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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bentway who wrote (209666)	11/28/2012 2:07:10 AM
From: freelyhovering	Respond to of 544021

This Patreaus series appears to be a good one. truth-out.org

To: bentway who wrote (209666)	11/28/2012 8:54:03 AM
From: JohnM	Respond to of 544021

3. It was never intended to be a retirement program, but rather a safety net. And SS plus Medicare has worked wonders in terms of reducing poverty among the elderly. Lots and lots of cheers should be lofted. I'm not certain the safety net metaphor fits SS but in terms of its mission/role/intent, it's been more than successful.

To: bentway who wrote (209666)	11/28/2012 10:26:38 AM
From: cosmicforce	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 544021

1. It's not an investment. It's a generational transfer program. See comment for #3. They are related. 2. People have been saying they wouldn't collect since SS's inception. All have, except those who died before they could. But, this is not like the other alleged apocalypses - this one is man made and it is a lot like building really tall buildings. Eventually, the strength of materials is overwhelmed by the forces of nature. There is a limit to how tall a building can be and should be. I went short too early in 2008 on the banks when they were giving my friend's son a home mortgage based upon his status as a professional poker player. I was six months too early to profit on the options I bought. When SS failure will occur can be debated, but without major restructuring, SS will fail to deliver what is being promised. A major change in risk behaviors could do it - like a massive anti-smoking campaign. Never has SS faced the crushing wave of the baby boomers before with fewer people on the bottom, making less and more unemployable than now, who are really incapable of supporting the top of the pyramid. 3. It was never intended to be a retirement program, but rather a safety net. They keep marketing it that way and they send me statements and everything. If it is a safety net, they should stop sending me statements that show my annual contributions. I view it as a Ponzi scheme backed by the government. If I offered you a billion dollar insurance policy at a deep discount. I don't have the assets to back it up should you ever need to collect. SS is a lot like this.

To: bentway who wrote (209666)	11/28/2012 1:03:05 PM
From: koan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 544021

Don't you think SS sort of turned out to be what we needed i.e. a retirement program? I think half the people rely on it alone. SS had done more than any program on earth to pull people out fo poverty and allow the aged to live their last few years in some sort of comfort. I don't like the idea of raising the age limit for SS or medicare. Especially for those who spend their life doing hard work like the trades folks. Plumbers, carpenter, laborers, welders, etc are usually really beat up by 65. <<As an "investment" it is a crappy one and most people alive now would have been better off putting the money in a mattress. IMO." 1. It's not an investment. It's a generational transfer program. 2. People have been saying they wouldn't collect since SS's inception. All have, except those who died before they could. 3. It was never intended to be a retirement program, but rather a safety net.