a portion of what they put in back and that left a surplus, but L. B. Johnson just couldn't keep is grimy little Democrat hands off all that extra money and made SS a part of the General Fund, so they the government could spend this surplus as they saw fit. They gave themselves raises, gave themselves pension plans, gave themselves medical plans and spent it on other things than its intended purpose. Now that the baby boomers are retiring, there is not enough money in the plan to pay even this small percentage of what they paid in back to them. So letting the government handle any of you retirement is a bad deal, the ones who started SS may have had good intentions and been honorable, but the ones in government now are neither.
The best thing to do in to be in charge of your own retirement and not let the government get there grimy little hands on it, they will end of taking a huge chunk in taxes anyway of which they will piss it away on their stupid earmarks or just steal it for themselves outright.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)