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 04-07-2016, 04:45 PM
 
Location: Backwoods of Maine
7,119 posts, read 8,170,642 times
Reputation: 18781

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by seeriously View Post
Kinda makes Bernie Sanders and his tuition free-for-all sound a joke!

So who do you believe? The sky is falling out from the US Government or free and endless tuition for everyone?
There is no either/or here. Bernie just needs to learn that nothing is "free".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-07-2016, 06:38 PM
 
37 posts, read 36,455 times
Reputation: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zymer View Post
{Looks around}

Works for me.

I refuse to live in fear too. That's why I live in an isolated rural area with my guns, growing food, a deep well and a running clean stream, plenty of game. Alla y'all in the cities...well, too bad. Life is good here.
We have nothing to fear but fear itself.....and the boogey man.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2016, 07:39 PM
 
211 posts, read 151,564 times
Reputation: 633
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2016, 07:56 PM
 
958 posts, read 1,301,915 times
Reputation: 1309
Quote:
Originally Posted by FireFromIce View Post
We have nothing to fear but fear itself.....and the boogey man.
When I first started trying to grow my savings by venturing into investing, I paid a great deal of attention to the Doom N Gloom hucksters. It seemed as if they were all pushing guaranteed money-making investments, as long as I paid $$$$ for their newsletter, or email alerts, or books. I subscribed to as many as I could afford and lost most of my fledgling investments. Now when I hear someone hyping fear and dread, I ask myself, "How do they plan to profit from my fear?" With that in mind, I refuse to let them lead me around by the nose, and my investing is more successful.

When I was a young tad in high school (lo, a long time ago) I wrote a paper on Social Security for my social studies class. I discovered that the first regular SS recipient was Vermont school teacher Ida May Fuller. She paid a grand total of $24.75 into the system and collected $22888.82. I had never thought about investing or SS before but my youthful conclusion was "Uh Oh." Ever since, I proceeded on the assumption that it wouldn't be around for me to collect, and I saved accordingly. I'm very glad now that I did.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-08-2016, 06:15 AM
 
Location: Hiding from Antifa?
6,435 posts, read 4,192,537 times
Reputation: 5727
I am all for eliminating the cap on earnings for the SS contributions, without increasing the benefits, at least until the plan becomes solvent.

I look at it this way:
I believe there used to be an actual SS Trust Fund that was dedicated to be used for SS recipients. Somewhere in the past, the government had a shortfall in the general fund and decided to dip into the SSTF, rather than increase taxes to everyone, which would necessarily mean that high income earners(well over the annual cap) would have to pay more. Those high income earners therefore benefitted from taking money out of the SSTF.

If they hadn't done that, the high income earners would be paying a higher income tax right now, but instead the middle and low income earners have been subsidizing them, by continuing to participate in the SS system. By removing the cap, without automatically increasing the benefits for the higher income contributors, it would set things right. Eventually, solvency would return to the point where a (higher) cap could be instituted or benefits could be increased for those that contributed more.

The problem I see with implementation, is that these higher income earners have the politicians in their pocket.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-08-2016, 06:28 AM
 
Location: Durham NC
1,190 posts, read 1,300,343 times
Reputation: 927
Local governments need money? They'll just raise property taxes. Eliminating the cap on SS? Younger professionals in their 20's and 30's will gladly pay more into SS believing they will never get a penny back?

SS age has to be raised and in a major way unless they can find a way to get a much larger population to begin paying into it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-08-2016, 06:56 AM
 
633 posts, read 464,383 times
Reputation: 1103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jumeby View Post
No, the Federal government does not literally print as many US dollars as it chooses out of thin air.

Actually, they can do EXACTLY this. Remember the speculation over Obama's "Trillion dollar coin?"


Quote:
The $1 trillion coin is idea that was initially mentioned in the comments section of a blog post and has gained steam in recent weeks. The proposal is to have the Treasury Department mint the coin, declare it worth $1 trillion, deposit it in the Federal Reserve and then use the money to pay its bills to avoid defaulting when it hits the debt ceiling.



Congress passed a law that allows the Treasury Department to print platinum coins and determine the value. The original intent was to allow the printing of commemorative coins. Philip Diehl, who ran the U.S. Mint from 1994 to 2000 and helped to write the bill, admitted that $1 trillion coin is not the original goal. "Yes, this is an unintended consequence of the platinum coin bill, but how many other pieces of legislation have had unintended consequences? Most, I'd guess," he wrote in an email to the website DailyKos.

What's up with the $1 trillion coin? - CBS News


Thin. Air. The treasury department could literally print a coin in whatever domination it chooses, declare that it now literally has that much money, and deposit it in the Federal Reserve and borrow against that amount or pay debt with it. it is ENTIRELY within the power of the federal government to declare it has as much money as it says it does, and the Fed can say nothing about this.


There are again political consequences to doing this, but it is COMPLETELY legal.


And again as I pointed out there is no legal means by which a state can default and restructure under federal bankruptcy laws. that only applies to municipalities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-08-2016, 08:09 AM
 
365 posts, read 307,531 times
Reputation: 443
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burger Fan View Post
Actually, they can do EXACTLY this. Remember the speculation over Obama's "Trillion dollar coin?"





What's up with the $1 trillion coin? - CBS News


Thin. Air. The treasury department could literally print a coin in whatever domination it chooses, declare that it now literally has that much money, and deposit it in the Federal Reserve and borrow against that amount or pay debt with it. it is ENTIRELY within the power of the federal government to declare it has as much money as it says it does, and the Fed can say nothing about this.


There are again political consequences to doing this, but it is COMPLETELY legal.


And again as I pointed out there is no legal means by which a state can default and restructure under federal bankruptcy laws. that only applies to municipalities.
"Actually, they can do EXACTLY this" ? Sure ... But then this is not the Weilmar government of Germany.

Just because there are no laws or policies currently on the books for a state to in effect declare bankruptcy ... does not mean a state can't default on it's obligations. It's happened before.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-08-2016, 08:20 AM
 
29,829 posts, read 34,918,975 times
Reputation: 11752
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jumeby View Post
"Actually, they can do EXACTLY this" ? Sure ... But then this is not the Weilmar government of Germany.

Just because there are no laws or policies currently on the books for a state to in effect declare bankruptcy ... does not mean a state can't default on it's obligations. It's happened before.
Exactly, bankruptcy is the orderly court approve process of being broke. Without it broke is still broke.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-08-2016, 12:33 PM
 
Location: Boston, MA
8,779 posts, read 7,717,600 times
Reputation: 7692
It WILL all come crashing down. The question is: when?

Don't depend on government, people.
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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - 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 - Top