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 (323801)	1/30/2007 11:37:15 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1578025

JF, > Most peoples statements don't show that. That's very high compared to the average. Considering that the SS tax is 6.25% from the employee and 6.25% from the employer, $140,139 over 25 years means that his salary was on average $44,844 per year. Tenchusatsu

To: Road Walker who wrote (323801)	1/31/2007 10:37:18 AM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578025

And yes many are too dumb to make good investment decisions Apparently they could have put the money in a CD and received a better return, and perhaps have done as well putting it under a mattress. The author also doesn't mention the folks that get disability SS benefits Yes, that is more the welfare part, or looked at another way insurance against becoming disabled. I know someone who receives it. But you can have welfare of disability insurance without having the whole structure of SS. I wouldn't expect you to shed tears for the blogger. I certainly don't. The post wasn't "oh poor me, look at how horrible things are for me, the awful injustice of it all...", and if it was I wouldn't have posted it here. The post was about how SS is lousy if viewed as a retirement program, and not very well targeted if looked at as a welfare program. The fact that the blogger might have a higher than average income is irrelevant to his points.