Social Security could = no gun ownership

[chucklenut]

Social security is NOT a government hand out. It is taken out of your paycheck every pay period as a retirement fund to be given back to you and is NOT supposed to be part of the general government funding pool. It is supposed to be a Government run 401k program. Of course we all know how well the government is at running things

its a shell out. if it wasnt the gov employees wouldnt have private pension plans set up.

it is not, nor was it ever, a government sponsored 401k. it is socialism

 

[insulinboy]

I used 401k as an example of a retirement plan which is what ss was supposed to be, not that it was a 401k, just that it was a govt retirement plan

 

[insulinboy]

And its really a legal ponzi scheme more that its anything else

 

[chucklenut]

I used 401k as an example of a retirement plan which is what ss was supposed to be, not that it was a 401k, just that it was a govt retirement plan

never was a government retirement plan. its a social restructuring plan

 

[YOTESHOOTER]

SS, use to be in a trust until LYNDON BANES JOHNSON, took it out and allowed the government to use the funds for pork barrel
spending. Another brite idea by our Washington bunch........

 

[bearpugh]

not quite, I know there are a lot of people who depend on SS for there primary income, most of whom will take more from the system than they ever contributed in the first place. That is living off the "teet".
If you were to receive a portion of the funds you contribute +/- accrued interest and admin costs much like a 401K then I would agree but unfortunately it is not.

but the many that never live to recieve it offsets that.

 

[chucklenut]

SS, use to be in a trust until LYNDON BANES JOHNSON, took it out and allowed the government to use the funds for pork barrel
spending. Another brite idea by our Washington bunch........

wouldnt have mattered anyway, even with a trust it does not account for population influx and immigration booms. not to mention that thye figures and projections done do not account for increased longevity (aka longer a ss recipient lives, the more they use up)

you are always taking out more than you are putting in

 

[chucklenut]

but the many that never live to recieve it offsets that.

if you wanna get into statistics, for example women in the workforce live longer and technically contribute less (in taxes) than men

but stats are stupid arguments really

always more being taken out.

 

[dsp]

if you wanna get into statistics, for example women in the workforce live longer and technically contribute less (in taxes) than men

but stats are stupid arguments really

always more being taken out.

That's why it's in everyone's personal interest to invest wisely. And SS does not fall into that category.
Of course with a 1 trade job throughout life some people are ****ed at retirement; no investment beyond SS? That's stupid, and they deserve the low figure checks they get

 

[chucklenut]

That's why it's in everyone's personal interest to invest wisely. And SS does not fall into that category.
Of course with a 1 trade job throughout life some people are ****ed at retirement; no investment beyond SS? That's stupid, and they deserve the low figure checks they get

im not entirely opposed to the idea of social darwinism lol

kinda a reap what you sew situation honestly. a lifetime of ****ty choices and bad health habits (smoking or being fat) shouldnt be rewarded with costly medical care to keep them around to infect others with their "sound advice"

folks get older, not always wiser. but the above is a pipe dream i reckon