Senior citizens cutting back on their necessities

[MG1968]

we monetize the debt.

Looking for someone who can explain that in terms everyone can understand.

You wanna give it a try? Dropski refuses and mg1968 obviously doesn't know.

I understand what monetizing the debt is. I gave an example of one way the government is doing so (by buying it's own bonds and securities), but that wasn't good enough for you. Another way to monetize the debt is to just print money and inflate the currency. I don't know what you're looking for and quite frankly, at this point, I don't really give a damn. You're no better than leftists like LG with their constant re-framing of a debate.

 

[lawgator1]

the only bad part about privatizaton is that we still need to fund the current retirees. i.e. we'd have to double fund to privatize it. therefore it doesn't make a lot of sense.

That is A downside. Not the only one.

I'd be okay with allowing some sort of partial privatization for people below a certain age and with a long investment horizon -- at least 20 years. But I'd want it strictly limited to pure index funds bought and held for them by the US government.

I'd never let the private financial adviers get their mitts on it or we are all screwed.

 

[MG1968]

That is A downside. Not the only one.

I'd be okay with allowing some sort of partial privatization for people below a certain age and with a long investment horizon -- at least 20 years. But I'd want it strictly limited to pure index funds bought and held for them by the US government.

I'd never let the private financial adviers get their mitts on it or we are all screwed.

that's almost exactly what Bush proposed, a partial privatization for people under a certain age. Even the limited investment options. He and the GOP were excoriated for it and the left completely lied about the proposal.

 

[droski]

right because people do so well on their own investing. god forbid people seek professional advice.

 

[utvolpj]

But I'd want it strictly limited to pure index funds bought and held for them by the US government.

I'd never let the private financial adviers get their mitts on it or we are all screwed.

you mean the same gov't who couldn't manage it in the first place? Good grief just end the sham that this is a retirement account and put it on the individual to provide for their own life. If not the tax rate will hit the 70% mark sooner than predicted.

 

[droski]

you mean the same gov't who couldn't manage it in the first place? Good grief just end the sham that this is a retirement account and put it on the individual to provide for their own life. If not the tax rate will hit the 70% mark sooner than predicted.

also. what happens if it is run by the govt and it doesn't produce the returns we think it will? wont the democrats do what they always do and raise holy hell and try to get the gap covered? just like they do with the unions.

 

[CSpindizzy]

also. what happens if it is run by the govt and it doesn't produce the returns we think it will? wont the democrats do what they always do and raise holy hell and try to get the gap covered? just like they do with the unions.

If it DOES produce good returns the far left will find itself cheering on the evil capitalist big businesses they despise and wish to regulate. I would love to see that dog chase his tail.

 

[overseasorange2]

what happened to you caring abuot the poor? does it bother you that the old are the richest people in this country and that the young are the poorest? we should merge it with welfare. if you are going to starve to death you'll get some money. otherwise screw you.

You mean do I feel guilty about my finances.Oh hell no! I was poor when I was young too, but I worked my ass off for 30 years...so I deserve exactly what I have.

However, that does not mean I don't care about the poor, and help out with various worthy causes. You always seem to think everything is so black or white. :blink:

 

[overseasorange2]

Thats the problem, everyone wants their piece of pie and it has already been spent. Now they're trying to get another piece of pie from other generations.

At some point one of the following generations is going to take whats left of the pie and the rest are going to starve.

Just because someone was smart enough to save and plan does not mean they deserve the SS that they donated to for decades any less than the guy who needs it. Kind of like a bank telling a rich person you don't get any interest on your account because you don't need it.:crazy:

 

[droski]

Just because someone was smart enough to save and plan does not mean they deserve the SS that they donated to for decades any less than the guy who needs it. Kind of like a bank telling a rich person you don't get any interest on your account because you don't need it.:crazy:

than i assume that you are against our current tax system since those taht work harder pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes?

 

[MontereyVol]

Just because someone was smart enough to save and plan does not mean they deserve the SS that they donated to for decades any less than the guy who needs it. Kind of like a bank telling a rich person you don't get any interest on your account because you don't need it.:crazy:

No one said life was fair, thats just how it is going to be.

Watch out for ORNL they thought it was strange I took a $200 credit dispute as far as I did. They actually asked me why I continued to pursue the compliant over something I could easily afford.

 

[rjd970]

than i assume that you are against our current tax system since those taht work harder pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes?

I think that should read "those that make more pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes"

I disagree that working hard always correlates to making more. It simply isn't the case. A number of factors go into how much money somebody makes.

 

[BeecherVol]

I think that should read "those that make more pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes"

I disagree that working hard always correlates to making more. It simply isn't the case. A number of factors go into how much money somebody makes.

I would agree.

Putting hard work into the right industry/line of work, will make you more successful than a guy that works hard digging ditches for a living. Im not slighting that type of work, because I have and still do this type of work. But I have figured out a way to make more money at it while not working much harder.

 

[overseasorange2]

than i assume that you are against our current tax system since those taht work harder pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes?

Does not matter what I think about our tax system. It is what it is, and if I don't like it, I can leave (Which I might anyway the way things are going here). Depending on what happens, it's an option many of my friends are considering for their retirement years.

 

[gsvol]

Like what? Privatizing it?

That works great in principle if 1) the options for investing are limited to sound vehicles over a very long period of time; and 2) no one retires during a downturn.

It's bad enough that so many people hit retirement age with nothing to speak of except social security. I'd hate to think what would happen to the millions of people retiring in the current 5-10 year span if their social security had been whalloped by the market plunge post dotcom and again in 2007.

The irony is that people would have one heckuva an incentive to reitre early if they were in their late 50's so as to cash out from the markets if there are worries about a coming down cycle that will kill them in their 60's and 70's, hastening a disaster if they all leave in a short period of time and take their investment marbles with them..

It doesn't take rocket scientist to do the math that shows the SS system isn't sustainable as it is currently run.

The only good thing about using part of the fund to invest in private markets is that the money doesn't go into the general fund and immediately be spent by big spending democrats thus dumping the debt on future generations.

I understand what monetizing the debt is. I gave an example of one way the government is doing so (by buying it's own bonds and securities), but that wasn't good enough for you. Another way to monetize the debt is to just print money and inflate the currency. I don't know what you're looking for and quite frankly, at this point, I don't really give a damn. You're no better than leftists like LG with their constant re-framing of a debate.

And I asked in return what agency buys from what agency??

Now I ask, who prints the money and how does it enter the economy??

Ask yourself this; if the federal government is buying it's own paper, (or just printing money) how do we end up owing Japan and China such huge amounts??

BTW, you are far more like ACLG in that you resort to personal slurs when you can't discuss the issues.

And another question, if you don't give a damn, why did you post on the topic to begin with??

It's sort of like you don't want to discuss the issue and don't want anyone else to discuss it either, how smart of you, simply brilliant! :no: