Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (217057)	2/3/2005 7:35:01 AM
From: Taro	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571405

On SS fix The Bush plan doesn't do anything until 2009. No doubt GB plans on leaving that challenge to the next President who no doubt will be a democrat. Taro

To: Road Walker who wrote (217057)	2/3/2005 8:33:32 AM
From: i-node	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1571405

The unfunded liability looks huge in the aggregate, when you go out 70 years and multiply it times millions of recipients. That's a smokescreen. It's an incremental problem that requires a minor and incremental solution. It is huge even today. But part of what you say is tue. If it is fixed now, the problem is much smaller than if it is let go another 10 years or 20 or 30. It would have been much more manageable had Clinton dealt with it. The really interesting part is your assumption of 7% returns. Even the Bush admin is using ~4%. And there is the risk of negative returns. Historically, there is no risk of negative returns over a sufficiently long period of time. The Bush plan doesn't do anything until 2009. THAT is a recipe for disaster. We need incremental change starting now. This is stupid. First you (and other liberals) argue for leaving it alone, then you argue for changing it instantly.

To: Road Walker who wrote (217057)	2/3/2005 1:26:03 PM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571405

John, The unfunded liability looks huge in the aggregate, when you go out 70 years and multiply it times millions of recipients. That's a smokescreen. It's an incremental problem that requires a minor and incremental solution. After months of debating this, it appears you are nowhere closer to having a clue what funded vs. unfunded means. "Minor" adjustmnet to fully move from unfunded to funded would require a tax increase to almost double the current SS taxes. This way, the first 12.4% would go to pay off the unfunded liabilities, and a second 12.4% to fund their own retirement account. That to me, that is anything but minor, and it would still take some 50 years to implement, during which time, the tax to pay off the unfunded portion would go to zero. (this is one way to pay off the unfunded liability). It is just a demonstration how deep in the hole the worst legacy of the Democrats have left the us. With a stroke of a pen, FDR created (and Democrats perpecuated) more debt that all of the presidents accumulated in the endire history of the country. Joe

To: Road Walker who wrote (217057)	2/3/2005 1:29:30 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1571405

re: The unfunded liability is HUGE. We're not talking billions or even hundreds of billions. And over the next 30-40 years, if something isn't done, we're talking tens of trillions. The unfunded liability looks huge in the aggregate, when you go out 70 years and multiply it times millions of recipients. That's a smokescreen. It's an incremental problem that requires a minor and incremental solution. I don't think DR really understands the problem. He's made it complicated so he can enjoy lecturing us on the subject and telling us we just don't understand. <g> ted