WSJ: A Counterfactual Social Security History

[gatomontes99]

Workers would be much richer if Congress had passed George W. Bush’s private accounts in 2005.

If you were 22 years old in 2011, you’ll miss out on more than $800,000 that you could have accumulated under the Bush plan by the time you retire. This assumes a retirement age of 65, a starting contribution rate of $83 per month, actual market returns since 2011, and the S&P 500’s historical average 10% annual return into the future. Workers would be benefiting in their personal accounts from the wealth creation now occurring from artificial intelligence and biotechnology. Stock-market wealth would be spread more broadly.

***********

This is what would have happened had they "privatized" (aka let you keep your money) social security. Now, in 2034, it will undergo a +20% cut just to survive. 

[Nationalist]

But but but...MANDANIIII...

[robosmith]

5 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

Workers would be much richer if Congress had passed George W. Bush’s private accounts in 2005.

If you were 22 years old in 2011, you’ll miss out on more than $800,000 that you could have accumulated under the Bush plan by the time you retire. This assumes a retirement age of 65, a starting contribution rate of $83 per month, actual market returns since 2011, and the S&P 500’s historical average 10% annual return into the future. Workers would be benefiting in their personal accounts from the wealth creation now occurring from artificial intelligence and biotechnology. Stock-market wealth would be spread more broadly.

***********

Stocks at all time highs are NOT GUARANTEED, so they are not RELIABLE.

Bear markets happen all the time, particularly when people like Bush and Rove goose the market with low interest rates and very lax regulation. Then the market crashed and your 401K evaporated.

5 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

This is what would have happened had they "privatized" (aka let you keep your money) social security. Now, in 2034, it will undergo a +20% cut just to survive. 

Not if the government increases SS taxes on the very wealthy like Bezos, Zuckerberg and Musk.

SS could have been shored up substantially for the price of the war in Iran and the cost to replace all those muti-$M interceptors.

So much for your partisan HACK PERSPECTIVE which IGNORES HISTORY.

[Michael Hardner]

8 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Stocks at all time highs are NOT GUARANTEED, so they are not RELIABLE.

Further to that, allowing people to invest their portion would defeat the purpose of the fund which is to provide basic payments to all.  I'm sure there are improvements to be made but if we let people invest in anything they wanted there would be plenty of broke homeless old folks too.

[User]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Further to that, allowing people to invest their portion would defeat the purpose of the fund which is to provide basic payments to all.  I'm sure there are improvements to be made but if we let people invest in anything they wanted there would be plenty of broke homeless old folks too.

The fund was not created to provide basic payments to all. It doesn’t do that now.

The concept of allowing people to control their own or some portion of their own money in retirement doesn’t mean it had no regulations as if they could throw it all away either. 
 

The bush plan was for people to keep some percentage to invest like a 401K on their own, not even the whole thing anyhow. 
 

401k’s are generally structured to reduce risk the closer to retirement you get. The notion that just because the average market goes down means someone close to retirement sees their account significantly drop is not accurate. 

[gatomontes99]

6 hours ago, robosmith said:

Stocks at all time highs are NOT GUARANTEED, so they are not RELIABLE.

Bear markets happen all the time, particularly when people like Bush and Rove goose the market with low interest rates and very lax regulation. Then the market crashed and your 401K evaporated.

Not if the government increases SS taxes on the very wealthy like Bezos, Zuckerberg and Musk.

SS could have been shored up substantially for the price of the war in Iran and the cost to replace all those muti-$M interceptors.

So much for your partisan HACK PERSPECTIVE which IGNORES HISTORY.

Dumbass

[robosmith]

1 hour ago, gatomontes99 said:

Dumbass

LAME ad hominem is the best you got. LMAO

AKA failure to formulate any coherent rebuttal.  

[gatomontes99]

7 hours ago, robosmith said:

LAME ad hominem is the best you got. LMAO

Ad hominem must attempt to discredit the opponent. I did not attempt to discredit you, you did that to yourself. I made a statement of fact that was rooted in the post to which I replied and the myriad of posts on this board.

7 hours ago, robosmith said:

AKA failure to formulate any coherent rebuttal.  

You don't understand the article enough to actually address what the article says, so why should I address your drivel? 

[robosmith]

4 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

Ad hominem must attempt to discredit the opponent. I did not attempt to discredit you, you did that to yourself. I made a statement of fact that was rooted in the post to which I replied and the myriad of posts on this board.

You don't understand the article enough to actually address what the article says, so why should I address your drivel? 

I understand your FALLACIOUS argument perfectly. It cherry picks a current timeline and FALSELY CLAIMS it proves a universal truth.

Apparently you don't understand your own article.

[gatomontes99]

8 minutes ago, robosmith said:

I understand your FALLACIOUS argument perfectly. It cherry picks a current timeline and FALSELY CLAIMS it proves a universal truth.

Apparently you don't understand your own article.

Dumbass.

It is an evaluation of the counterfactual of investing social security and comparing it to the current system. Recent market events have so little to do with it. 

Chilé did "privatize" government retirement in the 80s. It was mildly successful, but assumed a 100% workforce and jobs that used a paycheck system. If we implemented an investment system to supplement the current system, with appropriate guard rails to prevent risky investing, we could lift up everyone. Even a lifetime fastfood employee could have a solid retirement account.