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.

(Forbes)   Obama used his magical time machine to go back in time to 2007, fully implement Obamanomics, and crash the economy into the worst five years since the Great Depression   (forbes.com) divider line 458
    More: Obvious, President Obama, Great Depression, obamanomics, American Thinker, Reaganomics, american incomes, President George Bush, economic liberalism  
•       •       •

4599 clicks; posted to Politics » on 10 Feb 2013 at 12:33 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-02-12 09:38:18 PM

Mrbogey: CATASTROPHIC INSURANCE!!!!


Yeah. It's what SS is, essentially. Catastrophic retirement insurance.
You're smart enough to realize going without health insurance is bad, even for the young, even if you could potentially get a better return if you invested and didn't get sick. Why is retirement insurance bad?
 
2013-02-12 10:27:31 PM

Sergeant Grumbles: Yeah. It's what SS is, essentially. Catastrophic retirement insurance.


The rates suck and the return sucks. It's the shiattiest catastrophic insurance you could have. But I guess if the target market is rubes it makes sense.
 
2013-02-12 11:36:27 PM

Mrbogey: The rates suck and the return sucks.


At the risk of repeating myself, it's insurance, not investment.
It's not supposed to maximize returns. It's not supposed to be an attractive investment. It's supposed to be a stable, dependable stream of income to prevent total destitution in old age, which was a huge problem before SS was enacted. Unlike health insurance, which you may never need to utilize, everyone is pretty much guaranteed to get old.
Opening it up like an investment will do nothing to fix it because it isn't supposed to work that way. Introducing unnecessary risk undermines the entire idea.
I secretly suspect that's the true motivation the "government = bad" types, anyway.
 
2013-02-13 12:22:54 AM

Sergeant Grumbles: At the risk of repeating myself, it's insurance, not investment.


And I bet you'd be the first in line to buy insurance on your 200,000 house with a yearly rate of 1,500 and a deductible of 100,000. Hey, it's insurance, right? You clearly don't understand how insurance works. You don't ever want to get a policy that costs more or equal to the payout. SS is a sucker's game. As I demonstrated you could literally place the money on almost any major fund and beat SS across any random career lifespan. Even with the collapse of the markets in 2008 you'd at worse have made slightly less than SS.

I have never said this before but perhaps America would be better off if people who don't know how to plan weren't allowed to vote.
 
2013-02-13 01:01:56 AM

Mrbogey: I have never said this before but perhaps America would be better off if people who don't know how to plan weren't allowed to vote.


Just go with the unofficial Republican platform, the poor shouldn't vote.

See, that's the thing. I might be inclined to believe you if I had any faith Wall Street wouldn't take, inflate, pop, and crash the money from SS. SS doesn't need that kind of volatility. It doesn't matter what the average is across a career lifespan, the fact that it can be affected by crashes at all undermines the entire idea.
I still might be inclined to believe you if there wasn't a huge portion of the electorate that absolves Wall Street of blame for the crash, still crying for deregulation, still insisting the free market fixes everything and shouting down any attempts to reduce excesses.

But I don't see any attempt to move in that direction, so I'm disinclined to believe you, or that privatizing SS is anything but a cash grab by entities with no interest in grandma's retirement.
 
2013-02-13 01:03:47 PM

Fart_Machine: /facepalm again

No they didn't.


you're right. THe CRA and the $9TN in mortgage assets held by the federal government dont exist.
 
2013-02-13 01:07:34 PM

Sergeant Grumbles: Mrbogey: CATASTROPHIC INSURANCE!!!!

Yeah. It's what SS is, essentially. Catastrophic retirement insurance.
You're smart enough to realize going without health insurance is bad, even for the young, even if you could potentially get a better return if you invested and didn't get sick. Why is retirement insurance bad?


And what is funny is that social security DISASTER CATASTROPHIC INSURANCE costs as much as what retirement professionals suggest a person should put aside to retire comfortably.
 
2013-02-13 03:09:14 PM

o5iiawah: And what is funny is that social security DISASTER CATASTROPHIC INSURANCE costs as much as what retirement professionals suggest a person should put aside to retire comfortably.


Why is that funny when the cost determines how much you get back?
People keep acting like there's supposed to be some huge return. As I've been trying to explain, there isn't. That's not the point of the program. Trying to increase the return while also increasing risk does exactly the opposite and won't do anything to fix the perceived problems the program has. Problems, I might add, that are almost entirely invented by the people pushing these kinds of solutions.

What's funnier is that you still think the CRA forced banks to give free money to black people.
 
Displayed 8 of 458 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report