Reply
Wed 9 Jul, 2008 11:53 am
John McCain described social security like this.
McCain wrote:
Americans have got to understand that we are paying present-day retirees with the taxes paid by young workers in America today. And that's a disgrace. It's an absolute disgrace, and it's got to be fixed.
Yes... that's the idea. Those of working age pay for benefits for the current retirees, and when they become retirees, there will be new young workers.
This is how the very successful Social Security program has always functioned... but apparently McCain thinks it is a "disgrace".
Link to Video
Just what do you think he means by "fixed"?
Very successful, eh?
Seniors receive less than 1% return on their money and are at the mercy of the government.
That's very successful to you, is it?
You are a disgrace.
Tell your parents that you're glad that they didn't have the option to take the taxes that were confiscated for SS and put them in a mutual fund and have it earn 7-9% yearly (a very conservative figure).
SS dishonors our seniors and it is a disgrace to them. Only liberals don't seem to understand that.
real life wrote:Very successful, eh?
Seniors receive less than 1% return on their money and are at the mercy of the government.
That's very successful to you, is it?
You are a disgrace.
Tell your parents that you're glad that they didn't have the option to take the taxes that were confiscated for SS and put them in a mutual fund and have it earn 7-9% yearly (a very conservative figure).
SS dishonors our seniors and it is a disgrace to them. Only liberals don't seem to understand that.
You're a moron. SS has contributed to the greatest economic expansion of our lifetime by freeing up younger generations from the onerous burden of paying for the golden years of their parents. It increases home ownership tremendously and guarantees an income for folks NO MATTER what goes wrong in their lives or the stock market.
Go ahead - run on an anti-SS platform. Look how great that worked out for Bush and the Republicans a few years back, you think it's going to be a winner for McCain?
I
am glad my parents didn't have the option to put their SS funds into other investments. You should be glad as well, for there simply is no guarantee of returns on investments, and as many will lose as win when playing the market. The problem is that fools like you don't understand this fact, and somehow seem to think that the stock market is just an endless money engine; it is not.
Cycloptichorn
Well then RealLife.... I guess it is a good thing that McCain is coming out so strongly against Social Security.
I hope it goes well for him.
Cycloptichorn wrote:real life wrote:Very successful, eh?
Seniors receive less than 1% return on their money and are at the mercy of the government.
That's very successful to you, is it?
You are a disgrace.
Tell your parents that you're glad that they didn't have the option to take the taxes that were confiscated for SS and put them in a mutual fund and have it earn 7-9% yearly (a very conservative figure).
SS dishonors our seniors and it is a disgrace to them. Only liberals don't seem to understand that.
You're a moron. SS has contributed to the greatest economic expansion of our lifetime by freeing up younger generations from the onerous burden of paying for the golden years of their parents. It increases home ownership tremendously and guarantees an income for folks NO MATTER what goes wrong in their lives or the stock market.
Go ahead - run on an anti-SS platform. Look how great that worked out for Bush and the Republicans a few years back, you think it's going to be a winner for McCain?
I
am glad my parents didn't have the option to put their SS funds into other investments. You should be glad as well, for there simply is no guarantee of returns on investments, and as many will lose as win when playing the market. The problem is that fools like you don't understand this fact, and somehow seem to think that the stock market is just an endless money engine; it is not.
Cycloptichorn
Even putting their money in a bank at standard interest rates over the past 40 years would have gotten them much more.
Learn to use a calculator.
ebrown_p wrote:Well then RealLife.... I guess it is a good thing that McCain is coming out so strongly against Social Security.
I hope it goes well for him.
It won't go so well. The media will paint him as a villian for blowing the whistle on this scam.
real life wrote:Cycloptichorn wrote:real life wrote:Very successful, eh?
Seniors receive less than 1% return on their money and are at the mercy of the government.
That's very successful to you, is it?
You are a disgrace.
Tell your parents that you're glad that they didn't have the option to take the taxes that were confiscated for SS and put them in a mutual fund and have it earn 7-9% yearly (a very conservative figure).
SS dishonors our seniors and it is a disgrace to them. Only liberals don't seem to understand that.
You're a moron. SS has contributed to the greatest economic expansion of our lifetime by freeing up younger generations from the onerous burden of paying for the golden years of their parents. It increases home ownership tremendously and guarantees an income for folks NO MATTER what goes wrong in their lives or the stock market.
Go ahead - run on an anti-SS platform. Look how great that worked out for Bush and the Republicans a few years back, you think it's going to be a winner for McCain?
I
am glad my parents didn't have the option to put their SS funds into other investments. You should be glad as well, for there simply is no guarantee of returns on investments, and as many will lose as win when playing the market. The problem is that fools like you don't understand this fact, and somehow seem to think that the stock market is just an endless money engine; it is not.
Cycloptichorn
Even putting their money in a bank at standard interest rates over the past 40 years would have gotten them much more.
Learn to use a calculator.
What happens if the banks fail? You don't understand SS in the slightest.
Cycloptichorn
Cycloptichorn wrote:real life wrote:Cycloptichorn wrote:real life wrote:Very successful, eh?
Seniors receive less than 1% return on their money and are at the mercy of the government.
That's very successful to you, is it?
You are a disgrace.
Tell your parents that you're glad that they didn't have the option to take the taxes that were confiscated for SS and put them in a mutual fund and have it earn 7-9% yearly (a very conservative figure).
SS dishonors our seniors and it is a disgrace to them. Only liberals don't seem to understand that.
You're a moron. SS has contributed to the greatest economic expansion of our lifetime by freeing up younger generations from the onerous burden of paying for the golden years of their parents. It increases home ownership tremendously and guarantees an income for folks NO MATTER what goes wrong in their lives or the stock market.
Go ahead - run on an anti-SS platform. Look how great that worked out for Bush and the Republicans a few years back, you think it's going to be a winner for McCain?
I
am glad my parents didn't have the option to put their SS funds into other investments. You should be glad as well, for there simply is no guarantee of returns on investments, and as many will lose as win when playing the market. The problem is that fools like you don't understand this fact, and somehow seem to think that the stock market is just an endless money engine; it is not.
Cycloptichorn
Even putting their money in a bank at standard interest rates over the past 40 years would have gotten them much more.
Learn to use a calculator.
What happens if the banks fail?
Is that the scare line you plan to use to keep seniors from doing the math?
Despicable.
How many banks have failed in the last 40 years? And what happens when they do? Fearmonger, have you ever heard of deposit insurance?
SS is a vote buying scam and you can't turn it loose even to help your grandparents.
Despicable.
Sometimes I forget why it's a waste of time to have a conversation with you, troll. Honestly. You don't even have a child's understanding of economics, yet like to talk about it as if you do.
I think I will rest comfortably upon the fact that SS isn't going anywhere anytime soon; that you will continue to be wrong and will not see relief in your lifetime. For the rest of your life you will pay into the SS system and you will benefit from it when you retire, along with other members of your family. And if you don't like it? Too bad.
Cycloptichorn
I read one of those little political books written and signed as his own, from Ronald Reagan, in 1964. It stated that SS is going broke within the next, I will say, 20 years, because that is as close as I recall to the actual figure. The point is, 44 years have passed, and it is still functional (crippled by politicians, but, functional). If there exists a will to make it work, it will never go broke. Eliminating many pork barrel programs, cutting back on the military spending (getting out of Iraq, for a beginner, cutting out star wars programs), no more raiding the coffers, etc., ought to help enormously. I am not schooled in any of this, but those who are must have produced a few minds that can work out the details and present a coherent program that works.
Cycloptichorn wrote:Sometimes I forget why it's a waste of time to have a conversation with you, troll. Honestly. You don't even have a child's understanding of economics, yet like to talk about it as if you do.
I think I will rest comfortably upon the fact that SS isn't going anywhere anytime soon; that you will continue to be wrong and will not see relief in your lifetime. For the rest of your life you will pay into the SS system and you will benefit from it when you retire, along with other members of your family. And if you don't like it? Too bad.
Cycloptichorn
Ponzi schemes such as SS used to be illegal until an exception was made for the government to get in on the action.
You cannot answer any of the points I've raised with anything resembling a fact.
Why should seniors be forced to settle for an underperforming 'benefit' program just to keep your boys in power?
Go ahead and dodge the issue by sticking your head in the sand.
Anyone who does the simple math knows you're dead wrong on this.
I think McCain diving into political quicksand. I am happy that realLife and others are pushing him further in.
I wonder what Real Life would do to fix Social Security.
Real Life isn't entirely wrong here. SS is run exactly like a Ponzi scheme (minus the exit strategy, hopefully), which are illegal in all 50 States for good reason. The problem is; to get away from the Ponzi type set up of today would cost the tax payers the better part of a trillion dollars a year, which would very slowly decrease as new retirees increasingly used their private SS over the current system. To fix this over night would cost more than this year's entire GDP, so forget about that. The problem is; the current system, much like our federal government in general, has no safeguards to balance the budget... which essentially almost inevitably leads to just another way of Boomers spending their children's, grand children's, and great grandchildren's money before they even earn it. Like all things U.S. Government; there can be no real transparency in spending projections because there is no real control... Balanced Budget amendment, anyone?
Until there are legally binding Budget controls; it is difficult to even weigh the Pros and Cons of any proposal; because people will always vote for more money now, seemingly with no clue or concern about the future ramifications of doing so. Telling the truth about our spending/debt is essentially political suicide (ask Ross Perot). McCain is correct that the system is fatally flawed, but that correctness will be of little consolation when it costs him political supportÂ… and it will... count on it.
ebrown_p wrote:I think McCain diving into political quicksand. I am happy that realLife and others are pushing him further in.
It's very risky, no doubt about it.
And I'm not very optimistic, I am a realist.
The harder he pushes SS reform the greater the downside because the Dems assisted by the media will miseducate everyone they can.
Campaigns are won by making promises of all gain and no pain, and that's not what he's saying.
kickycan wrote:I wonder what Real Life would do to fix Social Security.
I wonder sometimes too. But sticking with the status quo wouldn't be an option.
Allowing incremental and voluntary privatization is probably the best approach.
It's taken a long time to get into this mess, and will take a long time to fix.
Will that play with the McDonalds mentality? Probably not very well.
@real life,
Quote:Seniors receive less than 1% return on their money and are at the mercy of the governmen
What is your basis for this statement?
According to the Heritage Foundation they received more than that.
Those numbers are inflation adjusted so the return would be higher than that without adjustment.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace