あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]youdontseekyoda 54 ポイント55 ポイント  (96子コメント)

But privatizing Social Security (i.e. letting us keep our own money in accounts we actually have control over, and can check the balance, etc) is SUCH a bad idea...

[–]imaredditloser 14 ポイント15 ポイント  (1子コメント)

It was such a good idea that GWB used it as one of his major platform points.... and then the stock market fell by 50% a few months later and everyone realized it was a horrible fucking idea, but we were too busy learning how to grow food in our backyard and hide from terrorists attacks to fully talk about it. It's bad enough that people had their retirement in housing and the stock market, had they had ALL their savings in the stock market they'd be COMPLETELY fucked if they wanted or had to retire around that time. Many of them still are fucked because they can't sell their houses even for half the price they were told they would get by appraisers, realtors and bankers.

Diversifying your retirement with private AND government funding makes the most sense. SS is a basic retirement to keep old people from having to live in tent cities and homeless shelters.. which still costs us money and often costs more money than just putting them in low income housing. That and the fact throwing old people on the streets is not a very traditional value or non douchebag type thing to do.

We can pay about the same for them to life on the streets as it costs to put them into little one person apartments.

You have to accept the reality that if you get rid of social security all kinds of other costs go up and you lower the standard of living of your country. And yes.. fully privatized retirement is certainly a bad idea as history has proven. It doesn't work.. people don't save, it creates chaos and unhappiness and then society winds up paying for it anyway.

Imagine a something like the 2001 attacks and following economic crash without social programs to hold the country together. We'd be right back to a run on the banks and bread lines without these government buffers to protect us from the trillion dollars blunders of the wealthy.

[–]youdontseekyoda -4 ポイント-3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Someone's not listening... :-/

Even if you mandated that people can only invest in "safe" investments, such as treasury bonds/T-Bills, etc - i.e. the same 'investments' the government is supposed to be making with SS - that would completely negate your ridiculous point.

Nice try!

[–]StopTop 15 ポイント16 ポイント  (77子コメント)

I like that you got downvoted for suggesting that we be responsible for our own savings.

Retirement isn't a fucking right, it's something you earn.

[–]pneuma8828 90 ポイント91 ポイント  (19子コメント)

We decided collectively that we weren't going to let people too old to work starve to death. Either we have a safety net, or we don't. Privatizing social security removes the safety net. Being for privatizing social security means being for seniors starving in the streets, its as simple as that.

[–]RandoKalrissian 21 ポイント22 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Thank you. People forget that before anything about "entitlement" and "retirement", the name is "Social Security". Without a safety net, food riots and political instability would be a far greater risk.

[–]lackofcommitme 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I for one enjoy not living in a Mad Max style dystopia. And will continue paying my fair share of taxes to make sure my kids don't have to.

[–]zanzibarman 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Mad Max would be dope as fuck if you were in the 1% of people who survived the collapse of society and then managed to prosper in the ensuing anarchy.

Most people aren't that lucky.

[–]Dude_Shadoway 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

What if privatization simply meant the option to invest your retirement elsewhere? For example, say I have to pay $10k to SS next year. I have the option to take my $10k and invest it somewhere else if I so choose, with the same rules as SS regarding when I can start drawing. Alternatively, what if we were allowed to put a certain percentage elsewhere? So of my $10k I can put 100% into SS, or I have the option to privately invest up to 40% ($4k) where I please.

Obviously there would need to be regulations regarding the types of investment instruments you could use, but maybe something like this is at least a happy medium and doesn't completely remove the safety net.

[–]GravyMcBiscuits 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Not sure you could really call it a safety net though. You only get benefits if you paid in. It's more like a forced investment plan.

Elderly who haven't paid in enough to get livable benefits are forced to use other programs. I would say those other programs are the "safety net".

[–]qp0n -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Who is "we"? ... oh right, you meant "other people, mostly old people reaping the rewards".

awww, truth hurts. best to just downvote it and keep lying to yourself.

[–]Willchud -4 ポイント-3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Where/when did I decide that? Being for private SS does not equate to being for seniors starving. That's like saying being pro choice is being pro abortion. I'm pro choice becuase I believe people should be able to do what they want for themselves. However I am not pro abortion. If I created a fertilized embryo with my current partner I'd like to see it born, for me, my choice.

If I have to pay money into a retirement fund I'd like to be able to control it for me, my choice.

[–]Nohams -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Being for privatizing social security means being for seniors starving in the streets, its as simple as that.

No, not at all. What i am for it people taking responsibility for their actions and choices. Everybody gets old and it is up to you to plan for that. For those who fail to plan ahead we have charity. Your argument that we are either for SS, or for old people dying it incorrect, and illogical. It isn't either you get ss or you starve to death.

[–]brolix 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Retirement isn't a fucking right, it's something you earn.

Until you have an entire generation of people who are still alive, but contributing nothing while requiring resources to stay alive.

Expecting people to save for retirement is very much a fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice shame on me issue. That is to say we KNOW with absolute certainty that the vast majority of people either can't or won't save for their future. People are stupid. But to pretend they aren't stupid is EVEN MORE stupid.

So those people still alive, are you going to murder those people oorrr......?

[–]StopTop 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

No. Our generation will be the opposite of the boomers generation. We will have to pay while receiving nothing. Someone has to suffer. It will be us. And maybe we can teach our kids to rely on themselves instead.

Another point, you don't have to retire. Many people work into their 70s and 80s. I decided long ago that I am not. Largely due to the fact that our grandparents and parents squandered our resources and lived unnecessarily lavishly at our expense.

Retirement is a fairly new concept.

I am grateful for this mindset as it also frees me from the 9-5 living under corporate thumb lifestyle.

[–]EchoRadius 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Well I'm going to say it IS a right. If businesses want educated people to make money off of, and roads to do business on that we all fucking pay for, then they sure as fuck can drop a little in a fund for us when we're too old to do anything about ourselves. Seriously, the alternative for MOST is starvation. But sure, I'll entertain the idea when minimum wage is tied to and scaled with future projected CPI. Guessing minimum wage would be about $50/hr.

But they don't wanna pay for that either. So what's the real problem? People that have basic needs, or cheap billionaires?

[–]StopTop 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

You really think that there would be mass starvation if social security is taken away? I kinda think families and communities would step in and help where needed.

Heartless billionaire corporations are only made possible by government help anyways. A free market would absolutely level the playing field because cronyism (disguised as socialism or capitalism) would die.

The real problem is greed. It's the cultural mindset in America of always striving to have more. Even when you are far past what you need. I think (hope) it's seeing the beginning of the end with the millennials. Sorry I know I kinda went off on a tangent. But yes, the real problem is our culture of greed envy and consumerism.

[–]adisharr 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (9子コメント)

Not everyone has the means to handle investments or manage their money properly due to either their own doing or circumstances beyond their control. What do you suggest for them?

[–]watchout5 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Bootstraps. Lots of them. In lengths that your arms can reach?

[–]vamper 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (4子コメント)

education

[–]latigidigital[🍰] -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Education doesn't help a chronic alcoholic who squandered his savings before sobering up for 20 years.

Education doesn't help the wife whose economically abusive husband has total control.

Education doesn't help the person with bipolar or schizoid disorders who leverages their retirement during an episode they can't remember two weeks later.

Education doesn't help people who have poor judgment or impulse control due to head injuries.

Most importantly, education doesn't help bystanders — family members, friends, community volunteers, and so on — who also must sacrifice and suffer to endure the burden of caring for these people.

The prospect of ending—or privatizing, or reducing, or frankly not expanding—Social Security is a scandal of unbelievable proportion.

[–]vamper 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

if SS doesn't exist then who will do provide for those people?

[–]_jamil_ 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

yeah, how's that working out for those millennial? jobs just pouring out the wazoo for them?

[–]vamper -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

hey, at least they wont have to worry about paying into SS and never receiving any of it back... hope mom still has room in the basement.

[–]Willchud 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I don't suggest anything for them, let them decide for themselves.

[–]tdt0005 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Word.

[–]Nohams -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

A financial adviser.

[–]lawstudent2 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

What about those of us who believe it is, in fact, a right? Like in Europe? Or our parents generation? The same jobs that once offered retirement benefits do not. How an individual is to blame for this is beyond me.

And before you start talking about how I must be a 'taker,' the very strong odds are that I pay way, way more in taxes than you do. And continue to our leftist.

[–]Thegreenpander [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

While I agree that there should be a system in place for those unable to save for their retirement on their own for whatever reason, I wouldn't say that it's a right. Sure, if you pay into it then it is in fact your right to benefit from it, but only because you have already paid into it. But to say that it's a right to have this available to you is to completely misunderstand what a right is.

A right is something that no one can take away from you or stop you from doing. It's not something someone has to give to you.

[–]newf91 -4 ポイント-3 ポイント  (31子コメント)

The whole concept is centered around the idea these politicians seem to have that the American people can't take care of themselves. We need the gov't to hold our hands. Basically SS is the foundation of a welfare state

[–]AngryInYYc 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (11子コメント)

The problem of course, is that people can't take care of themselves. They've proven it time and time again. 40%+ of baby boomers have NO retirement savings. It's easy now to say "fuck them, they deserve what they wrought", and I don't even disagree with that, but people won't stand for it when poverty becomes reality for most seniors.

[–]Cary_Fukunaga 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Hey, don't you come in here with your fancy numbers and facts! If poor people wanted to eat in their old age they would have been stockpiling cat food for years, one can a week is all it takes.

[–]AngryInYYc 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

ha. Don't mistake me for someone who has a lot of sympathy for people who had the ability to save and didn't (hint: the majority of boomers)

[–]fortifiedoranges -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (8子コメント)

They had their entire lives to prepare for it. Why should young people have to support their bad decisions?

[–]AngryInYYc 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I don't think young people should have to support them at all, but the alternative is millions of old people in abject poverty. Do you think that people will be ok with that, regardless of what people deserve?

[–]fortifiedoranges -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

If they have a problem with it they can donate their own time and money to help these people. People who live within their means should not have to pay for those who spent the 60s and 70s getting high.

[–]Backstop 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (5子コメント)

So the plan is just to let those people become homeless or what.

[–]fortifiedoranges 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (4子コメント)

It's not our responsibility. Again, they had their entire lives to prepare for it. It's just that they were more interested in getting high and partying instead of planning for the future.

[–]SenorBeef 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

What, 50 straight years if getting high and partying is the average reason for being unable to afford retirement? Man, people are having some wild lives apparently.

Probably has nothing to do with escalating costs and lowered wages for the average worker even as the economy grows.

[–]fortifiedoranges -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

How is that the responsibility of the younger generation? They're in the same boat. Why should the younger generations have to suffer twice for the mistakes made by the older ones? Escalating costs and lowered wages? Someone better alert all of those 20-something job creators. Oh wait, again not our fault or our responsibility.

[–]Backstop 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

So the plan is just to let those people become homeless or what.

[–]newf91 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Haha we certainly need a new plan. It would have been nice if the government could actually be trusted to hold on to any of the money that we give them

[–]pneuma8828 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (5子コメント)

Were you not fucking paying attention when Wall Street evaporated the retirement savings of half the country? Are you that fucking stupid?

[–]newf91 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Have you seen the politicians in Washington wipe out the entire countries retirement savings by mismanaging the money we gave them for our social security. Are you that fucking stupid? At least with Wall Street you get to pick who to give your money to.

[–]SenorBeef 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Our country has a retirement savings? When do we.. uh.. retire as a country?

This is the dumbest use of "the national economy is just like a household budget!" fallacious argument I've seen.

[–]SugarDaddyVA 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Wall Street has recovered and then some. Individuals who had therfore retirement savings evaporated were those who pulled their money OUT of Wall Street. Should have been patient and left your money there. You'd be more than fine today.

[–]summercampcounselor 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Good news, I found a much simpler way than guessing whether or not you should pull your money out of the stock market!

[–]youdontseekyoda -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (12子コメント)

It also goes into the general fund, which is one of the reasons why it's going bankrupt.

It's my money, damnit. It's just another tax, and when I need it, it won't be there. Fuck the government.

[–]General_Bison 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (2子コメント)

It's my money, damnit. It's just another tax, and when I need it, it won't be there. Fuck the government.

you can always leave

[–]SenorBeef 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Really? Where does one go? Are you aware that the United States is pretty much the only country in the world that doesn't attempt to control who gets into their country?

[–]youdontseekyoda -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm sure I've paid much more into SS than you, since I actually have a high paying job, and don't suck my mom's tit for meals.

[–]newf91 -4 ポイント-3 ポイント  (8子コメント)

Oh yeah it's not like they are actually saving the money for us the citizens(whom they claim to care so much about). Which is ironically what they do not trust us to do. They spend that shit the second they get it like a crack fiend in need a of a fix.

[–]youdontseekyoda 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (7子コメント)

Unfortunately, as most of Reddit is either still financially dependent on their parents, in college (and living off student loans), or "highly educated" tech professionals (who have lots of disposable income, and little-to-no responsibility), they just don't understand why this is a big deal. They can't grasp concepts that are not tangible in their minds (and future retirement needs are just SOOOO LAME!).

So, they ignore the issues. This is why history repeats itself, and "smart" people do dumb things.

[–]literallykillgmuoug -4 ポイント-3 ポイント  (6子コメント)

So why the fuck are you wasting your breath?

[–]youdontseekyoda 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (5子コメント)

Because when the future society looks at the historical records, they'll see that someone got it right. I can't let the moron masses dictate groupthink.

[–]literallykillgmuoug -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (4子コメント)

No, they wont see this. Youre just wasting your breath. If everyone at reddit "cant comprehend" your amazing idea (which is simply to create another personal savings account) why do you keep telling it to us?

[–]youdontseekyoda -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (3子コメント)

It's not another savings account. You'd be able to invest in the same secure government options (treasury bonds, etc) that they currently invest your money in - except in this case - there'd be 100% transparency as to what you've contributed, and how your contributions have grown.

But, again, an idiot like you - that has no concept of SS - or the future failure of the current system - loves the status quo, right?

Or, are you just too stupid to propose an alternative that works, and is guaranteed - AND - which has the transparency required to ensure it's being run properly?

[–]Willchud -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Right? You shouldn't just get free money and health care cuz you turned a certain age. You had your whole life to plan and earn your own retirement. I shouldn't have to pay for it.

[–]watchout5 -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Then you should campaign to end social security. That's like saying air isn't a right and then not doing anything about all the free air around us. Good luck in your quest, you'll probably need more allies than you'll find on a website like this to end such a program.

[–]StopTop 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Yes, social security is comparable to free money floating all around us for everyone to have as much as they desire...

[–]watchout5 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

If the tax was lifted to include all levels of income it still wouldn't be free money but the program would last until your great great great great great grandchildren get old. If you think this money is free you're not paying attention to who's paying the bill.

[–]11-Eleven 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

The solution you're looking for:

Mandatory retirement fund. Choose a private organization for your retirement fund that is fdic backed to a certain %. If you can't prove you are paying to a private organization for retirement, you are forced into ss.

[–]youdontseekyoda 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Possibly something along those lines.

A) It would shut liberals up regarding their ridiculous "GREEDY BANKERS WILL STEAL IT' routine

B) It would give transparency to the amount you've saved.

C) It would be safe.

[–]SenorBeef 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Ah, yes, give a massive amount of power and money to the financial sector that has looked out for the public interest and served the general public so well in recent years. What could go wrong? Nothing! If it's not government, it can't be wrong!

[–]BostonJohn17 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (3子コメント)

That's a fantastic idea if you're one of the people getting a cut of the transaction fees.

[–]youdontseekyoda 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (2子コメント)

As opposed to the government, which literally spends ALL of the collected money decades before it's needed? Did you have a point?

[–]BostonJohn17 -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (1子コメント)

The government invests it in US treasury bonds. Which are a solid investment.

[–]youdontseekyoda 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

i.e. they buy bonds from themselves, and then spend the money... it's all based on a ponzi-scheme that future contributions will outpace withdrawals - which we know isn't the case.

[–]Makemewantitbad 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Oh, just terrible. How dare we decide what to do with OUR OWN money.

[–]watchout5 -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

What if my decision is that I want the government to hold enough of our money such that if the banks collapse again we're not left with nothing in our precious 401ks?

[–]newf91 -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Much better we give it to the gov't to mismanage and piss away.

[–]yonreadsthis 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

You weren't around for President Ronnie. 401Ks worked out really well, didn't they. (Yes, that is sarcism.)

[–]newf91 -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Social security sure is panning out much better. (Yes, sarcasm)

[–]Slick424 -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (3子コメント)

In fall 2008 nothing happened to the financial sector. No banks or large insurers failed and had to be bailed out by the government(taxpayer).

accounts we actually have control over

That is an illusion. By the time you would retire the money would be long gone. Either by maleficence or incompetence of your private insurer, bank or fund manager. And again, the government (taxpayer) had to jump in just to prevent a full social collapse.

[–]watchout5 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

So, if the government has to prevent financial institutions from collapsing, and they're also in charge of giving old people checks, wouldn't that mean even if the banks crash (re: our 401k) that the government would have to bail them out? Seems like social security is just giving us our money in one step, instead of using the middle man of wall street.

[–]youdontseekyoda 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

You just don't get it. The money is mine, I've contributed it - therefore, I should be able to get a transparent snapshot of how my specific pot of money is growing, etc. Even if you're forced to invest in safe government bonds - it's better than pissing into the wind, and having the government squander it on all the shit they do.

[–]Slick424 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

No YOU don't get it.

Just because you get an advertisement of your bank/fund manager/insurer disguised as financial report does not mean that there will be any money there decades later when you retire.

As awful as democratic governments are when it comes to trustworthiness, banks or similar financial institution are a lot worse. They have no allegiance to anyone except their shareholders and will just leave you behind to sniff the exhaust of their private jets when things go wrong or become unprofitable.

Or do you want to be your own fund manager? You are just as well suited for that job as you are to be your own oncologist.

As bad as governments are for this task, every other possibility is a lot worse.