|
Post by millring on Jun 11, 2015 6:40:36 GMT -5
Lar may be right.
It would seem that privatizing ANY of Social Security is just a cynical, red meat idea sold to worried mid-year folks who see Social Security at risk of either not being there or severely diminished by the time they are old enough to collect it. It might be exactly the mirror image of the red meat the Democrats are throwing to their ravenous bunch of retirees with the scare of "Republicans taking away their Social Security".
We can argue about which of those two red meat offerings is the most poisonous. Which is the bigger lie.
But if we grant that Social Security simply cannot continue without modification. And we further at least admit that Social Security is not tied to investment of any kind, but is, rather, a promise of the government to pay the retirement of folks who bought this form of retirement insurance, then it might be a worthwhile experiment to try to allow some private investment.
Sure, if Lar is right, the taxes collected will receive a hit of somewhere between 0%-1.5% (a guess, based on the fact that probably a majority of the population wouldn't bother to divert funds to a private account).
But on the outside chance that Lar is wrong about more people losing such a savings account rather than gaining from it -- say we gave it a 20 year run -- then at least we might have real numbers instead of hypotheses and anecdote to go on when comparing compulsory savings to tax-and-redistribute.
|
|
|
Post by brucemacneill on Jun 11, 2015 6:41:08 GMT -5
"Some of you seem to have done okay since the worst of the recession. Others, Bruce and David's mom come to mind, haven't. Why would that be? "
Lar, I'm doing OK. I could have done better but as I tell financial people, I went to the wrong school for that stuff. The advisers I hired a couple of years ago are doing OK, I'm averaging about 7% return after fees so far. Perfect investments may have done better but I'm in the skiddish range on risk tolerance so have a "Conservative" portfolio, which is somehow appropriate I guess. I talked with them last week because I find I don't need as much of a withdrawal rate as I thought I would last year and we're going a little less conservative and see how that works out for awhile. First thing they did was drop some government bonds and increase foreign stock exposure. Like I said, we'll see how that works out. In any case, I'm still supposed to have enough money to live to 92 and I don't figure to live to 92.
|
|
|
Post by jdd2 on Jun 11, 2015 6:53:35 GMT -5
lar, well, I would not listen to you regarding investments. or those others, above. otoh, I think omaha-jeff bought facebook at about 17 and change...
|
|
|
Post by jdd2 on Jun 11, 2015 6:57:02 GMT -5
Lar may be right. It would seem that privatizing ANY of Social Security is just a cynical, red meat idea sold to worried mid-year folks who see Social Security at risk of either not being there or severely diminished by the time they are old enough to collect it. It might be exactly the mirror image of the red meat the Democrats are throwing to their ravenous bunch of retirees with the scare of "Republicans taking away their Social Security". We can argue about which of those two red meat offerings is the most poisonous. Which is the bigger lie. But if we grant that Social Security simply cannot continue without modification. And we further at least admit that Social Security is not tied to investment of any kind, but is, rather, a promise of the government to pay the retirement of folks who bought this form of retirement insurance, then it might be a worthwhile experiment to try to allow some private investment. Sure, if Lar is right, the taxes collected will receive a hit of somewhere between 0%-1.5% (a guess, based on the fact that probably a majority of the population wouldn't bother to divert funds to a private account). But on the outside chance that Lar is wrong about more people losing such a savings account rather than gaining from it -- say we gave it a 20 year run -- then at least we might have real numbers instead of hypotheses and anecdote to go on when comparing compulsory savings to tax-and-redistribute. I would definitely not listen to you as an investment advisor, either. I'd be running the other way.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Jun 11, 2015 8:21:45 GMT -5
I would definitely not listen to you as an investment advisor, either. I'd be running the other way. That's probably a good idea. I don't know what that has to do with my post, though. I'm not offering investment advice.
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Jun 11, 2015 8:50:50 GMT -5
I knew a guy, old friend of my dad's, who sold a small business back in 1990. Wasn't a big deal. He netted about $250k after it was all said and done.
He asked me what he should do with the money. I was a little surprised and flattered that he asked me, but I guess he was asking everyone.
I told him I really had no idea, but if it were me, I'd dump the whole thing in Warren's lap and let him handle it. He ended up buying 30 shares of Berkshire stock. Today, that $250k is worth over $6 million. Which is going to do his kids and grandkids a lot of good.
But that's an exceptional story. Dude was 50 at the time. Not a lot of 50 year olds stumble into $250k in cash.
For the Average Joe, getting rich takes a different path.
A typical 25 year old American is going to make, in total, around $3 million over the subsequent 40 years. Its all "ant v grasshopper" from there.
|
|
|
Post by majorminor on Jun 11, 2015 9:31:49 GMT -5
When I was about 24 or so I became a manager at a once large but now struggling door company. Unbeknownst to me the company put some money in a vesting program for managers. The company closed and liquidated and I borrowed 20K from my dad and bought 3 of their delivery trucks, and one older Ford F150 company truck from the bank. I sold the trucks within 2 weeks, paid my dad back and cleared something like 10K. My vesting check was handed to me and it was 6K or so. So there I was at 24, no debt other than rent and car insurance, single, and sitting on 17K in the bank in like 1989. My mom says to me "son you need to trust me on this but if you know what's good for you you'll stick that in the stock market and forget about it." What I actually did was blow it all on a brand new Ford truck(gone), a mesa Boogie Mark III(gone), and a P.A. system(gone). My point to this ramble is: LISTEN TO YOUR MOTHER!!!.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Jun 11, 2015 10:14:49 GMT -5
When I was about 24 or so I became a manager at a once large but now struggling door company. Unbeknownst to me the company put some money in a vesting program for managers. The company closed and liquidated and I borrowed 20K from my dad and bought 3 of their delivery trucks, and one older Ford F150 company truck from the bank. I sold the trucks within 2 weeks, paid my dad back and cleared something like 10K. My vesting check was handed to me and it was 6K or so. So there I was at 24, no debt other than rent and car insurance, single, and sitting on 17K in the bank in like 1989. My mom says to me "son you need to trust me on this but if you know what's good for you you'll stick that in the stock market and forget about it." What I actually did was blow it all on a brand new Ford truck(gone), a mesa Boogie Mark III(gone), and a P.A. system(gone). My point to this ramble is: LISTEN TO YOUR MOTHER!!!. You got rid of a Boogie?!?!?
|
|
|
Post by majorminor on Jun 11, 2015 10:19:52 GMT -5
Yeah - several years later I packed everything I could in to the back of that Ford truck and moved to Montana so I wound up dumping a lot of stuff(for room and $$) to make the move. I had a smaller 1x12 Mesa combo called a .50 Caliber that suited me just fine.
|
|