Social Security - your thoughts?

#202
#202
utvolpj said:
Illegally or using the numerous loopholes instituted by both parties? Using the system as created and intended is not gaming the system
Click to expand...


If you make secret campaign contributions and the elected officials do your bidding to pass changes which help you avoid taxes, that's going to kill the notion of a 15 percent flat tax.
 
#203
#203
lawgator1 said:
The concern is obvious, which is that if there were a substantial market downturn, or even a modest one that lasted a period of a few years, you'd have people who run out of $ to pay for retirement substantially before they would have, had they been getting the steady SS check.

Everyone would love it if it consistently gave 5% + growth. But if it got sluggish and there were the kind of enormous losses that would entail to a huge population with no alternatives, not so much.
Click to expand...
If you're wanting zero risk, you could find instruments that are as close to zero as possible. The return is not good but still better than SS.

How much money do you think the ave wage earner would have in the account (using historical rates of return) when they turn 65? I did the math a few months ago in the thread. But do you have a gut feeling on the amount?
 
#205
#205
lawgator1 said:
If you make secret campaign contributions and the elected officials do your bidding to pass changes which help you avoid taxes, that's going to kill the notion of a 15 percent flat tax.
Click to expand...
You did it again. You pretended to be in earnest. But you are unserious about a real discussion.
 
#206
#206
The math I referenced earlier in a reply to LG (in case anyone is interested):
McDad said:
Math:
Ave weekly wage in US = $1200 per week (rounded).
% contributed to SS by employee and employer per paycheck = 12.4%
Ave amount per week going into SS = 150 (rounded)
Amount of money after 47 years of working if 150 per week was put into a very safe investment at 7% = 3M (rounded).
***This assumes a wage which never increases over time.
ave monthly SS check for those retiring at 65 = $1720 (rounded)
ave age of death in US = 73
1720 x (8 years x 12 months) = 165K

The ave earning power the benevolent government stole from the ave american worker = 2,830,000 (rounded)
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol and Gandalf
#208
#208
BigOrangeMojo said:
You are putting in 366K (assumes 0% return) and getting out 165K....
Click to expand...
But what if there is a steep or moderate downturn in the market that lasts for several years?

That security from a negative 50% return on 366k is better, right???
 
#209
#209
McDad said:
But what if there is a steep or moderate downturn in the market that lasts for several years?

That security from a negative 50% return on 366k is better, right???
Click to expand...

There's some issues with your logic and assumptions but the general gist is directionally correct...
 
#211
#211
McDad said:
I like my llogical and assumptive issues. It's what makes me unique.

Let's explore them. Lay it on me.
Click to expand...

You are taking current average SS check of 1,720 which was earned from 1940-2023.

You are comparing that to current average weekly wages of 1200 and extrapolating it out.

Grandpa wasn't making 65K a year in 1940...

More accurate method would be the average weekly paycheck from 1940-2023, not current one..
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#212
#212
BigOrangeMojo said:
You are taking current average SS check of 1,720 which was earned from 1940-2023.

You are comparing that to current average weekly wages of 1200 and extrapolating it out.

Grandpa wasn't making 65K a year in 1940...
Click to expand...
Agreed. How much does it change the total payout based on what the monthly amount is in 45 years? We can even bump up the life expectancy a bit to account for healthier population if you want.


ETa...and since we're talking about those refinements, how about a yearly COLA increase to weekly wages for the 45 years?

This is going to be interesting.
 
#213
#213
BigOrangeMojo said:
More accurate method would be the average weekly paycheck from 1940-2023, not current one..
Click to expand...
I was trying to do the math on someone joining the workforce today and retiring in 47 years rather than someone starting their work 47 years ago.
 
#214
#214
McDad said:
Agreed. How much does it change the total payout based on what the monthly amount is in 45 years? We can even bump up the life expectancy a bit to account for healthier population if you want.


ETa...and since we're talking about those refinements, how about a yearly COLA increase to weekly wages for the 45 years?

This is going to be interesting.
Click to expand...
an annual 2.5% COLA raise on a weekly 1200 wage would be around $3800 per week in 47 years.
 
#218
#218
SpaceCoastVol said:
I for one don't care whether or not any of them 'appreciate it'. I want OUR tax dollars to benefit OUR country first. If there is any left over then we can be generous. With $4,000,000,000,000.00 in debt, we are nowhere near that point yet.
Click to expand...

The debt doesn't affect your life--so why do you and others pretend that it does? It's the same with right-wingers who are always
prattling about the GOVERNMENT limiting their "freedom." More nonsense.
 
#220
#220
turbovol said:
The debt doesn't affect your life--so why do you and others pretend that it does? It's the same with right-wingers who are always
prattling about the GOVERNMENT limiting their "freedom." More nonsense.
Click to expand...

It does affect everyones life since the .gov is printing money just to cover the interest.
 
#223
#223
The numbers are even worse if you are at the cap....

Me and my spouse would both have to make it to late 80s/early 90s to get positive ROI...

She'll murder me way before then
 
  • Like
Reactions: 85SugarVol and McDad
#224
#224
McDad said:
The math I referenced earlier in a reply to LG (in case anyone is interested):
Click to expand...


7 % is "very safe?" Where can I get that when I reitre ?

And you are talking long term, ignoring the disaster for 5 years when it's negative, just as a retiree needs it.
 
#225
#225
BigOrangeMojo said:
You are still looking at a 1.5% average ROI...at most...
Click to expand...
Ok. Great you've provided more accuracy on my overview. I like it.

What about greater accuracy on private index funds? Is the rate of return reasonable? should we estimate increasing levels of contribution as pay increases? What do you think?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top