Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

[QUOTE=Giantone;1224747]Maybe you should educate yourself on th system itself.





[url]https://www.ssa.gov/history/InternetMyths2.html[/url]







Not accusing Bush of anything this artical does a good job of explaining alot...........



[url]https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/aug/03/facebook-posts/did-george-w-bush-borrow-social-security-fund-war-/[/url][/QUOTE]

So if we can set aside partisanship, and trump/hc hatred, can this country fix entitlements in a way that protects the sick, and elderly while preserving the US economy for future generations. I would love to here Schneed way in on the healthcare costs.

Seems to me that something does need to be done, but what?

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

G1 gave me some crazy answer before...I don’t think he understood what I was getting at. It’s an issue and we need to come together with a legitimate solution. Extending age to claim, portioning out a percentage to invest, etc

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

[QUOTE=Chico23231;1224750]G1 gave me some crazy answer before...I don’t think he understood what I was getting at. It’s an issue and we need to come together with a legitimate solution. Extending age to claim, portioning out a percentage to invest, etc[/QUOTE]Thats why i moved it to its own thread

There are so many parts to entitlement reform, I think its important to start with some basic agreements:

Can we on here all agree that:
There should be a sovial welfare net for the elderly, sick and children?

That our healthcare system AS IT IS now is in need of reform.

We need to find a balance of future spending obligations with the size and scope of the social welfare net's reach.

I hope this discussion can avoid political amd racial divisiveness that permeates rhe current atmosphere and focus on what we really can do as a nation.



Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

[quote=Chico23231;1224750]G1 gave me some crazy answer before...I don’t think he understood what I was getting at. It’s an issue and we need to come together with a legitimate solution. Extending age to claim, portioning out a percentage to invest, etc[/quote]

Of course it was crazy to you it was fact. Seriously you need to educate yourself about what it is you're trying to speak of .

[url]https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinance/retirement/2018/11/18/social-security-how-much-congress-owes-interest-over-next-decade/38532839/[/url]

[url]https://www.ssa.gov/history/InternetMyths.html[/url]

[url]https://www.ssa.gov/history/InternetMyths2.html[/url]


...............SS is a paid program ...NOT...an entitlement.

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1224754]Thats why i moved it to its own thread

There are so many parts to entitlement reform, I think its important to start with some basic agreements:

Can we on here all agree that:
There should be a sovial welfare net for the elderly, sick and children?

That our healthcare system AS IT IS now is in need of reform.

We need to find a balance of future spending obligations with the size and scope of the social welfare net's reach.

I hope this discussion can avoid political amd racial divisiveness that permeates rhe current atmosphere and focus on what we really can do as a nation.



Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk[/quote]

Healthcare needs a review, Obamacare was a great idea that has some flaws but the bones of it are good,yes, some adjustments should/ must be made .

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

As much as I hate to say it all entitlement programs need more government oversight. Through the years I have come across way too many people abusing welfare and social security disability. The people I know that were gaming the system could have been easily exposed with a little surveillance and a few surprise visits.

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

[quote=Giantone;1224796]Of course it was crazy to you it was fact. Seriously you need to educate yourself about what it is you're trying to speak of .

[url]https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinance/retirement/2018/11/18/social-security-how-much-congress-owes-interest-over-next-decade/38532839/[/url]

[url]https://www.ssa.gov/history/InternetMyths.html[/url]

[url]https://www.ssa.gov/history/InternetMyths2.html[/url]


...............SS is a paid program ...NOT...an entitlement.[/quote]

[url]https://www.senate.gov/reference/glossary_term/entitlement.htm[/url]

[B][U]entitlement[/U][/B] - A Federal program or provision of law that requires payments to any person or unit of government that meets the eligibility criteria established by law. Entitlements constitute a binding obligation on the part of the Federal Government, and eligible recipients have legal recourse if the obligation is not fulfilled. [B][U]Social Security [/U][/B]and veterans' compensation and pensions are examples of entitlement programs.

Here you go G1, hope this helps.

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

Fairly juvenile debate you're having here, isn't it? SS is an entitlement. NO ITS NOT. YES IT IS. NO ITS NOT.

LOL

Who cares, semantics. Just discuss whether it needs to be changed, and how.

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1224749]So if we can set aside partisanship, and trump/hc hatred, can this country fix entitlements in a way that protects the sick, and elderly while preserving the US economy for future generations. I would love to here Schneed way in on the healthcare costs.

Seems to me that something does need to be done, but what?

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk[/quote]

CMS estimates Medicare will run out of money in 2026 so something definitely has to change with the healthcare side. When Medicare was first conceived 65 was set as the age at which it began, now life expectancy is much longer. I don't see how you can fix Medicare without adjusting the age of eligibility. It's hard to see it working without that. Math should be fairly easy - if life expectancy has increased by 5 years since Medicare was conceived, then raise the age of eligibility by five years.

Really, the same should be done with social security because it's the same concept there. People will have to stay in the workforce longer - I don't see any way around that because we need more money coming into the Medicare and SS funds to support those drawing down on them.

This part isn't complicated, it's just politically inconvenient. Nobody wants to be the bad guy to delay benefits to seniors. That's why it won't be voted into place until the public recognizes that the programs themselves are genuinely at risk. Right now it's a figment in the minds of some, but once it becomes a reality for people that they stand to lose their Medicare safety net entirely, only then does it become politically expedient to support it.

In other words, once it's too late. Hope you're all saving your money as effectively as possible. Those capable of supporting themselves on their own two feet stand to come out the other side in decent position. Others will experience difficulties.

Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

[quote=Buffalo Bob;1224814]As much as I hate to say it all entitlement programs need more government oversight. Through the years I have come across way too many people abusing welfare and social security disability. The people I know that were gaming the system could have been easily exposed with a little surveillance and a few surprise visits.[/quote]

Usually the juice isn't worth the squeeze. OIG has bigger fish to fry than Joe Schmoe who may be working a little on the side. (People are actually allowed to work while on disability and/or SSI to certain limits, just to note.)

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

[quote=Schneed10;1224821]CMS estimates Medicare will run out of money in 2026 so something definitely has to change with the healthcare side. When Medicare was first conceived 65 was set as the age at which it began, now life expectancy is much longer. I don't see how you can fix Medicare without adjusting the age of eligibility. It's hard to see it working without that. Math should be fairly easy - if life expectancy has increased by 5 years since Medicare was conceived, then raise the age of eligibility by five years.

Really, the same should be done with social security because it's the same concept there. People will have to stay in the workforce longer - I don't see any way around that because we need more money coming into the Medicare and SS funds to support those drawing down on them.

This part isn't complicated, it's just politically inconvenient. Nobody wants to be the bad guy to delay benefits to seniors. That's why it won't be voted into place until the public recognizes that the programs themselves are genuinely at risk. Right now it's a figment in the minds of some, but once it becomes a reality for people that they stand to lose their Medicare safety net entirely, only then does it become politically expedient to support it.

In other words, once it's too late. Hope you're all saving your money as effectively as possible. Those capable of supporting themselves on their own two feet stand to come out the other side in decent position. Others will experience difficulties.[/quote]

[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_Trust_Fund[/url]

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

[quote=Chico23231;1224815][url]https://www.senate.gov/reference/glossary_term/entitlement.htm[/url]

[B][U]entitlement[/U][/B] - A Federal program or provision of law that requires payments to any person or unit of government that meets the eligibility criteria established by law. Entitlements constitute a binding obligation on the part of the Federal Government, and eligible recipients have legal recourse if the obligation is not fulfilled. [B][U]Social Security [/U][/B]and veterans' compensation and pensions are examples of entitlement programs.

Here you go G1, hope this helps.[/quote]

It does but it doesn't help you.

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

[QUOTE=Schneed10;1224821]CMS estimates Medicare will run out of money in 2026 so something definitely has to change with the healthcare side. When Medicare was first conceived 65 was set as the age at which it began, now life expectancy is much longer. I don't see how you can fix Medicare without adjusting the age of eligibility. It's hard to see it working without that. Math should be fairly easy - if life expectancy has increased by 5 years since Medicare was conceived, then raise the age of eligibility by five years.



Really, the same should be done with social security because it's the same concept there. People will have to stay in the workforce longer - I don't see any way around that because we need more money coming into the Medicare and SS funds to support those drawing down on them.



This part isn't complicated, it's just politically inconvenient. Nobody wants to be the bad guy to delay benefits to seniors. That's why it won't be voted into place until the public recognizes that the programs themselves are genuinely at risk. Right now it's a figment in the minds of some, but once it becomes a reality for people that they stand to lose their Medicare safety net entirely, only then does it become politically expedient to support it.



In other words, once it's too late. Hope you're all saving your money as effectively as possible. Those capable of supporting themselves on their own two feet stand to come out the other side in decent position. Others will experience difficulties.[/QUOTE]Thanks for actually discussing the actual issues. I believe the systemic issues should outweigh politics but I agree with you. Politicians can/will not make tough choices if Joe Public is not pushing it, and as you said right now its a monster under the bed issue, both sides can use it to scare there base by saying the right call words.

I believe social programs should be keyed to (at least) 3 main measurables:
Average life expectancy
Localized cost of living
average cost of preventative care medical figured independently from general cost of living.

If you can find baselines around those statistics and total percentage of federal budget allocated to these programs then you should be able find the intersecting values that keep the system working right.


Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1224827]Thanks for actually discussing the actual issues. I believe the systemic issues should outweigh politics but I agree with you. Politicians can/will not make tough choices if Joe Public is not pushing it, and as you said right now its a monster under the bed issue, both sides can use it to scare there base by saying the right call words.

I believe social programs should be keyed to (at least) 3 main measurables:
Average life expectancy
Localized cost of living
average cost of preventative care medical figured independently from general cost of living.

If you can find baselines around those statistics and total percentage of federal budget allocated to these programs then you should be able find the intersecting values that keep the system working right.


Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk[/quote]

Yes and those statistics already exist as part of the Medicare reimbursement formula - Medicare pays based on wage index, so a hospital located in New York gets paid more than a hospital located in Nebraska simply by virtue of the fact that nurses and doctors in New York have higher wage rates than those in Nebraska.

Philadelphia's wage index for example is 1.06, it's hardwired into the Medicare formula, SS could just borrow from the same thing.

And cost of Medical care is available through the Bureau of Labor & Statistics, can just look at the CPI for Medical Care Services. You're right, it should be easy to hardwire this.

Getting several hundred congress men and women to understand how it works is one hurdle, because embarrassingly may do not. And then there's the political hurdle, why support something that isn't a fire yet. But agree, it's not as hard as people think.

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

[quote=Schneed10;1224821]CMS estimates Medicare will run out of money in 2026 so something definitely has to change with the healthcare side. When Medicare was first conceived 65 was set as the age at which it began, now life expectancy is much longer. I don't see how you can fix Medicare without adjusting the age of eligibility. It's hard to see it working without that. Math should be fairly easy - if life expectancy has increased by 5 years since Medicare was conceived, then raise the age of eligibility by five years.

Really, the same should be done with social security because it's the same concept there. People will have to stay in the workforce longer - I don't see any way around that because we need more money coming into the Medicare and SS funds to support those drawing down on them.

This part isn't complicated, it's just politically inconvenient. Nobody wants to be the bad guy to delay benefits to seniors. That's why it won't be voted into place until the public recognizes that the programs themselves are genuinely at risk. Right now it's a figment in the minds of some, but once it becomes a reality for people that they stand to lose their Medicare safety net entirely, only then does it become politically expedient to support it.

In other words, once it's too late. Hope you're all saving your money as effectively as possible. Those capable of supporting themselves on their own two feet stand to come out the other side in decent position. Others will experience difficulties.[/quote]

The retirement age is already gradually increasing for benefits. The easy solution to me is to drastically raise the cap or eliminate it. Right now the maximum earnings subject to Social Security payroll tax is only $132,900. If we want to get serious about expanding and strengthening Social Security I'm down with [URL="https://www.marketwatch.com/story/bernie-sanders-says-its-time-for-the-super-rich-to-do-the-morally-right-thing-2019-02-15"]Bernie's ideas[/URL].

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

[quote=MTK;1224829]The retirement age is already gradually increasing for benefits. The easy solution to me is to drastically raise the cap or eliminate it. Right now the maximum earnings subject to Social Security payroll tax is only $132,900. If we want to get serious about expanding and strengthening Social Security I'm down with [URL="https://www.marketwatch.com/story/bernie-sanders-says-its-time-for-the-super-rich-to-do-the-morally-right-thing-2019-02-15"]Bernie's ideas[/URL].[/quote]

I would agree with raising the cap. When the cap was set it was done in a time when $100K was a real high salary.

The age of eligibility and the cap both need to get with the times. We live longer now, and $250K is the new $100K. Put both in line relative to when the plan was instituted and then you've got something. It's a mathematically objective notion too.

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

raising the cap could be the starting point. its old, and needs adjusted. part of the issue is also congress dipping into the fund. its a great fall back for those who cant budget correctly

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

Congress didn't take money from the SS fund, that's a myth.

[quote]
As for Social Security's most pervasive and borderline irritating myth, that goes to the belief that the federal government raided Social Security's coffers and never put the money back. As a financial journalist of nearly eight years, I can confirm that the comment section on most Social Security articles over the years has been riddled with allegations that Congress stole money from Social Security and never put it back -- and that this is the primary reason why the program's asset reserves will be depleted within the next 16 years.

In reality, none of this is true.

The folks who perpetuate this myth strongly believe that Social Security's current asset reserves of nearly $2.9 trillion is a sham. In other words, they don't believe the money is there. They believe lawmakers on Capitol Hill absconded with this money, and that seniors and future retirees will suffer as a result.

The truth is that the Social Security Administration takes this extra cash, which would be earning nothing if it were sitting around in a trust, and invests it in various special-issue bonds, and to a lesser extent certificates of indebtedness, with staggered maturity dates ranging from a year to perhaps longer than a decade from now. By placing this excess cash -- which has been built up since 1983 as a result of Social Security being a cash-flow positive program -- into special-issue bonds and certificates of indebtedness, it earns interest. In 2016, $88.4 billion of the $957.5 billion in revenue that was generated came from interest income earned on its bonds and certificates of indebtedness.

Does the federal government use the cash that's invested in these bonds, as well as non-special-issue bonds, for regular revenue items? Absolutely! Selling Treasury notes is a common way Congress raises money to pay the bills. The thing is, these bonds are backed by the full faith of the U.S. government, and the federal government is legally obligated to honor both the interest payments and maturities as they come along. Every single interest payment on Social Security's special-issue bonds has been paid, and every last maturity has been met with a full repayment.

Just because Congress uses this cash for its everyday expenditures in no way means that lawmakers raided Social Security. The program operates now as it has for decades, and the excess cash that's been built up since 1983 will be there through 2034, according to estimates.

About the only true concern is the U.S. debt level. If national debt continues to climb in relation to GDP, then it could become difficult, many decades down the road, for the federal government to meet its interest and maturity obligations on bonds. The thing is, with Social Security expected to deplete its asset reserves by 2034, it won't have any excess cash in 16 years, so this really isn't an issue.

Long story short, the federal government didn't steal from Social Security. If you want to accuse lawmakers of shorting the American public, slight them for not having yet fixed Social Security's long-term cash shortfall, despite having no shortage of possible solutions on the table.[/quote]

[url]https://www.fool.com/retirement/2018/05/20/did-congress-really-steal-from-social-security.aspx[/url]

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

[quote=Schneed10;1224830]I would agree with raising the cap. When the cap was set it was done in a time when $100K was a real high salary.

The age of eligibility and the cap both need to get with the times. We live longer now, and $250K is the new $100K. Put both in line relative to when the plan was instituted and then you've got something. It's a mathematically objective notion too.[/quote]

Raising the cap is a lot better than raising the retirement age. Even though people are living longer the wear and tear on the body on a lot of manual labor jobs hasn't changed since social security was implemented.

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

[quote=Buffalo Bob;1224814]As much as I hate to say it all entitlement programs need more government oversight. Through the years I have come across way too many people abusing welfare and social security disability. The people I know that were gaming the system could have been easily exposed with a little surveillance and a few surprise visits.[/quote]



[quote=MTK;1224822]Usually the juice isn't worth the squeeze. OIG has bigger fish to fry than Joe Schmoe who may be working a little on the side. (People are actually allowed to work while on disability and/or SSI to certain limits, just to note.)[/quote]

My issues are when Joe Schmoe is healthy enough to work a full time job, but lazy and gaming the system. People that do that often seem to run in family circles.
I had an employee who had a couple cousins, females in their mid 30's who were on social security disability, claiming to have fibromyalgia. I gave them both all expense paid vacations to Vegas complete with cash to gamble with in exchange for help working a couple conventions promoting our products.

I spent a better parts of 2 weeks with these women and neither showed one sign of being less than perfectly healthy.

As for the welfare fraud I have worked with plenty a guy who fathered children out of wedlock, one guy had 5 , lived with the mother who was collecting welfare on the children he fathered all while he had a full time job that paid a livable wage.

I have just seen too much of this in my small world to not think it strains the system.

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

[quote=Buffalo Bob;1224841]Raising the cap is a lot better than raising the retirement age. Even though people are living longer the wear and tear on the body on a lot of manual labor jobs hasn't changed since social security was implemented.[/quote]

Can't design a whole system around the portion of the workforce aged 65-70 who remain in physical labor jobs.

My perspective is simple - when the program was conceived the retirement age was set such that there was a 7 year gap between retirement and life expectancy (death). And it was set with a cap of $100K because that was a shitload of money at the time.

Update both to today's terms. Take life expectancy minus 7, that's the new retirement age (72). And take the cap and inflate it to today's dollars ($250K or so). Both factors together return the program to a) what it was intended to be all along and b) solvency.

Don't cherrypick, you expose your political bias. Both should be done, otherwise it's gerrymandering the original intent of the program.

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

Or you could privatize it - let us choose our own investments and we'd all be way better off.

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

[quote=Schneed10;1224844]Or you could privatize it - let us choose our own investments and we'd all be way better off.[/quote]

This is my suggestion as well as raising the age to a more reasonable level to accommodate the rise in life expectancy.


Good stuff from everybody here...I just think this issue needs to raised with more urgency.

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

[quote=Chico23231;1224845]This is my suggestion as well as raising the age to a more reasonable level to accommodate the rise in life expectancy.


[B]Good stuff from everybody here...I just think this issue needs to raised with more urgency.[/B][/quote]

It does. Right now the only people that feel the urgency are financial professionals and those with an understanding of the time value of money. It's just not a large enough percentage of the population to motivate the votes on the hill.

GW Bush tried in 2005 to partially privatize and allow us to divert portions to our own preferred investments as individuals. It died on the hill, even with a Republican controlled house, and then when 2006 midterms came the Democrats took control of the house and his proposal was effectively squashed. It was such a shame because it truly would have made an immense difference - my retirement account is healthy today because I can invest it into targeted date funds - everyone could have done the same with SS under Bush's plan. But when people hear the program won't become insolvent for another 25 years, even Republicans pushed off the vote.

Such a lack of foresight. That was our best chance to do something. Now we can be assured nothing will happen until it's nearly too late.

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

[quote=Schneed10;1224844]Or you could privatize it - let us choose our own investments and we'd all be way better off.[/quote]

Not true. Yes you might be very good at it but be honest ,do you really think many Americans understand the market and investing?

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

[quote=Giantone;1224848]Not true. Yes you might be very good at it but be honest ,do you really think many Americans understand the market and investing?[/quote]

This is off the top...but say if you could pool with others to buy into approved funds that look only long with multi-layer low risk products? What about percentage based options with which puts a governor on trading and/or the amount of the nest egg that could be in market?

You certainly don't want day traders messing with this shit.

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

[quote=Buffalo Bob;1224842]My issues are when Joe Schmoe is healthy enough to work a full time job, but lazy and gaming the system. People that do that often seem to run in family circles.
I had an employee who had a couple cousins, females in their mid 30's who were on social security disability, claiming to have fibromyalgia. I gave them both all expense paid vacations to Vegas complete with cash to gamble with in exchange for help working a couple conventions promoting our products.

I spent a better parts of 2 weeks with these women and neither showed one sign of being less than perfectly healthy.

As for the welfare fraud I have worked with plenty a guy who fathered children out of wedlock, one guy had 5 , lived with the mother who was collecting welfare on the children he fathered all while he had a full time job that paid a livable wage.

I have just seen too much of this in my small world to not think it strains the system.[/quote]

Eh, everyone knows someone who knows someone who does something, etc. It's anecdotal stuff.

Medicare billing fraud is a much bigger issue and puts more strain on the system than Joe Schmoe.

Besides, everyone complains about how hard it is to get social security disability in the first place right? That's because it is hard to get. Even people with disabilities have good days, good weeks, etc. And there's the mental conditions that you don't necessarily see.

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

[quote=Chico23231;1224849]This is off the top...but say if you could pool with others to buy into approved funds that look only long with multi-layer low risk products? What about percentage based options with which puts a governor on trading and/or the amount of the nest egg that could be in market?

You certainly don't want day traders messing with this shit.[/quote]


Thank you for proving my point. You think the majority of American across the country know what you just said?

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

[quote=Giantone;1224848]Not true. Yes you might be very good at it but be honest ,do you really think many Americans understand the market and investing?[/quote]

When there’s cash at stake people figure out a way.

And besides, I don’t like the idea of robbing those with half a brain an opportunity for the sake of those without one at all.

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

[quote=Giantone;1224855]Thank you for proving my point. You think the majority of American across the country know what you just said?[/quote]

Look at it this way, I often hear folks complain when the market is doing well...that it is "only" working for a certain class of people (which isn't completely true, but whatever) so if you could educate and get folks to participate who in the past didn't, you could really open up a group of people to a new experience which could motivate them to invest elsewhere.

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

[quote=Chico23231;1224857]Look at it this way, I often hear folks complain when the market is doing well...that it is "only" working for a certain class of people (which isn't completely true, but whatever) so if you could educate and get folks to participate who in the past didn't, you could really open up a group of people to a new experience which could motivate them to invest elsewhere.[/quote]

[B]"IF"[/B] , if you could educate people about something as simple and as easy as voting we wouldn't be in the mess we're in now and you think you can educate these people about investing and the market ? Most of the people we're talking about don't trust the goverment or anyone that is connected with it and with Wall Streets history of screwing over Joe Blow you're not going to get the people to trust them.



To Big to Fail........[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Too_big_to_fail[/url]
Enron [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enron[/url]
Savings and Loan crisis [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savings_and_loan_crisis[/url]
Bernie Madoff .[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_Madoff[/url]
Real Estate bubble burst in 2006/08 [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_housing_bubble[/url]

.................all reasons on why the average Joe Blow is weary of the investment world.

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

I think privatizing Social Security would be a bad idea. Too many people out there live paycheck to paycheck with little to no savings as it is so the thought of putting them in charge of their Social Security is a little scary to me.

Social Security isn’t meant to be your one and only source of income when you retire, but for many people it is. I think it’s important to keep it secure.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

[quote=MTK;1224862]I think privatizing Social Security would be a bad idea. Too many people out there live paycheck to paycheck with little to no savings as it is so the thought of putting them in charge of their Social Security is a little scary to me.

Social Security isn’t meant to be your one and only source of income when you retire, but for many people it is. I think it’s important to keep it secure.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quote]

You could give them an option to stick with the existing program or privatize it and move to investment vehicles of their choice.

This way, if somebody wants to keep it safe in T Bills, they can leave it where it is. Or, if the person takes no action at all, it stays where it is. Meanwhile the rest of us who actually understand how money works can be afforded the opportunity to grow our nest eggs.

I mean if we all paid into it, we should all have choices. Is it our money or not?

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

[quote=Schneed10;1224864]You could give them an option to stick with the existing program or privatize it and move to investment vehicles of their choice.

This way, if somebody wants to keep it safe in T Bills, they can leave it where it is. Or, if the person takes no action at all, it stays where it is. Meanwhile the rest of us who actually understand how money works can be afforded the opportunity to grow our nest eggs.

I mean if we all paid into it, we should all have choices. Is it our money or not?[/quote]

If that was an option SS would fail . The more money into the fund the more it is suppose to make ...correct (basic,I know )? If people take the money that they think is theirs' and invest it poorly...what happens to those people when they are asking or dying for help? Let me ask you a question....do you have choice where your taxes go and what they pay for. I mean why should someone with no kids pay property taxes for a school system they do not use ?

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

Individual control > Government Control

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

[quote=Chico23231;1224868]Individual control > Government Control[/quote]

...........and?

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

[quote=Giantone;1224866]If that was an option SS would fail . The more money into the fund the more it is suppose to make ...correct (basic,I know )? If people take the money that they think is theirs' and invest it poorly...what happens to those people when they are asking or dying for help? Let me ask you a question....do you have choice where your taxes go and what they pay for. I mean why should someone with no kids pay property taxes for a school system they do not use ?[/quote]

I see personal finance is not your strong suit. Obviously people would not be permitted to trade penny stocks - privatizing would treat it like your typical 401K where you have maybe 8 mutual fund options, all appropriately diversified. If you’re investing for more than 10 years, as most of us would be, you couldn’t lose money.

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

[quote=Schneed10;1224873]I see personal finance is not your strong suit. Obviously people would not be permitted to trade penny stocks - privatizing would treat it like your typical 401K where you have maybe 8 mutual fund options, all appropriately diversified. If you’re investing for more than 10 years, as most of us would be, you couldn’t lose money.[/quote]

My personal suit is not in question here(and you're off by a mile) it is the average American who knows nothing of what your talking about that is what we're talking about here. Yes you know what's great for you and maybe it does seem simple for you but most of Americans don't have a clue to what you're talking about financially.


.....as for me ,The New York Curb Market / Exchange .

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

[QUOTE=Schneed10;1224873]I see personal finance is not your strong suit. Obviously people would not be permitted to trade penny stocks - privatizing would treat it like your typical 401K where you have maybe 8 mutual fund options, all appropriately diversified. If you’re investing for more than 10 years, as most of us would be, you couldn’t lose money.[/QUOTE]This may not be the right way to ask this question, but i will try anyway.

Couldn't social security be set up in a way that accounts for time horizons. So funds needed for immediate and short term obligqtions are put in a "lockbox account with minimal interest" while mid to long term bligations are invested against stock indexed accounts?



Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Re: Fixing(?) Entitlements
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1225185]This may not be the right way to ask this question, but i will try anyway.

Couldn't social security be set up in a way that accounts for time horizons. So funds needed for immediate and short term obligqtions are put in a "lockbox account with minimal interest" while mid to long term bligations are invested against stock indexed accounts?



Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk[/quote]

Yes, that's exactly what I was referencing when I mentioned target date funds. Every mutual fund firm has them. Pretty simple and low cost to manage.