Derby Trail Forums

Derby Trail Forums (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/index.php)
-   The Steve Dellinger Discourse Den (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=4)
-   -   Is Social Security A Good Investment? (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=43574)

joeydb 08-22-2011 02:33 PM
Is Social Security A Good Investment?
 
Worth a read:
http://www.inmessment.com/finance/is...w-the-numbers/

Could you do better with your contrib- er- confiscated money?

Riot 08-22-2011 04:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeydb (Post 802028)
Worth a read:
http://www.inmessment.com/finance/is...w-the-numbers/

Could you do better with your contrib- er- confiscated money?
Too bad Social Security isn't an investment program. It's stupid to try and compare apples and oranges, don't you think?

You make me laugh, Joey. You are handing the people that want to kick you off your Social Security Disability Insurance the hard-heeled boot to do just that.

Tell me - how would you be doing, today, living off just the profit of your hard work in your lifetime, with no Social Security disability to help you?

Your personal retirement fund right now is at least 5-7% of your lifetime income, right? You know - the percentage of income people should save, that you have saved, minus any Social Security percentage you have contributed? You've been completely diligent about saving that, surely, the way you bemoan we all contribute so seniors don't die in poverty (what a terrible societal decision THAT was, huh? How horrid a society are we, do protect our seniors?)

Better plan for being without that SSDI now, as long as you are going to try so hard to elect them and get that accomplished.

Clip-Clop 08-22-2011 05:02 PM
Charity should not be a function of the government.

Riot 08-22-2011 05:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clip-Clop (Post 802072)
Charity should not be a function of the government.
You're against all the help we send to our fellow Americans in drought, or in flood, or after hurricanes and tornadoes? Interesting stand you have taken.

You might consider moving to a different country, because this great one was founded upon forming a group society that has the power to tax for the benefit of all.

Clip-Clop 08-22-2011 05:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot (Post 802079)
Then you might consider moving to a different country, because this one was founded upon forming a group society that has the power to tax for the benefit of all.
Like a military, stable currency (under attack right now) and opportunity to succeed. That is enough for the Federal government to provide. Let states compete with each other for the rest.

Riot 08-22-2011 05:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clip-Clop (Post 802080)
Like a military, stable currency (under attack right now) and opportunity to succeed. That is enough for the Federal government to provide. Let states compete with each other for the rest.
Yes, tell New Orleans to go screw themselves. It's not Oregon's problem Katrina hit.

Clip-Clop 08-22-2011 05:27 PM
You never address anything realistically. Any and all real math is shot down or completely ignored. Any arguments that point out what is wrong are responded to with something meant to tug at the heartstrings. I feel bad for you, your life must be awful for you to spend so much time here trying to convince people that the federal government is and should be the cure all for everyone's problems.
Perhaps GE could donate their fair share and that would take care of an awful lot were the government capable, in any way, of handling money. Obama should just ask Immelt for the money that company should have paid just last year alone and solve these issues for millions of your downtrodden.
You are unable to learn or even look at things from any other perspective than your own. I am through debating with you, it is pointless.

Riot 08-22-2011 05:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clip-Clop (Post 802088)
You never address anything realistically. Any and all real math is shot down or completely ignored.
LOL - I'm not the one with the talking points.

Go ahead, you be realistic, and you tell Joey why he doesn't deserve "charity" from us.

Quote:
I feel bad for you, your life must be awful for you to spend so much time here trying to convince people that the federal government is and should be the cure all for everyone's problems.
Then let me assure you, so your concerned mind can rest at ease: my life is pretty damn wonderful, thanks.

I have never said the federal government should be the cure all for everyone's problems. Why do you misrepresent what I say?

Quote:
Perhaps GE could donate their fair share and that would take care of an awful lot were the government capable, in any way, of handling money. Obama should just ask Immelt for the money that company should have paid just last year alone and solve these issues for millions of your downtrodden.
You are unable to learn or even look at things from any other perspective than your own. I am through debating with you, it is pointless
Yes, because you don't have any facts or figures at hand to try and convince people of the validity of your argument in an objective manner. "You know what you know", and damn, it's sure not being a willing contributing member of this American society, apparently.

Danzig 08-22-2011 07:43 PM
would i be better off with my own money elsewhere? sure...everyone who could put it somewhere else would be better off. but that doesn't do many others any good, which is why we're stuck with the program-right? right. so, put what you can afford elsewhere, because you still need to rely on yourself.

joeydb 08-22-2011 09:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot (Post 802058)
Too bad Social Security isn't an investment program. It's stupid to try and compare apples and oranges, don't you think?

You make me laugh, Joey. You are handing the people that want to kick you off your Social Security Disability Insurance the hard-heeled boot to do just that.

Tell me - how would you be doing, today, living off just the profit of your hard work in your lifetime, with no Social Security disability to help you?

Your personal retirement fund right now is at least 5-7% of your lifetime income, right? You know - the percentage of income people should save, that you have saved, minus any Social Security percentage you have contributed? You've been completely diligent about saving that, surely, the way you bemoan we all contribute so seniors don't die in poverty (what a terrible societal decision THAT was, huh? How horrid a society are we, do protect our seniors?)

Better plan for being without that SSDI now, as long as you are going to try so hard to elect them and get that accomplished.
It's not an investment program? That's good because any investment program with that poor return would be a joke. But then, so is Social Security.

You're playing semantics. Whether it's classified as a "safety net", which I guess some how exonerates the government from giving a good return, or an investment program, is meaningless because in all cases the citizen's money is the money being applied for this purpose. It is the citizen who bears the lack of growth or outright loss. The paying citizen that is - those of us suckers who pay in.

Oh - I am a saver , but I want to do it with less of a headwind.

If Social Security is that great, make it optional.

dellinger63 08-22-2011 09:16 PM
social security is a welfare program at best and a ponzi scheme at worse.

Ponzi is more like it IMO

If 'God' sent a mailing with I will take X amount of money out of your check, spend it on whatever he chooses and at the time of signing up it is 63 when you can start withdrawing, but God may change that to a more advanced age especially if 'God' was running out of money. And oh yea, 'God' will decide your benefit or (payment per month) at that time. And 'God' may not pay you anything if you've saved too much money. With no payment back on investment upon death, how many besides Riot would raise their hands? :zz:

jms62 08-23-2011 06:45 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot (Post 802058)
Too bad Social Security isn't an investment program. It's stupid to try and compare apples and oranges, don't you think?

You make me laugh, Joey. You are handing the people that want to kick you off your Social Security Disability Insurance the hard-heeled boot to do just that.

Tell me - how would you be doing, today, living off just the profit of your hard work in your lifetime, with no Social Security disability to help you?

Your personal retirement fund right now is at least 5-7% of your lifetime income, right? You know - the percentage of income people should save, that you have saved, minus any Social Security percentage you have contributed? You've been completely diligent about saving that, surely, the way you bemoan we all contribute so seniors don't die in poverty (what a terrible societal decision THAT was, huh? How horrid a society are we, do protect our seniors?)

Better plan for being without that SSDI now, as long as you are going to try so hard to elect them and get that accomplished.
Wait... Is Joey actually on SSDI ???

joeydb 08-23-2011 07:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jms62 (Post 802182)
Wait... Is Joey actually on SSDI ???
No, never. Don't ever take the irrational rantings of Riot seriously.

jms62 08-23-2011 07:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeydb (Post 802186)
No, never. Don't ever take the irrational rantings of Riot seriously.
;) Rats. I just spent 30 minutes composing a blistering retort in my mind if the answer was yes. I will never get that time back.

joeydb 08-23-2011 07:16 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jms62 (Post 802189)
;) Rats. I just spent 30 minutes composing a blistering retort in my mind if the answer was yes. I will never get that time back.
Can't blame you a bit for that.

She must be thinking of someone else that she actually knows.

By the way, how does one go about changing their logon here? I'm thinking about "Order" - you know, the "anti-riot". :D

Danzig 08-23-2011 07:22 AM
speaking of ssdi, apps have increased by 50% with the economy's difficulties. it's headed towards insolvency as well.

it would be nice if people would buy short and long term disability coverage, wouldn't it? another available service that many ignore and then find a need.

jms62 08-23-2011 07:45 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danzig (Post 802194)
speaking of ssdi, apps have increased by 50% with the economy's difficulties. it's headed towards insolvency as well.

it would be nice if people would buy short and long term disability coverage, wouldn't it? another available service that many ignore and then find a need.
Agree however in these times people are more concerned about the little things like keeping a roof over their heads and feeding their children at least once a day.

Danzig 08-23-2011 08:36 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jms62 (Post 802200)
Agree however in these times people are more concerned about the little things like keeping a roof over their heads and feeding their children at least once a day.
obviously if you have to choose between food and coverage, you pick the food. but i was always astounded when people rejected short term disability when i was at my previous job. it didn't cost a dollar a week because the company paid most of the expense.. many of the employees used tobacco, but 'couldn't afford' the coverage. never made sense to me. my husband missed almost four months of work because of a broken heel a few years back; we were lucky we had it.

jms62 08-23-2011 08:46 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danzig (Post 802206)
obviously if you have to choose between food and coverage, you pick the food. but i was always astounded when people rejected short term disability when i was at my previous job. it didn't cost a dollar a week because the company paid most of the expense.. many of the employees used tobacco, but 'couldn't afford' the coverage. never made sense to me. my husband missed almost four months of work because of a broken heel a few years back; we were lucky we had it.
You are 100% right.

Riot 08-23-2011 11:49 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jms62 (Post 802182)
Wait... Is Joey actually on SSDI ???
No, I thought it was Joey, but I was mistaken. Somebody else here, with right wing leanings, did post they get SSDI. I"ll have to go looking for who it was. I already apologized to Joey on another thread for confusing him with someone else.

Riot 08-23-2011 11:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeydb (Post 802191)
Can't blame you a bit for that.

She must be thinking of someone else that she actually knows.

By the way, how does one go about changing their logon here? I'm thinking about "Order" - you know, the "anti-riot". :D
Riot is an accomplished hunting sighthound. The opposite would be ... maybe a couch Pekinese :D

And I searched, it's Timmgirvan that said he receives SSDI.

Riot 08-23-2011 11:53 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danzig (Post 802194)
it would be nice if people would buy short and long term disability coverage, wouldn't it? another available service that many ignore and then find a need.
People can't afford it, 'Zig. Health insurance is too expensive for most in the US unless they have an employer to help them out, and ignoring insurance and just purchasing the healthcare you need is completely unaffordable. As I said yesterday, UK charges $193 to see a GP for 15 minutes if you don't have insurance? That's absurd.

Healthcare in the US is 1/5 of our economy. It's only 4-6% in other first world countries. Our system is badly broken.

timmgirvan 08-23-2011 12:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot (Post 802265)
People can't afford it, 'Zig. Health insurance is too expensive for most in the US unless they have an employer to help them out, and ignoring insurance and just purchasing the healthcare you need is completely unaffordable. As I said yesterday, UK charges $193 to see a GP for 15 minutes if you don't have insurance? That's absurd.

Healthcare in the US is 1/5 of our economy. It's only 4-6% in other first world countries. Our system is badly broken.
With insurance, my doc charges 225-295 a visit. Medicare pays approx 100, I pay 25. Copay has increased....meds are 35-50% higher since July. Fixed income is nice to have, but it's still "checkers" at the end of the month.

Danzig 08-23-2011 06:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot (Post 802265)
People can't afford it, 'Zig. Health insurance is too expensive for most in the US unless they have an employer to help them out, and ignoring insurance and just purchasing the healthcare you need is completely unaffordable. As I said yesterday, UK charges $193 to see a GP for 15 minutes if you don't have insurance? That's absurd.

Healthcare in the US is 1/5 of our economy. It's only 4-6% in other first world countries. Our system is badly broken.
the coverage where i used to work for bc/bc for the employee was about $20 a week, certainly affordable for everyone who worked there. i know what the pay was for each position there.
and as i said above, the std was about 1 dollar a week. a dollar-people can't afford that? to get paid 2/3's their salary if they had to be off?
but, that money for tobacco is easily found i guess...one lady complained that they didn't have much-but her, her mom, and her hubby all used tobacco. pack/can a day for each. $15 a day. times 30 days. when i did the math, she looked at their habits a lot differently. it's all about priorities, and for many people, health coverage isn't a priority-til they need it. then it's a huge problem. and then it's pooor me. when in fact, those with a need already can be covered by medicaid. but it's the ones who don't want to pay who so often look for that help and sympathy. it's aggravating as hell. now, is everyone like that? obviously not. but when even smaller employers offer the stuff, and people turn it down-you gotta wonder what's in their head.

Antitrust32 08-24-2011 09:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danzig (Post 802399)
the coverage where i used to work for bc/bc for the employee was about $20 a week, certainly affordable for everyone who worked there. i know what the pay was for each position there.
and as i said above, the std was about 1 dollar a week. a dollar-people can't afford that? to get paid 2/3's their salary if they had to be off?
but, that money for tobacco is easily found i guess...one lady complained that they didn't have much-but her, her mom, and her hubby all used tobacco. pack/can a day for each. $15 a day. times 30 days. when i did the math, she looked at their habits a lot differently. it's all about priorities, and for many people, health coverage isn't a priority-til they need it. then it's a huge problem. and then it's pooor me. when in fact, those with a need already can be covered by medicaid. but it's the ones who don't want to pay who so often look for that help and sympathy. it's aggravating as hell. now, is everyone like that? obviously not. but when even smaller employers offer the stuff, and people turn it down-you gotta wonder what's in their head.
great post

Danzig 08-24-2011 10:48 AM
another question....if people wont buy group coverage with the employer paying a huge part, how will they suddenly afford obamacare??? the ONLY way to assure 100 % coverage and force everyone to pay is thru a tax.

Clip-Clop 08-24-2011 11:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Antitrust32 (Post 802505)
great post
It is...But they need tobacco and alcohol because they are sad and because they do not have health care. It makes them feel better. Like all those people WITH jobs and families that "cling to guns and bibles" to feel better.

Antitrust32 08-24-2011 11:13 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clip-Clop (Post 802525)
It is...But they need tobacco and alcohol because they are sad and because they do not have health care. It makes them feel better. Like all those people WITH jobs and families that "cling to guns and bibles" to feel better.
I'm not sad but I certainly like consuming alcohol!!! :)

Clip-Clop 08-24-2011 11:37 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Antitrust32 (Post 802528)
I'm not sad but I certainly like consuming alcohol!!! :)
My alcohol consumption is truly a result of my location. There are FAR too many beers out here to be avoided.

Riot 08-24-2011 12:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danzig (Post 802518)
another question....if people wont buy group coverage with the employer paying a huge part, how will they suddenly afford obamacare???
The insurance exchanges setups (private companies providing the insurance) are meant to provide direct, purely capitalistic competition between companies for one's business that will lower prices for all.

People with insurance offers through work will not be eligible for the exchanges, they have to purchase from work. The ACA is trying to insure those without insurance options, left adrift by our current healthcare insurance system. Not those who can get insurance.

Except these employees will not be forced to get the insurance available to them, because the Republicans demanded that all these small businesses be excluded.

It is repeatedly distressing to have people discussing the value of the ACA, and passing judgment upon it, when the factual provisions of the ACA are clearly not known to them. Those provisions are readily available, and have been since the law was passed, on the internet in easily-understandable bullet point websites geared to familiarizing people with the truth - not the GOP screaming August health care town hall ads and lies about government takeover of health care - of what the ACA actually contains.

Quote:
the ONLY way to assure 100 % coverage and force everyone to pay is thru a tax.
Or you could do it the way the ACA is set up. The ACA is attempting to get the currrently uninsured, insured. By private insurance companies. Not "the government". It doesn't change anything for those with insurance (other than the existence of the exchanges should make an employers choice for purchasing health insurance for their employees less expensive with greater competitive options)

Riot 08-24-2011 12:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danzig (Post 802399)
the coverage where i used to work for bc/bc for the employee was about $20 a week, certainly affordable for everyone who worked there. i know what the pay was for each position there.
and as i said above, the std was about 1 dollar a week.
Yeah, but what about all the other people who do not have work health insurance & disability offers, are unemployed, or currently are uninsurable, or have insurance but the company will not insure them for their chronic illnesses, etc?

That's who the ACA is trying to insure. Not the currently insured, but the currently under- and un-insured.

Yes, I agree it's sad to see people make bad life financial decisions for themselves and refuse employer offers like heath insurance, disability, matching 401K funds, etc.

Danzig 08-24-2011 01:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot (Post 802564)
The insurance exchanges setups (private companies providing the insurance) are meant to provide direct, purely capitalistic competition between companies for one's business that will lower prices for all.

People with insurance offers through work will not be eligible for the exchanges, they have to purchase from work. The ACA is trying to insure those without insurance options, left adrift by our current healthcare insurance system. Not those who can get insurance.

Except these employees will not be forced to get the insurance available to them, because the Republicans demanded that all these small businesses be excluded.

It is repeatedly distressing to have people discussing the value of the ACA, and passing judgment upon it, when the factual provisions of the ACA are clearly not known to them. Those provisions are readily available, and have been since the law was passed, on the internet in easily-understandable bullet point websites geared to familiarizing people with the truth - not the GOP screaming August health care town hall ads and lies about government takeover of health care - of what the ACA actually contains.



Or you could do it the way the ACA is set up. The ACA is attempting to get the currrently uninsured, insured. By private insurance companies. Not "the government". It doesn't change anything for those with insurance (other than the existence of the exchanges should make an employers choice for purchasing health insurance for their employees less expensive with greater competitive options)
but as i posted, you can't make them buy. and if they arent insured, the risk is all on them. and if people 'can't afford' employer subsidized group coverage, they certainly cant afford to buy outside of the group.
people want ins, want coverage, want care, want whats right...they just dont want to pay for it. i dont care if obamacare is all wrapped up and with a bow, there are people who dont see or feel a need, and wont pay. and no doubt they dont have car or life ins either.

Riot 08-25-2011 01:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danzig (Post 802588)
i dont care if obamacare is all wrapped up and with a bow, there are people who dont see or feel a need, and wont pay. and no doubt they dont have car or life ins either.
Yes, but out of the 60 million currently uninsured, I doubt they are remotely near a significant number. Most uninsured will be very grateful to be able to finally afford their own health insurance, and/or be insured for the illnesses and problems their current insurance company denies them coverage for.

I'll remind that most bankruptcies in this country are due to medical bills, and most of those bankruptcies are people who have insurance.

That simply doesn't occur in other first world countries. We are backwards and woefully inadequate, here in the US, with our health care.

Danzig 08-25-2011 01:19 PM
i've been told that about 40% of drivers here are uninsured. it's a significant amount. no doubt they're as blase' about health insurance.
thing is, like i said, people wail and moan about health costs-but many wouldn't have those issues had they opted for the insurance. i think the numbers would surprise you of people who simply chose not to take coverage. i see it every day. people who can afford insurance, be it for life, health, car, etc. they don't see a need. their excuse-why pay for something i'll never use? because all it takes is one catastrophe, but they don't look at it that way.

Coach Pants 08-30-2011 07:36 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:09 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.