Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Chuck, that isn't the money under discussion. The money being discussed
is that which the government takes from our checks for Social Security. If I could invest it and get a better return, why shouldn't I be able to? If I could pass the savings on to my children, why shouldn't I be able to? All the IRA, 401k, and 403b plans are great - for those who can take advantage of them. But whether an individual can or cannot take advantage of them is beside the point. The point is the return on the money the government takes for Social Security. ************ The challenge with your perception is that you are looking at Social Security primarily as a pension plan. It is not, and never was intended to be primarily a retirement pension system. The purpose of Social Security is to provide a social safety net for people who cannot take care of themselves. For esample, when my brother in law died last November and left a dependent wife and a 4-year old son behind, the money he and others paid into social security is being used to insure that the 4-year old will have a very basic but secure lifestyle during the 14 years it will take for him to become an adult and legally responsible for his own care. (My sister in law gets 1200 or so a month from SS- just enough to live at about the poverty level- so the family helps out, and she has a mini-wage job to do what little she can- of course). Among the persons identified as less-able under the social security system are those individuals who are too old or sick for gainful employment. When the system was enacted, very few people lived to be 65, but in today's society probably 85-90% of the people who make it to 55 will survive to 65 and beyond. Social Security has become a defacto pension plan, when it should not have. We would probably have to raise the age to 75 in order to once again extend retirement benefits to the same small group of old folks that the system was originally designed to serve. It's downright silly to talk about the "return" on the money impounded for Social Security. What is the rate of financial "return" on our dollars spent for national defense, for the interstate highway system, or for federal law enforcement efforts? None, nada, zip, and who cares? You want to invest for retirement? Great! Everybody should. But those who are in such tight financial straits that they can only free up investment money if 2% of their wages are returned to them via a reduction in SS taxes? Those people have NO BUSINESS in the stock market. None. Anybody cutting it that close can't afford to be exposed to the ever present risk of loss with securities. If it's all spent every month so that there is no money to invest for retirement, a worker would do far better to analyze his family budget and figure out how to free up some serious money rather than moaning that SS has dealt him a cruel blow. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Jimcomma -- Post the whole story! OT | General | |||
( OT ) Bush back on the road to tout Social Security changes | General | |||
Social Security Quotes OT | General | |||
Bush and Social Security | General |