Scrap it. The federal government does not have (or at least, *should *not have) the authority to have anything to do with our retirement or financial security. Citizens should have the freedom and liberty to save/invest - or not save/invest - for their retirement as they see fit. Don’t like it? Move to Sweden.
What about those of us who DO want the government to have that ability?
Unfortunately, they have been collecting money from me for over 40 years with the promise that they DO have that authority. I could accept a lot of compromises but not one where the government decides to default on all that money I have loaned them over the years. If our leaders don’t like paying back the loans they have forced us to give them, let them move to Sweden. Or, they could just stop spending so damned much money that they have to borrow from my piggybank.
meh
Then you can pay into it, and hope there is something for you when you retire. I want the freedom to take my money and choose my own investments.
But that’s not what you said - you said flat out they don’t have the authority and shouldn’t do it. You’re taking MY freedom to vote for a government pension program away.
I wonder how many retirees would have been wiped out when the real estate bubble burst. How many of them would thought real estate a safe investment, maybe they bought into Bernie Made-Off, Lehman Brothers, Bear-Stearns? Some folks on TV were calling Bear Stearns safe while it was in freefall.
My 401K lost about half it’s value in that debacle. (true story!)
Investment is risk. Even tradtitional safe investments can tank.
Let’s imagine for a moment that you had the freedom to invest in the market and put none in SS. You did this for many years. Further imagine many others did the same. And the investments tank (don’t think it can’t happen).
What then? Everything you have saved is gone. Are you gonna say ‘Oh well, the free market has spoken. I will have to get used to eating cat food and fighting entrenched bums for shelter.’ Or will you expect Uncle Sam to help?
[sub]pretty sure I already know the answer[/sub]
Modify it.
Take away the earnings cap. Means test it - but I want something in my pocket for having been an ant and saving while I contributed to SS - a tax break on my 401k and investment earnings after I reach retirement age.
These libertarian types have the absolute faith that that will never happen to them, it only happens to inferior people not libertarian supermen.
Actually, my comments were inappropriate here. This is a poll, not a debate.
My apologies.
I first misunderstood your post. Yes SS would be in good shape at least through my life time, except they loaned my money to a wastrel that has no means of paying it back now that it is time for me to collect.
I can’t find a cite for this but have read in several sources that the average retiree receives all the money he has put into the system within something like two years of retirement. If it’s not two years, it’s certainly not the whole span of retirement. So the whole “I paid in, so give me my money back now that I’m retired” viewpoint is maybe a little off-base.
Yes, once upon a time, people tried to save for their old age. But most of them also expected their children would support them. I wonder how many Americans would be willing to go back to that sort of scenario. And there were charitable old age homes, many of which offered care that was substandard at best. It seems to me that if anyone suggesting private charities take up the slack should be donating regularly and generously to those charities.
It would be great if everyone who was diligent in saving for retirement would never be financially devastated by a major illness, or a big downturn in the stock or real estate market. If only the Good Ol’ Days were as good as we wish they’d been.
It’s the only, but it is the biggest.
We *need *to something about Social Security and we *need *to do something about defense.
Trying to get out of our current mess without addressing these seems pointless.
Yes, it’s the largest part of the budget, beside the Military, but it is currently self - sufficient, *it pays for itself and more. *
40% of federal tax receipts come in from Soc Sec etc.
It’s not a current problem. Mild tweaks will keep it running for decades.
The fact that our great banks and investment firms had this attitude (“Uncle Sam will help”) is the major root cause of the financial crisis that caused you to lose half of you investment in the first place. A truly free market would have more likely avoided this crisis.
No, in a truly free market the banks and investment firms would have been forced to eat the loss they incurred by choosing the wrong risks instead of everyone else being forced to bail them out.
Yes, that is true. But it is only fair the government bailed them out of a problem the government caused. Barney Frank’s influence over Fanny and Freddy caused much of the problem. John Mclain was too dumb to realize it and tell the American people. He got what he deserved, but the rest of us didn’t deserve what we got.
Yes, where are these superior investments that pay great dividends and are available to MILLIONS?
And of course they’ll have to be risk free. Look at what just happened to everyones 401K and other investments. The only investments I have that didn’t take a beating were CD’s (which are currently paying 1.4%)
Bad investments are rampant. What about those who lose? You know there will be MILLIONS with nothing…no cash, no home, no health care. I guess it’s ok to be starving and desperate in old age.
Uh, really? You don’t think investment firms mixing good loans with bad and labeling them all AAA
had anything to do with it? Or AIG’s worthless insurance?
Exactly, except they wouldn’t have been so quick to make those risks. Incentives change drastically when the government gets in the way.