If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Oregon Live)   $0   (oregonlive.com) divider line 108
    More: Fail, Social Security benefits, social security, security questions, Social Security Administration  
•       •       •

8117 clicks; posted to Business » on 11 May 2012 at 12:20 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



108 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-05-11 12:32:25 PM
If given the option to opt out forever without any possibility of going back, I'd do it in without hesitation.
 
2012-05-11 12:34:51 PM
Retirement age (67):
$503 a month

Hilarious. I made more selling candy at a movie theater as a 14 year old
 
2012-05-11 12:37:41 PM
It's Only Money's column this weekend will assess the health of Social Security system. It's better than the headlines have led you to believe.

You mean Republicans and centrists who "want to have a grown-up conversation about entitlements" have been misleading folks like Smeggy Smurf so they can push through their plan to hand SS over to private banks?

I'm shocked.
 
2012-05-11 12:38:17 PM

Smeggy Smurf: If given the option to opt out forever without any possibility of going back, I'd do it in without hesitation.


Right now. Sign me up.

/23
//it's just another tax
 
2012-05-11 12:43:33 PM

Wendy's Chili: It's Only Money's column this weekend will assess the health of Social Security system. It's better than the headlines have led you to believe.

You mean Republicans and centrists who "want to have a grown-up conversation about entitlements" have been misleading folks like Smeggy Smurf so they can push through their plan to hand SS over to private banks?

I'm shocked.


this.

the only way SS is going away is if congress specifically acts to get rid of it. otherwise, SS will exist when you retire.
 
2012-05-11 12:44:50 PM
Mine says "At 67, report to FEMA camp L-163 as ordered".
 
2012-05-11 12:47:24 PM
Well, if it goes away, they could make certain things free for seniors or giveaways

Public transport
Food stamps/free meals
Housing allocation
Health Care
 
2012-05-11 12:50:49 PM

Smeggy Smurf: If given the option to opt out forever without any possibility of going back, I'd do it in without hesitation.

 
2012-05-11 12:52:31 PM
At full retirement age (67):
$2,312 a month

At age 70:
$2,867 a month

At early retirement age (62):
$1,628 a month

Bigger gap between 67 and 70 than I expected.
 
2012-05-11 12:53:43 PM

Pinner: Well, if it goes away, they could make certain things free for seniors or giveaways


"They" could. But they won't. That's not the bootstrappy way.
 
2012-05-11 12:56:25 PM
SS may go away, but the tax will remain. Taxes never go away.
 
2012-05-11 12:59:03 PM

Sun Worshiping Dog Launcher: Pinner: Well, if it goes away, they could make certain things free for seniors or giveaways

"They" could. But they won't. That's not the bootstrappy way.


I always point to some random area when referring to 'them'
 
2012-05-11 12:59:27 PM

Katie98_KT: the only way SS is going away is if congress specifically acts to get rid of it. otherwise, SS will exist when you retire.


Not to mention its trivial to fix. Up the Wage Base and up the retirement age. Hardly rocket science. It was good enough for Reagan.

/I've hit the wage base for social security every year for the last 17 years
 
2012-05-11 01:00:33 PM
Estimated Benefit at Full
Retirement age (67):
$1,576 a month

I'm OK with this.
 
2012-05-11 01:03:12 PM

FatSteveWasted: I'm OK with this.


How old are you?
 
2012-05-11 01:05:27 PM

Smeggy Smurf: If given the option to opt out forever without any possibility of going back, I'd do it in without hesitation.


This.

I'll continue to see it as it really is: a legalized government run Ponzi scheme.
 
2012-05-11 01:05:50 PM

Katie98_KT: the only way SS is going away is if congress specifically acts to get rid of it. otherwise, SS will exist when you retire.


Or, you know, if it runs out of money so many times over that they can't even keep the joke running anymore.

As it will be.

Smeggy Smurf: If given the option to opt out forever without any possibility of going back, I'd do it in without hesitation.

 
2012-05-11 01:06:08 PM
Done in the headline.
 
2012-05-11 01:06:33 PM
Golf Clap subby!

I got a statement from the SS a few months back that says when I retire I "should" be able to get "up to" 75% of the benefits that are due to me.

@___@

I want 100% of the benefits.
I wish I could opt out of paying into this corrupted system and instead let me pay into a Roth IRA that is self directed.
 
2012-05-11 01:08:25 PM

chewielouie: I'll continue to see it as it really is: a legalized government run Ponzi scheme.


Ponzi schemes don't run for 77 years.

/social security is trivial to keep going identifiably - medicare on the other hand ....
 
2012-05-11 01:11:30 PM

gingerjet: Ponzi schemes don't run for 77 years.


But a Ponzi scheme DOES take the investment money of some and pay it out as the "return" to others.

This is different from SS how, exactly?

Just because it's "legal" doesn't make it something else.
 
2012-05-11 01:13:55 PM
Ending social security and medicare will not only save a bajillion dollars but it will also kill all the old people that vote wrong about gay marriage.
 
2012-05-11 01:16:05 PM

grinding_journalist: gingerjet: Ponzi schemes don't run for 77 years.

But a Ponzi scheme DOES take the investment money of some and pay it out as the "return" to others.

This is different from SS how, exactly?

Just because it's "legal" doesn't make it something else.


Ponzi schemes are fraudulent investment vehicles which are represented to the investor as a method to earn profit. Social security is an insurance compact which works like any other. My premiums are used as the funding source for current operations, just as is the case for car insurance, home insurance, life insurance, health insurance, etc.
 
2012-05-11 01:18:51 PM

grinding_journalist: gingerjet: Ponzi schemes don't run for 77 years.

But a Ponzi scheme DOES take the investment money of some and pay it out as the "return" to others.

This is different from SS how, exactly?

Just because it's "legal" doesn't make it something else.


SS isn't an investment. It's insurance against getting old or sick.
 
2012-05-11 01:19:28 PM

grinding_journalist: But a Ponzi scheme DOES take the investment money of some and pay it out as the "return" to others.


Um, so does every other insurance policy.
 
2012-05-11 01:22:55 PM

Stile4aly: My premiums are used as the funding source for current operations, just as is the case for car insurance, home insurance, life insurance, health insurance, etc.


No it's not the same; you get to choose to purchase those other services. (except car insurance, but choosing not to own a car is plausible, unlike choosing to not earn money) You also get to choose among competitors. There are plenty of better retirement savings vehicles available that a person might rather use instead of paying payroll tax. Too bad. Pay anyway or go to jail.
 
2012-05-11 01:28:33 PM

Smeggy Smurf: If given the option to opt out forever without any possibility of going back, I'd do it in without hesitation.


That's fine and dandy, but it's not all about you. It's about whether you want to live in a community where elderly people beg in the streets, sick and broken. We live in a society where the elderly do not live with their children. We want our parents to "go away". As a consequence, we need a system to care for them since we refuse to.

If you plan to spend your middle-aged years with your parents living in your home and you providing for their every need without any outside financial assistance, more power to you. If not, then STFU and pay your SSI.
 
2012-05-11 01:29:17 PM

Wendy's Chili: SS isn't an investment. It's insurance against getting old or sick.


Then it needs to stop being treated like a retirement plan, and people need to be allowed to opt out of it, god forbid they know how to invest their money better than the government.
 
2012-05-11 01:29:57 PM

DrewCurtisJr: FatSteveWasted: I'm OK with this.

How old are you?


32. Until 4 years ago, I was living at or below poverty line, making very little and contributing proportionately. About 4 years ago, I finally was able to land a "career" job. I now make decent money and contribute max into a 401K. In 4 years, my income has doubled, and I have confidence that I'll be able to retire with a combination of my 401K and SS, so long as the fuhkers don't tank the market again.
 
2012-05-11 01:30:18 PM

Larofeticus: Stile4aly: My premiums are used as the funding source for current operations, just as is the case for car insurance, home insurance, life insurance, health insurance, etc.

No it's not the same; you get to choose to purchase those other services. (except car insurance, but choosing not to own a car is plausible, unlike choosing to not earn money) You also get to choose among competitors. There are plenty of better retirement savings vehicles available that a person might rather use instead of paying payroll tax. Too bad. Pay anyway or go to jail.


So if someone choose poorly and ended up with no money when they are past a reasonable employment age, we can let them die in the streets, yes? Because that would happen with privatization. (Or, someone would end up broke and taxpayers would be paying for it anyways, while some shyster walks away with someone's life savings).
 
2012-05-11 01:33:41 PM

grinding_journalist: Wendy's Chili: SS isn't an investment. It's insurance against getting old or sick.

Then it needs to stop being treated like a retirement plan, and people need to be allowed to opt out of it, god forbid they know how to invest their money better than the government.


And if they suffer a catastrophy or just make terrible decisions, how does society handle them when they can no longer earn a living?
 
2012-05-11 01:34:35 PM

Larofeticus: Stile4aly: My premiums are used as the funding source for current operations, just as is the case for car insurance, home insurance, life insurance, health insurance, etc.

No it's not the same; you get to choose to purchase those other services. (except car insurance, but choosing not to own a car is plausible, unlike choosing to not earn money) You also get to choose among competitors. There are plenty of better retirement savings vehicles available that a person might rather use instead of paying payroll tax. Too bad. Pay anyway or go to jail.


As a society we have decided to purchase this service. You have had a vote in this matter in every election since you were 18. Just because the vote doesn't go your way doesn't mean that you've been disenfranchised.
 
2012-05-11 01:36:56 PM
Okay, time to start ageing backward... now how do I do that again?
 
2012-05-11 01:37:54 PM

Smeggy Smurf: If given the option to opt out forever without any possibility of going back, I'd do it in without hesitation.


Social Security was never intended to be a retirement plan. It's insurance against having starving old people in the street begging for money. It's the price/tax we all pay for living in a civilized society.
 
2012-05-11 01:40:09 PM

Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: So if someone choose poorly and ended up with no money when they are past a reasonable employment age, we can let them die in the streets, yes? Because that would happen with privatization.


I'd like you to point out records from a historical era during which poor people died in the streets as a general matter of course. Plagues, wars, and crop failures don't count.
 
2012-05-11 01:40:10 PM

grinding_journalist: Wendy's Chili: SS isn't an investment. It's insurance against getting old or sick.

Then it needs to stop being treated like a retirement plan, and people need to be allowed to opt out of it, god forbid they know how to invest their money better than the government.


What part of "it's insurance not a retirement plan" did you not understand?
 
2012-05-11 01:43:23 PM
I don't like social security at all. Since I don't have a say in how the money is invested, and since the long term health of it is terrible, I view my social security contribution as a tax....more specifically, a wealth transfer from young people to old people.

unfortunately, Americans have shown that they cannot be trusted to save for retirement on their own....look at the mess that is the 401k for example.

Link

as a result, I don't think its feasible for the program to be killed outright. if the program were to die tomorrow, i think most americans would spend their increased paychecks on some sort of instant gratification.

but I would love to see the retirement age raised, tax caps eliminated, benefit increases slowed, and allow for an option of how "my" funds are invested.
 
2012-05-11 01:48:16 PM

grinding_journalist: Wendy's Chili: SS isn't an investment. It's insurance against getting old or sick.

Then it needs to stop being treated like a retirement plan


Meaning what, exactly?

grinding_journalist: and people need to be allowed to opt out of it, god forbid they know how to invest their money better than the government.


Again, NOT an investment. Insurance. For our whole society. Most people get old. Those who don't have little need for an IRA.

Want to put in a smaller percentage of your money? Easy. Make more money.

Every dollar you make over $106k is exempt. If your investment skills are so awesome, making that much should be easy, and SS taxes shouldn't be a concern.
 
2012-05-11 01:48:17 PM
At age 70:
$2,316 a month

It would be nice if they provided an option where you could input expected salary increases. These numbers assume I make as much as I did last year for the next 38 years. That's not very realistic.
 
2012-05-11 01:50:50 PM

dumbobruni: I don't like social security at all. Since I don't have a say in how the money is invested ... allow for an option of how "my" funds are invested.


IT'S NOT AN INVESTMENT
 
2012-05-11 01:52:36 PM

j_hat: At age 70:
$2,316 a month

It would be nice if they provided an option where you could input expected salary increases. These numbers assume I make as much as I did last year for the next 38 years. That's not very realistic.


The sad part was going into my earnings record, and see that every year I had about double digit increases until we hit 2008..... then it was two years were I actually made less money each year, and now it is finally back up to 2007 levels.
 
2012-05-11 01:53:08 PM

Larofeticus: Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: So if someone choose poorly and ended up with no money when they are past a reasonable employment age, we can let them die in the streets, yes? Because that would happen with privatization.

I'd like you to point out records from a historical era during which poor people died in the streets as a general matter of course. Plagues, wars, and crop failures don't count.


In 1935, more than 50% of the elderly population lived in poverty.

Old people died in poverty. This is not an acceptable outcome for the greatest country on Earth.
 
2012-05-11 01:54:36 PM

Larofeticus: Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: So if someone choose poorly and ended up with no money when they are past a reasonable employment age, we can let them die in the streets, yes? Because that would happen with privatization.

I'd like you to point out records from a historical era during which poor people died in the streets as a general matter of course. Plagues, wars, and crop failures don't count.


Prior to Social Security, 50% of all elderly lived below the poverty line. Link
 
2012-05-11 01:55:16 PM

Stile4aly: Larofeticus: Stile4aly: My premiums are used as the funding source for current operations, just as is the case for car insurance, home insurance, life insurance, health insurance, etc.

No it's not the same; you get to choose to purchase those other services. (except car insurance, but choosing not to own a car is plausible, unlike choosing to not earn money) You also get to choose among competitors. There are plenty of better retirement savings vehicles available that a person might rather use instead of paying payroll tax. Too bad. Pay anyway or go to jail.

As a society we have decided to purchase this service. You have had a vote in this matter in every election since you were 18. Just because the vote doesn't go your way doesn't mean that you've been disenfranchised.


I don't remember a "Should Social Security be abolished" question on my ballot.
 
2012-05-11 01:57:36 PM

Stile4aly: As a society we have decided to purchase this service. You have had a vote in this matter in every election since you were 18.


The social contract is a fairy tale. A myth used to delude people like you into supporting the use of force. This context isn't even the use of force against "bad people" like criminals, unless you believe it is bad that some people choose to not be wasteful and end up with more.

If my "having a vote in the matter" has no possibility of consequence whatsoever, then what value is it? Considering there are an infinite number of possible policy variations, being presented with exactly one choice between two options seems like very poor coverage of the possible space.
 
2012-05-11 01:57:50 PM

Lost Thought 00: Larofeticus: Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: So if someone choose poorly and ended up with no money when they are past a reasonable employment age, we can let them die in the streets, yes? Because that would happen with privatization.

I'd like you to point out records from a historical era during which poor people died in the streets as a general matter of course. Plagues, wars, and crop failures don't count.

Prior to Social Security, 50% of all elderly lived below the poverty line. Link


Which was completely not the fault of the younger, working generations.
 
2012-05-11 01:59:22 PM

grinding_journalist: Wendy's Chili: SS isn't an investment. It's insurance against getting old or sick.

Then it needs to stop being treated like a retirement plan, and people need to be allowed to opt out of it, god forbid they know how to invest their money better than the government.


Most don't know how to better invest their money than the government. That's kind of the point.

You may, but even that's probably worth doubting.
 
2012-05-11 02:02:17 PM

SphericalTime: grinding_journalist: Wendy's Chili: SS isn't an investment. It's insurance against getting old or sick.

Then it needs to stop being treated like a retirement plan, and people need to be allowed to opt out of it, god forbid they know how to invest their money better than the government.

Most don't know how to better invest their money than the government. That's kind of the point.

You may, but even that's probably worth doubting.


Unless you have the personal ability to sell T-Bills on the international market, you almost certainly cannot achieve a better mix of return and security over the course of 40 years than the federal government
 
2012-05-11 02:04:37 PM

FlyingLizardOfDoom: Stile4aly: Larofeticus: Stile4aly: My premiums are used as the funding source for current operations, just as is the case for car insurance, home insurance, life insurance, health insurance, etc.

No it's not the same; you get to choose to purchase those other services. (except car insurance, but choosing not to own a car is plausible, unlike choosing to not earn money) You also get to choose among competitors. There are plenty of better retirement savings vehicles available that a person might rather use instead of paying payroll tax. Too bad. Pay anyway or go to jail.

As a society we have decided to purchase this service. You have had a vote in this matter in every election since you were 18. Just because the vote doesn't go your way doesn't mean that you've been disenfranchised.

I don't remember a "Should Social Security be abolished" question on my ballot.


Your votes elect your representative and Senators and a President. If you can get enough of the country to agree with your position that Social Security should be abolished, then you can elect the necessary people to do exactly that.
 
2012-05-11 02:07:20 PM

Wendy's Chili: dumbobruni: I don't like social security at all. Since I don't have a say in how the money is invested ... allow for an option of how "my" funds are invested.

IT'S NOT AN INVESTMENT


insurance is an investment
 
Displayed 50 of 108 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report