Social Security: The Next U.S. Bailout?

T

Trademark

Copywriter / Author
Jun 30, 2007
613
21
0
While not nearly as exciting as the LPLockdown thread, this will be felt far longer...

Cafferty File: Tell Jack how you really feel Blog Archive - How to handle gov't squandering Social Security surplus? - Blogs from CNN.com

The gist:

- Social Security is imploding.
- There used to be excess cash in the till.
- They spent the excess on "other stuff."
- Time for another huge bailout.

Here's a short piece by Allan Sloan on the matter...

washingtonpost.com

This is gonna be a big one. People are living longer and older folks vote, so it's a political trigger.

old%20couple-743330.jpg


Recipients want the cash to keep coming. I have a feeling there's no stopping this train. We're going to pay dearly for it later.

But, just for kicks, how would you folks fix this beast? Throw the older people under the bus? Bail it out? Integrate an "opt out" feature for younger workers?

Madoff is probably sitting in his cell wondering why the hell he's in jail.
 


The stats for Social Security are ridiculous.

Just another upside down Government venture that will continue to run no matter what.
 
But WTF? They're going to want to somehow penalize people for not taking better care of themselves while currently planning for healthcare reform - perhaps effectively forcing a percentage of people to live better and thus longer, ultimately fucking up SS because they'll have to pay out longer.
 
That led to the famous Greenspan Commission report, which recommended trimming benefits and raising taxes, which Congress did.
Click to expand...

Let's see, we have a sitting president who was elected to provide more benefits to the needy, so that's out... I wonder which one of those will happen this time?

I understand that it's far too late for some people to be able to come up with money to live on after a lifetime of depending on social security being there, but just like any other failing government program, we need a hard time-table for withdrawal.

Just make the decision. If you're 50 in 2010, you will be the last to receive benefits. Everyone else needs to start saving. I can't speak for my entire generation, but everyone I know in my age group has 401k's and IRA's because we were brought up not to depend on the government even being around by the time we retire. That just leaves the "maybes" in the 30-50 range.

If you keep telling them that "maybe" social security will still be around, they will never have incentive to start saving aggressively. If "maybe" doesn't happen, they can always blame the government and get a bailout in 2030.
 
SniperRyan said:
Let's see, we have a sitting president who was elected to provide more benefits to the needy, so that's out... I wonder which one of those will happen this time?

I understand that it's far too late for some people to be able to come up with money to live on after a lifetime of depending on social security being there, but just like any other failing government program, we need a hard time-table for withdrawal.

Just make the decision. If you're 50 in 2010, you will be the last to receive benefits. Everyone else needs to start saving. I can't speak for my entire generation, but everyone I know in my age group has 401k's and IRA's because we were brought up not to depend on the government even being around by the time we retire. That just leaves the "maybes" in the 30-50 range.

If you keep telling them that "maybe" social security will still be around, they will never have incentive to start saving aggressively. If "maybe" doesn't happen, they can always blame the government and get a bailout in 2030.
Click to expand...

401k's and IRA's aren't a savings. They're a gamble. And with the government proposing new laws to privatize i.e. seize pensions, you want the government to be investing your retirement "savings' for you? Get a fucking clue.

Learn how to trade - that is, get in and get OUT of the market - and capitalize on movements in the market. Don't leave that shit to lose value with "longterm investing." The only people making money from that are the brokers.

And work with exchange traded funds to get into commodities if you don't feel qualified or knowledgeable enough to trade the actual commodity itself. It's a nice way, say, to benefit from the next upmove in gold if you don't want to hold actual gold.

Remember - if your entire savings is in "paper" it can go POOF in a fucking instant. Real estate holdings, physical gold and silver, a few antiques that will gain value over time, maybe some art (depends on the genre and the artist though) as WELL as some paper is the way to go.

I'm only 35 but I knew by the time I was 20 that Social Security wouldn't be there for me. Got into the investing shit early. Bought my first gold and silver when I turned 21. Stocks? If I'd put all my money into a 401k or an IRA I would have lost it all in, what, six different hardcore, ass raping market busts by now? Fuck that shit.

Remember, "buy and hold" as a concept didn't exist until post 1960's. It's a bunch of crap.
 
The problem with social security is that when it was started there were something like 30 people paying for 1 but now with the older population it is down to 3 to 1 which doesn't work out mathematically.
 
bprimeelite said:
The problem with social security is that when it was started there were something like 30 people paying for 1 but now with the older population it is down to 3 to 1 which doesn't work out mathematically.
Click to expand...

SS is a big ponzi scheme, only way to fix it is for people to have more kids, if the government was smart they would offer more benefits and tax incentives to those who make more kids

effectively increasing their tax base and solving their long term money issues
 
dangregory said:
. Stocks? If I'd put all my money into a 401k or an IRA I would have lost it all in, what, six different hardcore, ass raping market busts by now? Fuck that shit.

Remember, "buy and hold" as a concept didn't exist until post 1960's. It's a bunch of crap.
Click to expand...

your advice is terrible. If you are a properly diversified (within stocks and other assets classes) you would never "lose it all" and when the market dips you would reallocate and make money on the swings.

wait you're totally right, warren buffet is a moron. Everyone should become a day trader.

a 401 or an ira shouldn't be 100% stocks anyway.
 
Jim Rogers has an interesting theory on diversification (as the layman understands it). That it was sold by fund managers who wanted to cover their asses for making the wrong calls, and so when the fund tanked, because it was diversified, they could blame the market as an aggregate, not their individually poor investment decisions.

Anyone who invests with the purpose to make money is wise to specialize. Rogers believes that, Taleb believes that. That is what Buffet does. He is very selective about what he invests in.

I watched this last night. It is an hour and a half. For young people, it doesn't get interesting until 1/2 way through. But Gary North is great, and this is a primer on the reality of retirement from wage labor.

Retirement Armageddon

related article here
Retirement Armageddon by Gary North
 
mkrongel said:
SS is a big ponzi scheme, only way to fix it is for people to have more kids, if the government was smart they would offer more benefits and tax incentives to those who make more kids

effectively increasing their tax base and solving their long term money issues
Click to expand...

isnt this what the child credit is for ( dependents )
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom