Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But, people who do accept company or corporate backed retirement backed benefits usually dump their funds into 401K's which is really a stupid thing to do.
Yeah, I feel really stupid making over 50k in the first 3 months of the year off my 401k.
Ah, grasshopper, you fail to comprehend what they wrote.
At no time did they say you had to enroll into FICA.
All it said was that if you already had the number, you had to divulge it to the various bureaucracies named.
Do not believe me - write to the SocSec admin and get your own form letter for proof.
The SSN is required only by the Social Security Administration. Otherwise you do not need an SSN. You can get a passport, pay taxes including getting a child credit, join the army. The only agency that is legally allowed to require an SSN is the Social Security Administration and that is to pay benefits.
The chance of you being audited by the IRS if very great; by someone at the IRS who knows actual law is very slim. You will win the court battle, but only at a higher price than what the auditor takes. So you should expect a lot of headaches going the route of living without an SSN.
No law compels participation, nor punishes non participation. It is 100% voluntary.
Getting the SSN is optional. Paying the taxes is not. There are many in this country who choose to not have an SSN. The only thing that they are choosing is to "not collect benefits".
The SSN is required only by the Social Security Administration. Otherwise you do not need an SSN. You can get a passport, pay taxes including getting a child credit, join the army. The only agency that is legally allowed to require an SSN is the Social Security Administration and that is to pay benefits.
The chance of you being audited by the IRS if very great; by someone at the IRS who knows actual law is very slim. You will win the court battle, but only at a higher price than what the auditor takes. So you should expect a lot of headaches going the route of living without an SSN.
You can't get a license, any license, without a SS number though.
Not necessarily. It depends upon your timeline. There have been 20 year periods when equities were flat. If that was your investment period, your investment wouldn't have grown at all.
Yes, the stock market runs in cycles, and if you buy high and sell low you will lose money. But no one invests all of their retirement money at a single point in time. 20 years is not a terribly relevant timeframe for retirement.
The more relevant point is that Social Security works like insurance. It is not meaningful when compared to a savings account. Insurance manages risk. Savings accumulates wealth. These are compliments not substitutes.
Yes, the stock market runs in cycles, and if you buy high and sell low you will lose money. But no one invests all of their retirement money at a single point in time. 20 years is not a terribly relevant timeframe for retirement.
The more relevant point is that Social Security works like insurance. It is not meaningful when compared to a savings account. Insurance manages risk. Savings accumulates wealth. These are compliments not substitutes.
Exactly my point.
There is no working-timeframe period in the history of the united states with monthly investments where the stock market has underperformed SS returns.
There is no working-timeframe period in the history of the united states with monthly investments where the stock market has underperformed SS returns.
Actually for the first 40 years of Social Security, the economic returns of Social Security were vastly superior to anything available in the public markets. Average retirees in 1960 expected to collect $7 of benefits for every $1 contributed on an investment adjusted basis. By 1985, the return had dropped to $3 to 1. For people just entering the system, the return is negative. The decline of return comes from the rising costs.
Comparing the stock market to the returns of Social Security is not apple to apple though. Social Security's economic returns stink because the system has to carry legacy costs. If the market had to carry legacy costs, the returns there would stink as well. If payroll taxes went to a private account, you would face substantially higher income taxes to pay for legacy costs. Or, you would bail on the promises of Social Security.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
