Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-13-2013, 07:45 AM
 
797 posts, read 1,340,763 times
Reputation: 992

Advertisements

If 'when SS is privatized, there would have to be about $3 TRILLION put into SS from the general fund to make the transition.

I oppose it, but at least President Bush was honest enought to mention it.
That ( borrowing $3 trillion) was a big reason President Bush could not sell his plan.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-13-2013, 08:01 AM
 
Location: Salisbury,NC
16,757 posts, read 8,168,982 times
Reputation: 8532
SS should never be privatized. Its there as what its name is Social Security, It is the base of your retirement not a pension or annuity. The program is to keep seniors from moving from the work force to the poor house. Proper planning during your 30 -40 year work life will enable a nice retirement.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2013, 09:04 AM
 
Location: Boca Raton, FL
6,882 posts, read 11,209,121 times
Reputation: 10792
Smile Don't judge everyone by their age

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boss View Post
Working to 65 is about as old as you should be. Just as back in the 70's we needed the "old guys" to get out of the way and retire so we could find jobs that paid more then minimum ($1.75/hr), It is our turn to get out of the way so the next generation can move up .

Judgeing from the # of friends needing some sort of corrective surgery (Hips, knees,heart valves) this generation (boomers) will be dropping like flies at the first frost.
I dislike generalities like this. True, we all have our disabilities and I've had a lifetime one but - maybe, it's because I live in a warm climate but I sure see a lot of 65 plus people who seem to be doing FINE - working - full time, part time, volunteering, whatever they want to do.

In the 1970's, people passed away at a younger age. Now, you are seeing a lot in their 90's (maybe it's where I live) so to hang out from age 65 to age 95 is a long time (30 years). Last I heard, it was a free or used to be a free country where you could decide what you wanted to do (of course, depending on resources).

Also, keep in mind, a lot of people are hanging in there until 70. But not all 65 or 70 year olds are the same - not all are ready to leave the workforce. It could be where the last few years have decided that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2013, 09:53 AM
bUU
 
Location: Florida
12,077 posts, read 10,674,992 times
Reputation: 8793
Quote:
Originally Posted by TuborgP View Post
This is a world without borders and do you want to tell us retired folks we can't move or we do away with the rights of states to tax their citizens?
Of course not. Read what you wrote, again - that which I replied to. You were talking about the wealth, not the people. Or is the problem here that you don't acknowledge a difference between people and their money?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2013, 10:38 AM
 
31,679 posts, read 40,955,698 times
Reputation: 14419
Quote:
Originally Posted by bUU View Post
Of course not. Read what you wrote, again - that which I replied to. You were talking about the wealth, not the people. Or is the problem here that you don't acknowledge a difference between people and their money?
Not really for in my experience my wealth travels with me and is taxed where I move to. So I clearly accept ownership of my wealth as being part of me. I as many others feel we earned it through the fruit of our efforts and agreements we entered into with employers in exchange for my labor. I invested part of that and it became part of my asset base. So NO I consider what people earn to be part of them. Not a problem we just see and I assume value things differently. Not sure about you or others but when the market goes up I think I made money and when it goes down I think I loss money. To me when you accept personal responsibilty for your financial security you own the results of it especially if it works out.

Last edited by TuborgP; 03-13-2013 at 11:08 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2013, 11:26 AM
bUU
 
Location: Florida
12,077 posts, read 10,674,992 times
Reputation: 8793
Quote:
Originally Posted by TuborgP View Post
Not really for in my experience my wealth travels with me and is taxed where I move to.
You say these things you say in such a manner that the inescapable inference is that you are declaring that nothing can change without your personal say-so. This is a society, we're talking about. It exists for all its members, not just you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TuborgP View Post
So I clearly accept ownership of my wealth as being part of me.
There is no appreciable difference between saying that and saying that society cannot impose taxes. They're both assuredly wrong.

Generally speaking, ownership of wealth is as per the terms and conditions of the economy within which that wealth exists. Such ownership therefore requires abiding with terms and conditions that the economy through its processes may impose. For example, you cannot move $10,000 in our out of a bank, in our economy, without a reporting requirement being satisfied. It isn't within an individual's purview to place themselves as arbiter with veto power over such requirements.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TuborgP View Post
I as many others feel we earned it through the fruit of our efforts and agreements we entered into with employers in exchange for my labor.
You've said that in such a manner that the inescapable inference is that you refuse to acknowledge how the economy within which that wealth exists fostered and facilitated your ability to earn the income that fed that wealth. That kind of denial of reality shuts the door on any substantive discussion of these issue. You're essentially saying, "It's mine mine mine and I don't care about society."

Quote:
Originally Posted by TuborgP View Post
Not a problem we just see and I assume value things differently.
I agree that it is not a problem that we value things differently, but the fact that you see this thing differently from the reality causes an unrecoverable fault: The refusal to accept one's self as part of society, insisting instead that one is a preemptive agent operating within society but apart from, entitled to act solely for personal advantage at society's expense and to the exclusion of society's interest, essentially scuttles any chance of coexistence with society itself.

President Obama recently noted the same thing, more generally, earlier this week.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2013, 11:45 AM
 
31,679 posts, read 40,955,698 times
Reputation: 14419
Quote:
Originally Posted by bUU View Post
You say these things you say in such a manner that the inescapable inference is that you are declaring that nothing can change without your personal say-so. This is a society, we're talking about. It exists for all its members, not just you.

There is no appreciable difference between saying that and saying that society cannot impose taxes. They're both assuredly wrong.

Generally speaking, ownership of wealth is as per the terms and conditions of the economy within which that wealth exists. Such ownership therefore requires abiding with terms and conditions that the economy through its processes may impose. For example, you cannot move $10,000 in our out of a bank, in our economy, without a reporting requirement being satisfied. It isn't within an individual's purview to place themselves as arbiter with veto power over such requirements.

You've said that in such a manner that the inescapable inference is that you refuse to acknowledge how the economy within which that wealth exists fostered and facilitated your ability to earn the income that fed that wealth. That kind of denial of reality shuts the door on any substantive discussion of these issue. You're essentially saying, "It's mine mine mine and I don't care about society."

I agree that it is not a problem that we value things differently, but the fact that you see this thing differently from the reality causes an unrecoverable fault: The refusal to accept one's self as part of society, insisting instead that one is a preemptive agent operating within society but apart from, entitled to act solely for personal advantage at society's expense and to the exclusion of society's interest, essentially scuttles any chance of coexistence with society itself.

President Obama recently noted the same thing, more generally, earlier this week.
You are taking things to an extreme. You need to know I am a social moderate and a fiscal conservative but most importantly I consider myself a realist and understand the nature and consequences of my personal decisions along with others. I know that when I invest in companies overseas or buy bonds from overseas I am supporting another countries economy. I also know the when a Muni Bond investor like Robyn decides to invest in one state over another she is shifting wealth to that state. I am older and have seen a lot and experienced a lot and worked with a wide variety of people and believe we have serious problems that can't be solved by taxation. Think Detroit and every other major city where the tax wealth has gone elsewhere and they now have no tax base. Think states where the same thing is happening. I have lived in very wealthy areas where low income foks were well taken care of because the community embraced doing so. However as the percentages change the ablility to do so become more challenging. I also know that in this forum many folks are looking for low tax states to retire to regardless of the level of social welfare for the poor in those states. Perhaps most importantly I understand that core to capitalism is the innate drive to act out in ones self interest. My belief is that if encouraged many more could learn to embrace their own wealth creation and we would all be better off. All of this is why the topic of raising the retirement age and how to solve the problems of SS are so challenging. It is not being felt solely on its own merits but as part of a greater debate in our society. As Mid Pack said early on we always end up back at this point because we have varying feelings about the underlying issues.

Last edited by TuborgP; 03-13-2013 at 12:14 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2013, 12:16 PM
bUU
 
Location: Florida
12,077 posts, read 10,674,992 times
Reputation: 8793
Quote:
Originally Posted by TuborgP View Post
You are taking things to an extreme.
To be fair, you're stating them to an extreme - I'm just reading the words you're posting. If you mean "sometimes" or "partially" or otherwise mean to make your comments equivocal then it is important you include those clarifications within your comments, because the reality is that there are a number of people who actually do profess the extreme.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TuborgP View Post
I am older and have seen a lot and experienced a lot and worked with a wide variety of people and believe we have serious problems that can't be solved by taxation.
That's just the first step, though. Many people realize that we have serious problems that can't be solved by taxation, but a lot of people stop there. The deeper realization is that there may not be a viable solution - viable implying practicality, efficacy, and the ability to gain the support necessary to be undertaken, so we will be forced to pick among the least of evils, which in many cases, given the principles of compassionate conservativism, could actually be taxation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TuborgP View Post
Perhaps most importantly I understand that core to capitalism is the innate drive to act out in ones self interest.
And core to society is the innate responsibility to protect society's members from being unilaterally subjected to such a blindly exploitative drive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TuborgP View Post
My belief is that if encouraged many more could learn to embrace their own wealth creation and we would all be better off.
I recognize such statements are often thinly-veiled categorical insults against those less fortunate, despite claims to the contrary. What is necessary is building a path forward based on respect for others rather than based on the baseless assumption that all such people lack the intention to pay their own way given such an opportunity. The reality is that our economy system actually is unfair. There is no way to move forward to resolve the problems we're discussing while so many people are unwilling to admit that fact.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2013, 12:33 PM
 
Location: NC
1,873 posts, read 2,396,474 times
Reputation: 1825
Quote:
Originally Posted by bUU View Post
I recognize such statements are often thinly-veiled categorical insults against those less fortunate, despite claims to the contrary. What is necessary is building a path forward based on respect for others rather than based on the baseless assumption that all such people lack the intention to pay their own way given such an opportunity. The reality is that our economy system actually is unfair. There is no way to move forward to resolve the problems we're discussing while so many people are unwilling to admit that fact.
While the numbers may be massaged, it would appear that the mainstream has tried to help the "less fortunate" more than ever, without much in the way of results unfortunately. I believe most people would genuinely like to help those less fortunate, but it's disappointing how little public spending seems to accomplish. More spending doesn't seem to be making anything better. What would you propose?
Attached Thumbnails
The Debate To Raise The Retirement Age-tax.jpg   The Debate To Raise The Retirement Age-poverty.jpg  

Last edited by Midpack; 03-13-2013 at 12:43 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2013, 12:45 PM
 
31,679 posts, read 40,955,698 times
Reputation: 14419
Quote:
Originally Posted by Midpack View Post
While the numbers may be massaged, it would appear that the mainstream has tried to help the "less fortunate" more than ever, without much in the way of results unfortunately. I believe most people would genuinely like to help those less fortunate, but it's disappointing how little public spending seems to accomplish. More spending doesn't seem to be making anything better. What would you propose?
Public spending can accomplish a lot and I have seen it happen. I have also seen it go to waste. When used with education on how to be successful it can really work. When used with the politics of it isn't your fault society works against you it often doesn't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top