FAA shares blame also

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...

If it weren't for the fact that it will go broke at some point, SS is a
great deal from an investment perspective assuming you live very long in
retirement.


Exactly. Ponzi schemes would be great if not for the fact that they don't
work.

"Matt Barrow" wrote in
:

As I estimate that Stan is fairly young, he should have a mix in his
portfolio weighted more towards growth than safety.

Bad estimate. I'll be 60 all too soon. No way am I going to risk
putting everything in growth funds.

--
Regards,

Stan

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." B. Franklin

Newps wrote in
:

If I had the chance when I started working to put all my social
security money into the same funds as my FAA 401K I would do that in a
heartbeat.
All Federal employees have the same 401K, called the Thrift Savings
Plan. All the funds are index funds. I would be so far ahead of
social security in the long run. If I was king I would eliminate SS
and make everybody take the same amount of money as they currently
send SS every month and invest it in the same 401K plan I have now.
If you don't want stocks you can pick our fund that isn't a stock or
bond fund. It always gives you 2-3% above inflation. That still
would give you far more than SS would.

I don't agree. I don't think it is at all possible to invest SS taxes
and come out ahead, and the trouble is if you don't, you're screwed. No
social security, no nothing. I know several people who did that through
city retirement, and now they're just out of luck. In the long run, the
stock market will never increase at anything close to 10%, and nothing is
guaranteed. The people who are really pushing this fiasco are stock
brokers, and they *always* make money, even when everyone else is losing
it.

--
Regards,

Stan

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." B. Franklin

Matt Whiting wrote in
:

Even so, I'd still rather have personal control of the money I put
into the SS system, but that is for reasons of security, not effective
rate of earnings.

The stock market offers no security at all. None. If you want security,
then the US govt is as secure as it's possible to get right now. After a
few more years of Republican administrations, that may not be the case.
Can you say Argentina?

--
Regards,

Stan

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." B. Franklin

"Matt Barrow" wrote in
:


If you don't have control of it, it's not YOUR money, or your property
as the case may be....it's called fascism (ie, private "ownership",
but governmental control).

No, it's called a tax. Civilization does not work without taxes.

--
Regards,

Stan

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." B. Franklin

"Stan Gosnell" wrote in message
...
"Matt Barrow" wrote in
:

As I estimate that Stan is fairly young, he should have a mix in his
portfolio weighted more towards growth than safety.

Bad estimate. I'll be 60 all too soon. No way am I going to risk
putting everything in growth funds.


Your 401 is HOW old?

"Stan Gosnell" wrote in message
...
Matt Whiting wrote in
:

Even so, I'd still rather have personal control of the money I put
into the SS system, but that is for reasons of security, not effective
rate of earnings.

The stock market offers no security at all. None. If you want security,
then the US govt is as secure as it's possible to get right now. After a
few more years of Republican administrations, that may not be the case.
Can you say Argentina?

Can you say "Nanny State"? Can you say "someone hold my hand and wipe my
nose"?

Geez, America, grow the **** up!!

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...

If it weren't for the fact that it will go broke at some point, SS is a
great deal from an investment perspective assuming you live very long in
retirement.



Exactly. Ponzi schemes would be great if not for the fact that they don't
work.



Well, they work for the folks in first ... just like SS. :-)

Matt

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...

Well, they work for the folks in first ... just like SS. :-)


Social Security IS a Ponzi scheme.

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...

If it weren't for the fact that it will go broke at some point, SS is a
great deal from an investment perspective assuming you live very long in
retirement.



Exactly. Ponzi schemes would be great if not for the fact that they
don't
work.



Well, they work for the folks in first ... just like SS. :-)

You do know, don't you, the SS was developed using a Ponzi scheme model. It
didn't just HAPPEN that way, it was intended that way since its conception.