Social Security - your thoughts?

#479
#479
BigOrangeMojo said:
A person who invested solely in 10 year treasuries for 40 years (1968-2008) and put all their money into equities in 2008 would still have a far better ROI than SS....
Click to expand...
What if the person who did that got divorced and had to give half of it to their ex.
What then?
 
#481
#481
hog88 said:
What if there was a flood and their boat got washed away, could they make a hardship withdrawal?
Click to expand...
Hey, what if they lost all their teeth and had to pay people to chew their food for them?
 
#484
#484
lawgator1 said:
Yes rebound that time was 2 years.

That time.

What if you are a low income worker and retire and this happens. Are you just supposed to go, well, never mind, it will bounce back in 2 years??? All the while depleting your remaining basis?
Click to expand...
so I put into SS what someone making 30k a year would get from SS: 1,300 a month. x 12 months is 15.6k.

that same person putting 3% into a 401k, with only 5% return would have 109,820 dollars. even if they had to pull out the same 15.6k with no return for 2 years, they would still have 71% ready to invest. even if they made no further gains on the 109k that would last 7 years, more than long enough to recover.

even a very low 2% growth in that 7 years would extend it to 8 years.

lets say you replaced SS with a retirement plan, and they invested the 6.2%, instead of it going to SS. they would have 225k. thats 14 years, with no additional growth. 4 more years with 2% growth.

you are ALWAYS going to come out better investing than you would with base SS.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary and McDad
#486
#486
LouderVol said:
so I put into SS what someone making 30k a year would get from SS: 1,300 a month. x 12 months is 15.6k.

that same person putting 3% into a 401k, with only 5% return would have 109,820 dollars. even if they had to pull out the same 15.6k with no return for 2 years, they would still have 71% ready to invest. even if they made no further gains on the 109k that would last 7 years, more than long enough to recover.

even a very low 2% growth in that 7 years would extend it to 8 years.

lets say you replaced SS with a retirement plan, and they invested the 6.2%, instead of it going to SS. they would have 225k. thats 14 years, with no additional growth. 4 more years with 2% growth.

you are ALWAYS going to come out better investing than you would with base SS.
Click to expand...

Too many numbers and that's coming from the tax nerd...
 
#498
#498
lawgator1 said:
Yes rebound that time was 2 years.

That time.

What if you are a low income worker and retire and this happens. Are you just supposed to go, well, never mind, it will bounce back in 2 years??? All the while depleting your remaining basis?
Click to expand...
You simply don't have it at risk. You do realize a 25yo and a 65yo don't invest the same right? If you go broke after 2 yrs then perhaps you weren't ready to retire. Govt shouldn't be a babysitter of other people's money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary and LadyVolette
#499
#499
BernardKingGOAT said:
My Dad was career USAF and then engineer afterwards. He knew how to save and invest. There are some valid points against privatizing it. I doubt either one of them are counting on it being their main source of income at retirement. In fact, anyone with a few functioning brain cells has planned accordingly, if they were able to do so
Click to expand...
Those with of us with some sense have planned with other investments, but in working with the elderly, some people have just betted on social security to make due, and it ain’t pretty.. never assume people will do the smart thing or plan ahead for that matter
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top