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: SilentZ who wrote (224521)	3/16/2005 9:04:16 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571704

>>> No. It's absolutely not. It requires a certain amount of money to be paid in at any given period of time, and a certain amount to be paid out. It can be mathematically worked out. It's worked up until now, and if we can only overcome the baby boomers retiring (which is an anomaly -- usually a generation is much bigger than the generation before), than we can keep it going ad infinitum. You don't comprehend the problem. Why don't you take a little time and do some homework before you post?

To: SilentZ who wrote (224521)	3/17/2005 12:49:28 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 1571704

It's worked up until now, and if we can only overcome the baby boomers retiring (which is an anomaly -- usually a generation is much bigger than the generation before), than we can keep it going ad infinitum. The baby boomers are not the only problem. Payouts per person keep growing in real terms (not just in nominal dollars), and the % of people receiving social security keeps going up because the % of people who live past the retirement age keeps going up. It we limit growth in payouts per person, and keep raising the retirement age (either through periodic adjustments that get voted in or through indexing the retirement age to life expectancy) than in theory SS could go on indefinitely. Tim