|
|
Post by 00hmh on Aug 1, 2018 7:41:13 GMT -6
True, the borrowing of funds is a negative consequence. The problem is too many people are becoming eligible with too few people working. Reforms are probably necessary, but the program can be enhanced. The borrowing is negative, only in slightly impacting the way the fund might have invested the money. But OTOH we can blame all the other choices that led to that borrowing, such defense spending, social spending, tax cuts that have dubious prospects of generating economic growth and jobs and all the other problems.
Society needed to spend more to fund the elderly in later life. The fact we live longer is not exactly a negative but was going to cause problems.
The issue of not having enough workers long term is more a problem, I agree with the post above on the actuarial assumptions, but it seems an argument for either raising taxes, cutting benefits slightly or both, not a reason to throw out the system. Might also be a good argument for promoting more immigration and larger population growth than an argument for not spending the money to provide a safety net. Those old farts, some of us among them would have to have funded retirement some way...that problem was not going away, and is not going away now for the future. Millennials are going to face that problem and I'll be surprised if the solution is to abolish SS.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2018 12:17:11 GMT -6
I calculated what I have paid into Social Security over the years. If I had invested the same funds directly into a S&P 500 based 401k, over the same period, I would've come out around 87% ahead of the value of my Social Security.
That also accounts for the recessionary drops that S&P 500 funds encountered over the past decades. While Social Security sounds great, it is not the best way to set up retirement. In fact, it sucks.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Aug 1, 2018 13:03:36 GMT -6
I calculated what I have paid into Social Security over the years. If I had invested the same funds directly into a S&P 500 based 401k, over the same period, I would've come out around 87% ahead of the value of my Social Security. That also accounts for the recessionary drops that S&P 500 funds encountered over the past decades. While Social Security sounds great, it is not the best way to set up retirement. In fact, it sucks. That's true for above average income where saving is possible. Or is it something everyone actually will be able to do, and even when you could save that 6% you put in might or might not have been put aside.
Ask the folks who suffer layoffs, bankruptcy, illness, it's not just the negligent who don't save after all. And it ignores the possibility those folks may have to care for mom and dad who would not have SS, that puts a crimp in saving after the kids are out of college, and is just not possible for some of the elderly to care for themselves, so we'd be paying something in some other way.
I agree it is not free money! But the system has pluses and minuses, and I doubt the majority would vote to shut it down. |
|
|
|
Post by JacksonStreetElite on Aug 1, 2018 14:05:53 GMT -6
I feel like there's a word for it when someone else has a legally recognized claim to the fruits of your labor and forces you to obey them...
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Aug 1, 2018 19:51:00 GMT -6
I feel like there's a word for it when someone else has a legally recognized claim to the fruits of your labor and forces you to obey them... That's a good point in an abstract debate. But in the real world the question is how much of a legally recognized claim and how much rule of law do you want. Absence of government completely and very weak governments have not worked well in human history... |
|
|
|
Post by Lurkin McGurkin on Aug 3, 2018 6:05:52 GMT -6
"The bigger the pool, the lower the costs." Until the pool reaches a certain median age. Look at what's happening in Japan. Now in negative population growth (declining since late 70s), median age of 47. There are not enough young people to offset the older folks. The Japanese are incredibly healthy, as a nation, but they will reach a tipping point soon. Sustainability is the number 2 problem with socialism. The people who can afford to, will leave, putting a larger and larger burden on the middle class, until it all collapses. Rampant corruption is the number 1 problem, as in most economic systems. |
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Aug 3, 2018 8:14:46 GMT -6
"The bigger the pool, the lower the costs." Until the pool reaches a certain median age. Look at what's happening in Japan. Now in negative population growth (declining since late 70s), median age of 47. There are not enough young people to offset the older folks. The Japanese are incredibly healthy, as a nation, but they will reach a tipping point soon. Sustainability is the number 2 problem with socialism. The people who can afford to, will leave, putting a larger and larger burden on the middle class, until it all collapses. Rampant corruption is the number 1 problem, as in most economic systems. Corruption and fraud in Medicare is not alarmingly high, not that much different than regular insurance, except for identity theft, where it is an easier target. This is more than offset by much lower administrative cost for Medicare compared to private insurance.
We are NOT in danger of matching the Japanese experience , no projection shows that. But. The population demographic is a big problem. Another good argument for freer immigration and promoting child care to encourage population to be more balanced. Japan is radically hostile to immigration...
|
|
|
|
Post by thebsukid on Aug 3, 2018 21:31:04 GMT -6
For those that like the Socialist model consider when you attended BSU if the following situation occurred:
Let’s say you were a 4.0 student that studied, went to class, etc but another student missed class, didn’t study, was just a partier and generally a poor student who had a 2.0 accum.
The University President calls you both in and explains the academic wealth should be shared. He awards 1.0 full point of your accum to other student and now you both are 3.0 students.
That’s sort of how it works...absolutely wouldn’t feel so good if you were the 4.0 student, right?
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Aug 4, 2018 7:56:08 GMT -6
For those that like the Socialist model consider when you attended BSU if the following situation occurred: Let’s say you were a 4.0 student that studied, went to class, etc but another student missed class, didn’t study, was just a partier and generally a poor student who had a 2.0 accum. The University President calls you both in and explains the academic wealth should be shared. He awards 1.0 full point of your accum to other student and now you both are 3.0 students. That’s sort of how it works...absolutely wouldn’t feel so good if you were the 4.0 student, right? Better analogy is that the President makes sure you have gone the extra mile to try to educate both well. That is the wealth they share, the resources of the University. We owe them a good evaluation of their work. Give them the grade they deserve...
If the poor student achieved a 2.0 instead of flunking out you give both a diploma. Hopefully both can then live a life they deserve. If the poor student really didn't get a 2.0, he leaves the University, if he got a 2.0 and did not deserve it then that is the error of the President. Then it's not the University but the rest of the community that has to deal with a huge problem. Not our problem but somebody's, still. Better we tried to help than not.
I don't want him at the University, but I'd rather have him on the dole than paying more to imprison him or have him living under a bridge...but I agree with you that the total loser is a huge problem. Under any economic system.
If such people did not cause pain and suffering to those around them and bore the cost of their errors it might be different. It is difficult to force them to pay the price for their behavior. Too often they are harming others or will, will become a burden on family, become criminal elements who harm the community, and so on.
They are the rotten apple in the barrel and there isn't an easy solution. The difficult question is if you find the ne'er do well passed out on the train tracks do you move him off, or let him suffer his fate? I am unwilling to leave him there...but ain't taking him home with me.
|
|
