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 : Sioux Nation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Karen Lawrence who wrote (16568)	5/11/2005 11:02:56 AM
From: T L Comiskey	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 361346

My sister in law has been with United since high school..... shes 53.. and Screwed......... All Hail Discordia T

To: Karen Lawrence who wrote (16568)	5/11/2005 11:08:13 AM
From: T L Comiskey	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 361346

Bush is a Stooge.. how can anyone believe him... saw Chuck Schwabb on the tube last week.. he 'seemed' very nervous about the markets.. lest we forget.. He and his pals.. paid Lil AssClown to peddle this crap.. More.. WMD.. W is Mentally Deranged.....

To: Karen Lawrence who wrote (16568)	5/11/2005 9:57:46 PM
From: DavesM	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 361346

Karen, As far as I know, everyone uses the SAME numbers to analyze Social Security. They either use the CBO's numbers from 2004, or the new numbers the CBO came out with this March. From that, analysts, economists, Democrats and Republicans spin. You too can go to the CBO's website and look at how the CBO calculates Social Secuity's solvency. You can even download an excel spread sheet with the numbers, so you can see how it's calculated. There is no dispute that either around 2018 or 2020 Social Security's Old Age Pension will take in less in contributions than it pays out (Medicare will be much sooner). There is no dispute that when Social Security goes cash flow negative, it should be technically solvent because the interst income from its bond Portfolio will cover the gap between contributions and pay out. At that point, there will be NO Social Secuity surplus to reduce Official Federal Deficit numbers. Those who defend the current system complain that it is not possible for someone with a private account to get a +3% real rate of return from TIPs or standard Treasuries - even though the Program ITSELF is counting on a >3% real rate of return on its bonds when calculating the programs solvency (till 2042)! Do you know why pension funds like the California Public Employees Retirement funds own stock, private property, corporate bonds as well as Treasury Bonds? Its because those funds cannot cover their obligations from the income it would generate from Treasury Bonds alone; and in a few decades, Social Security will not be able to either. And it's not Bush's plan, it is really the Clinton Plan (Bush just dusted it off and put it back in play). " In various ways, you all asked the same questions about the private accounts. First of all, let's back up and realize why we're dealing with this. By 2030, there will be only two people working for every one person drawing Social Security. The average rate of return on the investment any worker makes on Social Security will go down as more people live longer and more people are in the retirement funds, because government securities, while they're 100 percent certain, don't have a particularly high rate of return, like any kind of 100 percent certain investment. So the question is then raised, well, if -- over any 30- or 40-year period, an investment portfolio that, let's say, was 60 percent in stocks and 40 percent in government bonds, or 40 and 60 the other way, would have an average rate of return far higher. And even after you take account of the stock market going down and maybe staying down for a few years, shouldn't we consider investing some of this money, because, otherwise, we'll have to either cut benefits or raise taxes to cover them, if we can't raise the rate of return. So -- and I think those are the three main options." - President Clinton, July 27, 1998