• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Greenspan Points to Danger of Rising Budget Deficits

Help Support Ranchers.net:

C

Cal

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2005
Messages
3,598
Reaction score
0
Location
Southern SD
So how many people facing retirement, do you suppose, wish they could have invested the money withheld from their wages into personal savings and medical accounts instead of into an empty SS "lockbox"? I cannot relate to the thought process that creates and perpetuates these entitlements, while any meaningful reform never materializes. The way the AARP crowd screamed bloody murder when any immediate changes wouldn't have effected any of them seemed a bit selfishly absurd.
 
Cal said:
The way the AARP crowd screamed bloody murder when any immediate changes wouldn't have effected any of them seemed a bit selfishly absurd.
Click to expand...

Amazing, isn't it, that the "AARP crowd" looked beyond their immediate wants and needs and thought about others that will follow them. :shock:
 
Disagreeable said:
Cal said:
The way the AARP crowd screamed bloody murder when any immediate changes wouldn't have effected any of them seemed a bit selfishly absurd.
Click to expand...

Amazing, isn't it, that the "AARP crowd" looked beyond their immediate wants and needs and thought about others that will follow them. :shock:
Click to expand...

Why yes! How thoughtful to keep even young workers from investing any portion of their earnings into accounts that they would actually own, and could even will to their heirs, rather than to pay it into the government where it would be immediately gone forever, with nothing more than a promise from an empty, unlocked box, and to perpetuate the top loaded ponzi scheme known as Social Security.
 
Cal said:
Disagreeable said:
Cal said:
The way the AARP crowd screamed bloody murder when any immediate changes wouldn't have effected any of them seemed a bit selfishly absurd.
Click to expand...

Amazing, isn't it, that the "AARP crowd" looked beyond their immediate wants and needs and thought about others that will follow them. :shock:
Click to expand...

Why yes! How thoughtful to keep even young workers from investing any portion of their earnings into accounts that they would actually own, and could even will to their heirs, rather than to pay it into the government where it would be immediately gone forever, with nothing more than a promise from an empty, unlocked box, and to perpetuate the top loaded ponzi scheme known as Social Security.
Click to expand...

Ever hear the term IRA? I can tell you personally how well they work. They worked especially well during the Clinton Administration when the economy was doing well and gasoline prices were reasonable. I invested the maximum amount allowed for years and it's paying quite well today. Anyone can do that. It doesn't require any special law. It doesn't take away from Social Security. I also know dozens of people who will be working more years than they planned because Enron took people's money and wasted it. And where's Bush's pal, Ken Lay, today? I also know dozens of people who would not have a place to live or a meal to eat if not for their Social Security check every month. There's nothing to stop someone from investing money into private accounts. But after being beat up by AARP (among others) Bush finally admitted that his plan would not "save" Social Security. It would, in fact, damage Social Security. The American people made it quite plain to their representatives in Washington, DC, that they don't want Social Security killed by the Bush Administration.
 
Ok...stupid queston...but here goes. Let's say that you are now able to invest part of what would be taken for SS into an account for your retirement, that's the way to go... ..and you take that $$$ and place it into what the Bush Admn was proposing...a retirement acct via the stockmarket.

Ok...then let's say the stock market takes a dive and you,Person A loose all that money. Your retirement $$$ is gone because you invested this way.

What happens to Person A who is flat a**ed broke now? Will there be a gov't " net" to catch these people? And you can't say the stock market won't crash...as it has before and may again...might be even bigger next time...who knows?

If there is a " net" in place to protect people who loose all their retirement $$$ via these " personal retirement accts".....then why bother...isn't this SS as we know it today practically?

I'm not sure which way is best to be honest....I guess it's a personal decision and what matter of risks you're willing to take.
 
kolanuraven said:
Ok...stupid queston...but here goes. Let's say that you are now able to invest part of what would be taken for SS into an account for your retirement, that's the way to go... ..and you take that $$$ and place it into what the Bush Admn was proposing...a retirement acct via the stockmarket.

Ok...then let's say the stock market takes a dive and you,Person A loose all that money. Your retirement $$$ is gone because you invested this way.

What happens to Person A who is flat a**ed broke now? Will there be a gov't " net" to catch these people? And you can't say the stock market won't crash...as it has before and may again...might be even bigger next time...who knows?

If there is a " net" in place to protect people who loose all their retirement $$$ via these " personal retirement accts".....then why bother...isn't this SS as we know it today practically?

I'm not sure which way is best to be honest....I guess it's a personal decision and what matter of risks you're willing to take.
Click to expand...

It's not a stupid question at all. Cal and the Bush Bunch would like to ignore the fact that millions of people lost their retirements in the stock market bust after Bush came into office.

This country doesn't let anyone starve. So, as you say, we'd wind up supporting the person who invests their money unwisely anyway. And let's not forget that some companies, Enron as a prime example, flat out lied to their employees and to the analysts (at least those who weren't in cahoots with them). People didn't invest with then unwisely; they invested because they were lied to. Hmmm, sounds like Congress supporting Bush's plan to invade Iraq, doesn't it? They agreed because he gave them skewed intelligence. Some people invested in Enron because they were given skewed earnings reports. Is there a trend here?
 
kolanuraven said:
Ok...stupid queston...but here goes. Let's say that you are now able to invest part of what would be taken for SS into an account for your retirement, that's the way to go... ..and you take that $$$ and place it into what the Bush Admn was proposing...a retirement acct via the stockmarket.

Ok...then let's say the stock market takes a dive and you,Person A loose all that money. Your retirement $$$ is gone because you invested this way.

What happens to Person A who is flat a**ed broke now? Will there be a gov't " net" to catch these people? And you can't say the stock market won't crash...as it has before and may again...might be even bigger next time...who knows?

If there is a " net" in place to protect people who loose all their retirement $$$ via these " personal retirement accts".....then why bother...isn't this SS as we know it today practically?

I'm not sure which way is best to be honest....I guess it's a personal decision and what matter of risks you're willing to take.
Click to expand...

Only a portion of social security taxes would go toward the personal investment. But the plan had weaknesses, which is why it hasn't gathered much momentum. I'm not an economist, but the plan was a great deal more complicated than just taking social security payments and putting them entirely in personal accounts.
 
It's not a stupid question at all. Cal and the Bush Bunch would like to ignore the fact that millions of people lost their retirements in the stock market bust after Bush came into office.
Click to expand...

If you check your facts you would see that the many mutual funds and retirement plans including fers, started diving before Clinton left office......
(mine included,) had I not reacted I also would have lost hundreds of thousands, but by watching the indicators I was able to freeze my accounts, transfer money out and actually profit,

With that said a money manager who is complacent should not invest agressively in the stockmarket,

The plan offered would have offered a tiered system similar to FERS, and given the person options and risk levels, from safe goverment securities to bonds, and then the stockmarket,

The plan offered also only allowed a "portion" of the invested money to be taken in the stockmarket with the remainder being left in SS as a safety net......

The plan that congress and the federal workers get is called FERS, and is the model for Bush's plan.

It offers a safety net, tiered risk options, and the ability to freeze the account at a moments notice.........good enough for generations of Democratic politicians yet not good enough for US............................
 
I know that Enron took a chunk outta me when it hit bottom, but I was well diversified...but it still hurt. So, I now am lucky enough to have the time to handle my money myself now....may not be any better @ it than the others....but I sleep better @ nite.


Guess it's true that the Bush admn protects big buisness or youi'd think they'd investigate, prosecute, persue more into the Enron deal. Yeah I know they sacrificed a few...but what about Ken Lay???? Where's he....Cayman Islands maybe????
 
kolanuraven said:
I know that Enron took a chunk outta me when it hit bottom, but I was well diversified...but it still hurt. So, I now am lucky enough to have the time to handle my money myself now....may not be any better @ it than the others....but I sleep better @ nite.


Guess it's true that the Bush admn protects big buisness or youi'd think they'd investigate, prosecute, persue more into the Enron deal. Yeah I know they sacrificed a few...but what about Ken Lay???? Where's he....Cayman Islands maybe????
Click to expand...

Ken Lay is prolly the same place as Micheal Milkin.
 
But didn't Milken pull some jail time? Isn't that when he came up with the cancer...remember that? At least he did spend some time in the pokey...but not sure what good that does these types of guys.

Should make these big guys work @ a fast food place....pumper sewage truck for 2 yrs or something of the sort.
 
Born into poverty in Tyrone, Missouri, Kenneth Lay came from a family so poor that they were not always able to celebrate holidays, eating cold-cuts one Thanksgiving, Lay always kept a sense of optimism and had the credo that "things would work out."
Click to expand...

Maybe he went back to being poor????

I believe his trial starts in January.....
 
Should make these big guys work @ a fast food place....pumper sewage truck for 2 yrs or something of the sort
Click to expand...

Could you picture Martha, pumping Gas, or selling slurpies at 7-11?????

yea, give me ten worth of regular, and check the oil after you clean the bugs off my windshield........actually the thought does make me chuckle.....


her trial cost US ????
I have no sympathy for the rich that get caught with thier hands in the cookie jar anymore then the poor.....it is still a crime.....but making her do some poor schmuck's job would have been funnier.....and made a great reality show I could at least not watch......
 
Disagreeable said:
Ever hear the term IRA? I can tell you personally how well they work. They worked especially well during the Clinton Administration when the economy was doing well and gasoline prices were reasonable. I invested the maximum amount allowed for years and it's paying quite well today. Anyone can do that. It doesn't require any special law. It doesn't take away from Social Security. I also know dozens of people who will be working more years than they planned because Enron took people's money and wasted it. And where's Bush's pal, Ken Lay, today? I also know dozens of people who would not have a place to live or a meal to eat if not for their Social Security check every month. There's nothing to stop someone from investing money into private accounts. But after being beat up by AARP (among others) Bush finally admitted that his plan would not "save" Social Security. It would, in fact, damage Social Security. The American people made it quite plain to their representatives in Washington, DC, that they don't want Social Security killed by the Bush Administration.
Click to expand...
Your IRA success is a good testamonial as to why much of the general public would be better off without a lifetime of paying into SS. Maybe the people you claim that wouldn't have a meal or place to live without SS, should figure what a lifetime of investing, rather than paying into SS would have netted. I strongly believe that corp. crooks should be in jail, but what percent of the population was actually affected by the scam that you refer to? There needs to be some safety net, but forcing the entire population into the SS entitlement program was a bad idea to perpetuate, and no real reform is a pending disaster.
 

Latest posts

Top