What would have happened if we had put social security into stocks like Republicans wanted to do?

[drummer_40]

Social security is actually still being over-funded for several more years, but everyone has been severely hit in the market. Maybe governmental socialism is the right answer sometimes (e.g. post office, interstate system, defense)?

[Aestro]

Right now it would be in the same state as most people's 401k's - dead in the water.

[Thunderouswheel909]

We would have all been universally reamed to an even greater extent than we now are. These 'people' seem to know no end to the opportunity for economic devastation. I wonder what political party first suggested this as a way to share in the American dream?

[common_sense]

It is the right answer sometimes. Keyword being sometimes. Government services can snowball once a government spending on unnecessary projects goes out the wazoo.

Could somebody PLEASE for the love of God tell this to Nancy Pelosi??

[pjkondorpoduszlo]

Perhaps you are forgetting that Social Security, like some stocks are supposed to be, is a LONG TERM investment. Yes, the market goes up and down over time. But over the course of 30-40 years; it, like everything else, sees long term growth. Plus not all stocks are plummeting; and the individual citizen would have had the choice of where to invest.

[perflexed]

the same result,,,,, I don't count on there being anything for me when I retire,,,, I doubt I will live long enough to retire, they keep uping the age,,,, I plan for my own stability in old age because I know in the long run the government doesn't take care of anybody as well as they can take care of themselves,,,,,

if the government returned to me tomorrow everything I have paid into social security since I was 18,, I'm 50,, even without interest I would retire tomorrow

[mark32541]

Republicans did not want to put SS into the stock market.

The Republican plan, was to allow people to voluntarily invest up to 20% of their SS into specific investment programs.

It was a 100% voluntary program.

And you can bet the over sight on those investments would have been tight.

Now I don't know about you, but if someone wants to voluntarily put 20% of their SS into specific investments

I do not see how it can possibly harm me, in anyway.

[nononsense]

As someone that has an MBA in Finance, I would point out to you that while in the short term the stock market can be volatile, over the long term, the market, on average, returns about 12% annually to any given investor.

[JustJoe]

Two things:
There'd be no more social security
There'd be no more republicans.
J

[koalatcomics]

nice try liberal, now lets try getting it right ok? the option was to PRIVATIZE social security or give you the option of controlling your own money. some of us WORKING americans dont want or need the govt. to tell us what to do with our hard earned income. perhaps if the government beleived they had the right idea THEYRE OWN employees wouldnt have the option to opt out (pers) and wed have alot more of an income base to draw from. it had nothing to do with stocks..its was control. socialism isnt the right answer its a cancer.