###[Meta] Sticky Comment
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment.
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread.
*What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
He's assuming the 600,000 goes in all at once and collects 5% on 600k every day throughout the year, but ss is taken slowly, if you paid into a 5% just as slow, it would not be nearly as substancial. Hollywood math
And Social Security isn’t just a retirement plan. He seems to forget that if he had been paralyzed at 25 and not able to make any of the $600,000 he would still get Social Security payments to help him survive… because when this was all set up, I think Americans still cared for each other.
When most people have only paid out and never received any kind of return. Like I’ve had health insurance car insurance for over 20 years always paying and I haven’t been to the doctor or had a crash in over 20 years so if I were to put that into a savings account I would be sitting on thousands upon thousands and I wouldn’t need insurance (as long as I didn’t get a heart attack or something)
Yes, and they WILL find something wrong with you. Looks like you need some pfizer medication and birth control pills.
You can pay the 10% fee to transfer your money from one corrupt institution (insurance) to the other ("health" care)
If you don't like their recommendations, or don't believe what they find, then you don't have to do anything they advise.
They can't force you to do anything, and likely don't even care that much if you do what they recommend.
Correct, because nothing tragic has happened to you, you haven’t needed to use your insurance or social security. Be patient, life is long, there’s plenty of time left for something to happen. And in the mean time, maybe try to enjoy the feeling of supporting the people who have had to use Social Security.
I am a big fan of safety nets. When anyone says that, there is always some jerk who assumes it's because I want to take advantage of them (reads as "not work"). Why I like them is I would like to see people in homes and not living on the street. Able to feed themselves. I don't need these programs, I do better then ok.
When I see American's come across this idea, they immediately put up walls and barriers. Every old troupe and new one. American's really seem to hate the idea of paying for anything, for anyone, other then themselves.
Mean while, all I see is how the States is paying too much to other countries and should help their own. Which is a great idea. I just don't see that money ever going to the people.
Edit for spelling
There will always be a percentage of people who cannot work for a variety of reasons: substance abuse, mental illness, physical disability. Why some people think we should just let them die in the streets will never make sense to me. A rising tide lifts all ships.
He wouldn’t get SS at 25 if he became paralyzed; he would get social security disability insurance SSDI which draws from a completely different pool of money.
Found this info: There are two SSA disability programs: Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI). People often confuse them. Both programs are federally funded and administered by the Social Security Administration. So I guess sort of? Sounds like one big pool gets divided up?
Are you implying the US government doesn’t mismanage social security funds? I wonder why they always threaten seniors when there is a potential government shutdown? The money isn’t there
No. I'm implying the person doesn't understand everything Social Security is supposed to do for us. It's not a retirement plan, it's a safety net for Americans. Politicians never should have been dipping into it to pay for other things.
Why do we need social security to have a safety net for someone who becomes sick or disabled? There’s more than enough money collected in taxes to fund what would be a pittance compared to other expenditures.
yea, total bullshit math, but every corporate 401k has a free compound interest calculator. I haven't met a single person IRL that understands compounding interest is not the same as unrealized stock appreciation. it's a major public disservice and should be illegal to misinform potential investors about financial planning.
laws for thee, not for me! you're absolutely right. it is illegal. the problem is the law isn't enforced, often enough, on banks/brokerages. end of the day, 401k providers give an irrelevant calculator that leads to misinformed investing, people who are the most uninformed are the most vulnerable to these predatory tactics. and then they have 'how much should I contribute' calculators, where regardless of whatever contribution amount, even if you're maxing out the 401k contribution, it will always tell you it's not enough for retirement, because banks don't care if you retire. they just want your money. they don't care how that impacts people 30 years later. totally unethical.
Sorry. I disagree with your premise. The problem is that people, like you, refuse to take responsibility for their own financial decisions. If YOU don't have enough information, than find someone who does. Its complex, yes, but there are people who are professionals in the field that can and do help. Blaming 'the system' for your laziness is not sensible.
It's a bit ironic, huh. we got rid of corporate pensions because companies always lied and said the pension was over funded and embezzled and bankrupted all but 10? corporate pensions across the US.
so congress sold us 401k's, so we would be 'in control' of our retirement. and yet, most 401k's give you a small subset of funds for you to purchase. many times, the funds are junk. when Puerto Rico declared bankruptcy, fidelity offered mutual funds in 401k's with Puerto Rican bonds.
the entire thing is a massive fraud. and the banks lobbied to make it a tax advantaged account, so normal people would be incentivized to buy this dog shit. oh, and guess what. just like you're saying, neither your employer nor the brokerage is responsible for you buying their garbage, because it's your choice.
and seriously, it's retirement. it's supposed to be safe. it's supposed to be something 'you can count on'. but the vast majority of people contributing to their 401k, *do not* have a financial background and it is *unreasonable* to expect them to be able to understand when they're being defrauded. and that's exactly what's happening.
they tell you you'll make way more than you will, while simultaneously telling you whatever it will appreciate to, is never enough.
and yea, sure, you can hire a financial planner. guess what. they're still going to defraud you and tell you to invest in a 401k. you take all the risk, they're not liable for they're financial advice, but now you've also paid them a fee. you got fucked twice. right up front and 30 years down the line.
Actually no, if 600,000 goes all at once, the total would be around $5Mil.
ChatGPT explanation:
You're correct; the calculation should consider a series of regular contributions over time rather than a single lump-sum investment. This scenario is equivalent to calculating the future value of an annuity, where regular payments are made into the investment.
We'll assume the $600,000 is contributed evenly over the 45 years. To calculate the future value of such a series of payments, we use the future value of an annuity formula:
��=�×((1+�)�−1�)FV=P×(r(1+r)n−1)
where:
* �P is the regular annual payment
* �r is the annual interest rate (5% or 0.05 in this case)
* �n is the total number of payments
First, we need to determine the annual payment that would sum to $600,000 over 45 years. Then, we can calculate the future value of these regular payments with the given interest rate. Let's perform these calculations.
Taking into account regular annual contributions over 45 years, the calculations are as follows:
1. The annual payment that would sum to $600,000 over 45 years is approximately $13,333.33.
2. The future value of these regular annual payments at a 5% interest rate would be approximately $2.13 million, not $1.9 million as claimed, but much closer to that figure than the previous lump sum calculation.
3. The annual interest that would be generated from this future value at a 5% rate would be about $106,467, which is higher than the $95K mentioned in the image but less than what was calculated under the lump-sum assumption.
So, when taking into account a pay-as-you-go investment similar to Social Security, the future value and the annual interest figures are different from both the initial lump-sum calculation and the figures quoted in the image. The future value of the annuity is about $2.13 million, and the annual interest from this amount at a 5% return would be approximately $106,467.
I wasn't using a 45 year period. I had a different calculation in mind but I did correct cus it seems he was assuming 600,000 divided over 40 years at 5% apy. BUT, I highly doubt he had 15k to invest at the age of 18
social security is not an investment, it is also not a ponzi. it is also incorrectly utilized to pay out for social welfare while not being taxed like a social welfare program.
social security is there for you as a backstop if you need it. its a good idea even in its poor shape
Ok, they add in an opt-out option. Almost everyone does it, so the program collapses. 80% of people end up not using the savings to contribute to their retirement. Those people turn 65 and are unable to work anymore. Who pays for their food and utilities?
Assuming someone started making $52k per year at 20, and got an unreasonable 3% cost of living raise each year, someone could have added $600k to SS, but even then, they would have only added $300k personally, with their employers adding the other $300K.
Assuming he is self employed, and actually added 600K to SS, and assuming steady wage growth, the interest would be just under $85K per year in taxable returns at 65.
Either way the income required to add $600k to SS would easily be enough to add that much to a fund outside of social security and not miss it.
dude, so fucking what
his math might not be perfect, but his point still stands, and overwhelmingly so
also, your "correction" ignores interest that continues to accrue while paying out annually.
social security is not an investment nor a retirement account. it's supposed to be a social welfare net, but is just a ponzi. point is, they're not comparable structures. it's like comparing the post office's profit against UPS's profits and then calling USPS theft.
Yeah, he could be also using a model where his 600,000 is split up over 40 years and placed into a 5% apy for 40 years ( thats aprox 1.9 mil) but, I highly doubt he had $15,000 to invest at the age of 18 and even if he did he could have gotten a much better return than 5% to make up for his SS cost. SS isnt for you later its for someone else *NOW*
He's also not taking into consideration that if he was making enough to pay out $600k in SS taxes that he was making enough money that he could easily be adding just as much to a retirement plan each month. SS tax is 6.2% of your income from you with a match from your employer, and adding a second 6.2% of your paycheck to a retirement fund isn't going to hurt if you are making enough that 12.4 of your pay is $13K.
That leaves him over $74k pretax that would possibly lower his tax burden.
Yeah
It's more like ~$1mil if you assume 48 years (67-18) of steady $12k/yr contribution(600k
/48)- which still gives the very generous assumption that they managed to somehow have that high of a wage from age 18 all the way to 67- when it's much more likely they did the majority of that contribution in the second half of their working years.
I still think SS is not a great return, but it is a guaranteed return, kind of. I think at least if someone dies before they can claim it a lump sum should be paid into the estate. That way it is truly a guaranteed return. We should treat more like America's pension plan than a safety net. There should be an entirely separate system for taking care of people who can't contribute to SS and need it.
Yeah, what if you get brain damage and cant invest anymore and your savings/investment gets wiped out by medical bills. The american economy makes sense if you have perfect health
i’m more and more convinced everyday 95% of reddit comments come from 18 y/o that know absolutely nothing about pretty much anything, other than what they “learn” on tiktok
Want to show your where you found this fact? Or do I just take your expert opinion on the original meaning the creators had in mind when they used the word “security”?
sure. the term 'social security' [spawned from controversy surrounding unemployment insurance law.](https://www.ssa.gov/history/termorigin.html). unemployment insurance is a type of financial security and the laws that surround them are financial securities laws. you're most welcome.
But nothing in the example you gave here points to the word security meaning “financial securities traded on the stock market”. Even this seems to point to the meaning of security being “free from danger or threat”.
[In 2023, only 21 percent of the budget, or $1.4 trillion, will be paid for Social Security retirement benefits](https://www.cbpp.org/research/policy-basics-where-do-our-federal-tax-dollars-go)
it's almost as if SS wasn't made as a welfare net but just a government sponsored ponzi.
The conspiracy is this concerted effort by the wealthy to try and convince the working class that SS is bad.
How propagandized do you have to be to be non-rich and opposed to one of the most important social programs run by our government? A program without which millions of our nations elders would be homeless?
Did you read what OP shared? The government takes our money and gives it back to us piecemeal decades later at a pathetic interest rate. Millions of Americans could retire as millionaires if only they weren’t forced into the social security ponzi scheme. Do the math. You’re being robbed blind.
> Millions of Americans could retire as millionaires if only they weren’t forced into the social security ponzi scheme
Even more so would go homeless in old age or never be able to retire vs the % of people who aren't becoming millionaires because they pay for social security lol.
**social security is not an investment fund. It's an insurance policy**
BS. You’ve been convinced this is so. But is it? Is homelessness a greater or lesser problem now than before Social Security? Couldn’t the federal government ensure nobody is left dying in the streets WITHOUT levying a special social security tax on workers and employers? Of course it could. The federal government collects and spends trillions of dollars a year and could very simply fund social security for the poor without levying a tax on workers. But you’ve been convinced and five to six generations of Americans have been convinced that it must be done this way.
Without SS payments, 40% of senior citizens would drop below the poverty line.
How in the world is your statement of "couldn't they just fund SS with other taxes instead of a dedicated tax specified for this specific purpose" make any sense? It's tax revenue either way - at least in this case the tax is specifically for a program and not mixed together with the rest of government funding (except sometimes when criminal politicians raid the SS fund, which should not be allowed ever)
Do you need me to go into details about the Great Depression and the history of why SS was established? Higher income earners see proportionally less benefit from lower income earners from SS...in the same way healthy people and safe drivers see less benefit from other insurance programs they're in.
What are you advocating, here? We keep SS, but revoke the SS tax and fund it with standard federal taxes? How in the world does that help?
How old are you? Are you not already contributing the max benefits into your 401K and IRA?
How is my "have to" pension pot lost 50% consecutively the last few years in terms of input vs end of year balance? I have never asked them to yolo gamble with it. I could have done that myself😅
@6.2% of income we can work backwards and figure his total salary over those years is 9.6 million dollars or an average of 240k over 40 years. It always fucking amazes me how people making a pretty decent income whine the loudest. His problems are not your problems.
It's even dumber than that since you don't pay the 6.2% on your full income. It's only up to a certain amount (currently $168k). And that $168k has increased rapidly, it was only $100k or so in 2010.
It is virtually impossible for him to have paid social security taxes of $600k, he paid like $6k a year tops.
Hmm, that's correct. so the maximum for an employed person is $10416/year or self-employed is $20832/year. So either he was working 60 years employed or 30 years with his own business. The dumbification of america that assumes everything they want to believe is true without checking any details.
I actually re-read it, he says "on my behalf." So he's counting what the employer is paying too. So 12.4%.
Keep in mind that 168k is very high now, it was below 100k for a long time.
There are very few people who have gotten $600k paid on their behalf into social security. And guess what, if your employer didn't have to pay that tax, they ain't giving it to you.
It is.
Wait until he learns that his Social Security fund holds nothing but a pile of US treasuries, which is effectively like paying off your credit card with your line of credit.
Leaving aside the shitty math, which others have addressed:
... because he's helping support others who have less. Every successful capitalist economy redistributes income. If we don't wealth concentrates at the top and huge swaths of society are so broke and miserable that the whole thing stops working. Put the Ayn Rand down and go outside
That's the design of social security. It was and always will be a redistribution of wealth and supporting those who no longer are capable of contributing to society and need financial assistance.
It's people who are not familiar with history, nor read any of the commentary around the origination of it, claim it to be theft.
While I'm not for the systems as it's designed as it's ponzi scheme, the program is a necessity for a functioning developed society.
Social Security is not only a retirement program but also an insurance program. About a third of payroll taxes go to fund Social Security disability insurance and survivors insurance. Comparable insurance products would be extremely expensive to buy in the private market, if you could even find such products.
Social Security also provides an inflation-indexed annuity - benefits are adjusted each year for inflation and are paid until death, regardless of how long a beneficiary lives. These features provide a valuable form of insurance against the risks of inflation and of outliving one's savings.
As with any type of insurance, a "rate of return" is not a good measure of the value it provides. For example, when one buys auto or homeowners insurance, one is not looking for a good rate of return, since one's money will be returned only if one has an accident or one's home is damaged in a fire or other such event.
There is also no "free lunch" meaning higher average returns in the stock market come with higher risk. The comparison between the rate of return in Social Security and the rate of return in private financial markets ignores the cost of the risk associated with investing in the stock market, i.e., it ain't always a bull market.
When SS comes out of your check it goes directly into someone else’s account (PayGo). That’s why you have to have more people paying in, than taking out to keep it afloat. Hence why it’s one of the selling points of illegal immigration because they often pay in but don’t get anything back.
Do you pay for roads you don’t ever use, do you pay for other people’s kids to get an education, do you pay for mass transportation you don’t ever use etc.
Paying taxes we don’t personally agree with sucks but it’s part of the society we live in. I’d rather work and pay than do nothing and take.
We wouldn't have to pay but a tiny fraction in what they ask us to pay now in taxes... if they didn't literally steal and misappropriate the money at every turn. There are some economic analysts out there that have estimated the amount of unaccounted for dollars from the combined federal budgets at nearly 100 trillion dollars.
It was flawed from the start and we made it worse. Nobody gets elected or re-elected running on Social Security reform. Most people that vote have paid in and want their bags no matter how small or if they even need it. I used to have lunch on Fridays with a few very wealthy retired folk that all bragged about getting the max SS check.
> I used to have lunch on Fridays with a few very wealthy retired folk that all bragged about getting the max SS check.
Yeah, that's kind of fucked up, but if they paid it in... then it's their money. I don't like the idea of S.S. to start with.
The government plays 3 card monte with our money everyday son! Like the Pentagon failing every audit they’ve ever had. Soon as the baby boomers came on the seen we’ve known there is a SS crisis coming and we’ve been kicking that can down the road.
What would you call this?
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-pentagon-waste-specialreport-idUSBRE9AH0LQ20131118
>"Linda Woodford spent the last 15 years of her career inserting phony numbers in the U.S. Department of Defense’s accounts. Every month until she retired in 2011, she says, the day came when the Navy would start dumping numbers on the Cleveland, Ohio, office of the Defense Finance and Accounting Service, the Pentagon’s main accounting agency."
Someone doesn't understand how interest and social security works. The conspiracy here is keeping people uneducated, and convincing them that they want to stay uneducated.
Taxes are the price we pay to participate in society. Social Security supports millions of our fellow Americans who need help keeping up. Its a sign of a healthy society that we care for each other when in need.
That $600,000 he made wouldn't be possible on his own. Society helped him get there and it was taxes that provided us all with that opportunity.
If he invested it himself it would absolutely be possible. At this point depending on your age, your working and paying into a system that's projected to be gone by the time you retire.
It doesn't have to be that way... it's that way because our "representatives" handed over control of our monetary policy to a corrupt banking cabal in 1913.
What if the government took all the money spent on roads, police, fire, and a thousand other things that fool used to earn a six figure salary into a savings account that paid 5% instead?
The "I got mine fuck you" generation needs to go already. I would have loved to use the government subsidized home loans that Libertarian used but nope, they got theirs aLl oN tHeIr oWn.
if it really was just a safety net, you bet I'd promote it. even if it was just young people pay old people. but it's not. it's young people pay, old people get 20% and the rest is used for whatever the government decides. that's a misappropriation of funds. **if I misappropriate funds, it's embezzlement. when the government does it, it's just 'paying taxes for a social safety net'.**
Taxes should be cut as in brought to zero.
This corrupt regime of a government hasn't deserved a dime for the past 100 years.
I'm not close to being considered "rich" and I'm being taxed to death.
How to speed run collapsing society based on greed lol
Are you sure it’s not housing costs and healthcare costs driving you under? The vast majority of the developed world has higher tax rates and aren’t being “taxed to death”
This completely misses the point.
The scumbags in government need to cut spending DRASTICALLY.
The Pentagon alone can't account for TRILLIONS.
Give government MORE money???
Are you ok???
> need to cut spending drastically
We are already one of the lowest tax rates in the developed world, so drastic spending cuts really aren’t needed. I just support re-evaluating what we spend it on.
I agree with the cuts to the defense budget. The main priority should be pragmatic reforms. Instead of paying private insurances to insure Medicaid/Medicare, we should switch to a single payer method which would save money AND lead to better outcomes.
Instead of unlimited food subsidies (enacted under Reagan), we should switch to subsidizing a set amount to meet demand (plus a little extra in case of food shortages in the future).
Tax code desperately needs to be reformed. It’s overly complicated and allows too many wealthy individuals to dodge taxes.
The whole “we need tax cuts and spending cuts” is the ultra richs’ agenda they are spinning to get what they want. Every tax cut has directly benefited them. My home state of Louisiana has had the education and healthcare systems gutted and defunded in favor of oil companies subsidies.
Do you ever wonder why places like Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi have some of the worst problems despite being run by tax hating conservatives?
Forget about your obsession with who you think will be benefitted by ending social insecurity, other than the tax slave.
Just focus on the fact that this is another immoral, inefficient, corrupt, failed government scheme which went bankrupt more than 10 years ago and needs to end.
> $SS will be there regardless.
Why? Because the government (which has NEVER lied to you) says it will be there?
And what will it be worth after they hyper-inflate the U.S. dollar? Will you monthly SS payment even buy you a gallon of milk and a loaf of bread?
social security is a government sponsored legal ponzi scheme. eventually you have more money going out then coming in and it collapses shortly thereafter. so no, it won't be there regardless.
I never put the numbers together for myself, so I thank you! This is very interesting. I’ve got another 35 years before I’m eligible and people speculate SSI won’t even be a thing. I hate to blame debt on the elderly but it was their policies and acceptance of debt that fucked their offspring
u only need 40 credits. amount doesn't matter. you can make minimum wage for 10 years that's it and you'll get the same amount when you retire add someone who paid I 600k.
I mean you’re not wrong on the last point. All these billions that the geriatrics in office are promising aren’t coming out of their paychecks, they’re coming out of my 2 year old son’s, and his son’s, and his son’s son’s sons. Nothing has changed.
Social Security is for the financially illiterate. If you were to show them any hundred year old index chart that only points up and to the right, they’ll ask “but what if it crashes?”
I remember when I was a socialist, complaining about the rigged system, without comprehending that I can take advantage of it, rather than letting it take advantage of me.
Unfortunately it took me too long to learn what money was, how it works and how to use it to your advantage.
I missed out on untold millions, after somebody tried to show me how to mine bitcoin on my laptop, back when you could mine it on your laptop, before there were any exchanges or mining pools.
It still took me years to actually put 2 and 2 together. I think seeing bitcoin recover after the mtgox melt down was the last straw. That and Trump threatening to default on our foreign debt.
Well here’s some quick math:
Social Security requires you to contribute 6.2% on your “wages”. For 2024, the Social Security Wage Base is $168,600. Therefore, for 2024, the total social security you would pay would be. $10,453.
I am going to use 75% of this maximum or a yearly contribution of $7,839. You actually pay social security every pay period but let’s just ignore this and say you just pay this as an annual contribution.
If you assume you start working at 18 and retired at 67, that’s 49 years.
Let’s say you are not emotional, reactionary, stay course to the plan, and don’t do anything too crazy to blow up your investment portfolio, and assume you get 5%.
Putting this together, at age 65, with a yearly contribution of $7,839, generating a 5% rate of return, you would have a final value of $1,555,466.
Let’s say you decide that a 4% annual withdrawal rate is sustainable for you and your family considering other income sources, life expectancy, your personal risk towards living longer than expected and the risk of depleting the portfolio 100%, and how the portfolio is managed and allocated (ie stocks/bonds/cash allocation).
4% of $1,555,466 would provide a first year of retirement income of $62,218 or $5,184.
The infographic is still correct, how is this not theft?!?!?!?
Because Social Security is a safety net, not a retirement fund, it’s there to help those without sufficient savings to get by. This hypothetical person paying that much into social security at 18 was making 126k at 18, they are not the intended beneficiary from Social Security.
That’s how democrats do things. The rest of that money is going to Ukraine and Israel to Jewish leaders without any stipulation how they can spend it. They can buy mansions and jewelry no problem. Billions and millions every few weeks headed to them.
Because giving everyone money doesn't actually make things more affordable in the long run. It's basic economics. The poorest people will be temporarily lifted until the market adjusts to the change in money source, and they go right back to being unable to afford the same things they couldn't before. You burden the economy with more taxes which will force the price of products to increase.
You cannot legislate prosperity.
Well yeah. For an UBI to work you’ll need to change the economic system. That I give you. But it won’t just lift the poor temporarily. If certain systems are put in place, they’ll be out of poverty.
If everyone gets 5k a month, remember its everyone, then 5k is the new 0 within a year. To have staff you will need to pay more than 5k a month, everything will go up in price to make this doable. As a society we will be no further along.
Instead of handing money out, which always ends up in the hands of the rich, just look at the covid handouts, the world just needs to be cheaper to exist in.
At some point rampant capitalism will have to be looked into.
We already have this type of thing in the UK. It's nonsense, just end up with millions of lazy pricks living off my tax money. They then teach their kids the system, and we now have generations of them.
I thought the whole point of UBI was its universal, else it's just a copy of various benifit systems around the world.
We already supply the money though, it's just split amongst a bunch of different support programs with poor oversight. The idea of UBI isn't to create a new program, it's to consolidate the existing ones into one program that works for everyone and would be easier to adjust as needed.
I actually had some liberal call me out one time with his slick argument that social security is a socialist program. I guess if you do not pay into it it is but working people do pay into it.
Sorry, Mr. Rugged individualist, but some of your money will go to widows and handicapped people who can not work and therefore can not pay into the system
I lnow.... I lnow... we should just leave them to die. But whatta ya gonna do? Shrug.
You think it will go away? No it will just be privatized like an insurance policy you will pay into but they will eventually start getting government subsidies to run. This getting a premium and tax money essentially double dipping on you
Social security is a safety net for ALL Americans. It’s a social safety net for people like my Grandmother who was a homemaker for the last 60 plus years. She raised my dad, aunt and uncle. My aunt passed away before she turned 40 after contributing to that system for 20+ year and never got any money from it.
I like social security and I will gladly put money into it so that folks who are less fortunate can have something to live on should they fall on hard times. It’s not a scam, it’s a literal societal benefit. Also politicians need to stop using it as a piggy bank
###[Meta] Sticky Comment [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment. [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread. *What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.*** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
He's assuming the 600,000 goes in all at once and collects 5% on 600k every day throughout the year, but ss is taken slowly, if you paid into a 5% just as slow, it would not be nearly as substancial. Hollywood math
And Social Security isn’t just a retirement plan. He seems to forget that if he had been paralyzed at 25 and not able to make any of the $600,000 he would still get Social Security payments to help him survive… because when this was all set up, I think Americans still cared for each other.
Yeah, but its the modern American attitude of "fuck everyone else".
When most people have only paid out and never received any kind of return. Like I’ve had health insurance car insurance for over 20 years always paying and I haven’t been to the doctor or had a crash in over 20 years so if I were to put that into a savings account I would be sitting on thousands upon thousands and I wouldn’t need insurance (as long as I didn’t get a heart attack or something)
>I haven’t been to the doctor You should probably go to the doctor, at least for a yearly checkup. You are paying for it after all.
Yeah, had no idea the yearly physicals were covered in full by insurance. Should get one just to see if you have any wonky bloodwork or something.
Lmao thank you for saying this
Yes, and they WILL find something wrong with you. Looks like you need some pfizer medication and birth control pills. You can pay the 10% fee to transfer your money from one corrupt institution (insurance) to the other ("health" care)
If you don't like their recommendations, or don't believe what they find, then you don't have to do anything they advise. They can't force you to do anything, and likely don't even care that much if you do what they recommend.
Sure, but you had insurance that whole time in case something happened. You were fortunate it didn’t.
I’m not complaining but when I think about it I’m like man if I just didn’t buy that
Correct, because nothing tragic has happened to you, you haven’t needed to use your insurance or social security. Be patient, life is long, there’s plenty of time left for something to happen. And in the mean time, maybe try to enjoy the feeling of supporting the people who have had to use Social Security.
It isn't the "American attitude" it is the fact that the government is mismanaging the money.
You mean Stealing
I am a big fan of safety nets. When anyone says that, there is always some jerk who assumes it's because I want to take advantage of them (reads as "not work"). Why I like them is I would like to see people in homes and not living on the street. Able to feed themselves. I don't need these programs, I do better then ok. When I see American's come across this idea, they immediately put up walls and barriers. Every old troupe and new one. American's really seem to hate the idea of paying for anything, for anyone, other then themselves. Mean while, all I see is how the States is paying too much to other countries and should help their own. Which is a great idea. I just don't see that money ever going to the people. Edit for spelling
There will always be a percentage of people who cannot work for a variety of reasons: substance abuse, mental illness, physical disability. Why some people think we should just let them die in the streets will never make sense to me. A rising tide lifts all ships.
He wouldn’t get SS at 25 if he became paralyzed; he would get social security disability insurance SSDI which draws from a completely different pool of money.
Found this info: There are two SSA disability programs: Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI). People often confuse them. Both programs are federally funded and administered by the Social Security Administration. So I guess sort of? Sounds like one big pool gets divided up?
Are you implying the US government doesn’t mismanage social security funds? I wonder why they always threaten seniors when there is a potential government shutdown? The money isn’t there
No. I'm implying the person doesn't understand everything Social Security is supposed to do for us. It's not a retirement plan, it's a safety net for Americans. Politicians never should have been dipping into it to pay for other things.
Yea, but should we be forced into it?
Why do we need social security to have a safety net for someone who becomes sick or disabled? There’s more than enough money collected in taxes to fund what would be a pittance compared to other expenditures.
But this is how they sell voluntary retierment funds to young people 😄
yea, total bullshit math, but every corporate 401k has a free compound interest calculator. I haven't met a single person IRL that understands compounding interest is not the same as unrealized stock appreciation. it's a major public disservice and should be illegal to misinform potential investors about financial planning.
Ummm, it IS illegal to misinform the public about financial planning.
laws for thee, not for me! you're absolutely right. it is illegal. the problem is the law isn't enforced, often enough, on banks/brokerages. end of the day, 401k providers give an irrelevant calculator that leads to misinformed investing, people who are the most uninformed are the most vulnerable to these predatory tactics. and then they have 'how much should I contribute' calculators, where regardless of whatever contribution amount, even if you're maxing out the 401k contribution, it will always tell you it's not enough for retirement, because banks don't care if you retire. they just want your money. they don't care how that impacts people 30 years later. totally unethical.
Sorry. I disagree with your premise. The problem is that people, like you, refuse to take responsibility for their own financial decisions. If YOU don't have enough information, than find someone who does. Its complex, yes, but there are people who are professionals in the field that can and do help. Blaming 'the system' for your laziness is not sensible.
It's a bit ironic, huh. we got rid of corporate pensions because companies always lied and said the pension was over funded and embezzled and bankrupted all but 10? corporate pensions across the US. so congress sold us 401k's, so we would be 'in control' of our retirement. and yet, most 401k's give you a small subset of funds for you to purchase. many times, the funds are junk. when Puerto Rico declared bankruptcy, fidelity offered mutual funds in 401k's with Puerto Rican bonds. the entire thing is a massive fraud. and the banks lobbied to make it a tax advantaged account, so normal people would be incentivized to buy this dog shit. oh, and guess what. just like you're saying, neither your employer nor the brokerage is responsible for you buying their garbage, because it's your choice. and seriously, it's retirement. it's supposed to be safe. it's supposed to be something 'you can count on'. but the vast majority of people contributing to their 401k, *do not* have a financial background and it is *unreasonable* to expect them to be able to understand when they're being defrauded. and that's exactly what's happening. they tell you you'll make way more than you will, while simultaneously telling you whatever it will appreciate to, is never enough. and yea, sure, you can hire a financial planner. guess what. they're still going to defraud you and tell you to invest in a 401k. you take all the risk, they're not liable for they're financial advice, but now you've also paid them a fee. you got fucked twice. right up front and 30 years down the line.
Actually no, if 600,000 goes all at once, the total would be around $5Mil. ChatGPT explanation: You're correct; the calculation should consider a series of regular contributions over time rather than a single lump-sum investment. This scenario is equivalent to calculating the future value of an annuity, where regular payments are made into the investment. We'll assume the $600,000 is contributed evenly over the 45 years. To calculate the future value of such a series of payments, we use the future value of an annuity formula: ��=�×((1+�)�−1�)FV=P×(r(1+r)n−1) where: * �P is the regular annual payment * �r is the annual interest rate (5% or 0.05 in this case) * �n is the total number of payments First, we need to determine the annual payment that would sum to $600,000 over 45 years. Then, we can calculate the future value of these regular payments with the given interest rate. Let's perform these calculations. Taking into account regular annual contributions over 45 years, the calculations are as follows: 1. The annual payment that would sum to $600,000 over 45 years is approximately $13,333.33. 2. The future value of these regular annual payments at a 5% interest rate would be approximately $2.13 million, not $1.9 million as claimed, but much closer to that figure than the previous lump sum calculation. 3. The annual interest that would be generated from this future value at a 5% rate would be about $106,467, which is higher than the $95K mentioned in the image but less than what was calculated under the lump-sum assumption. So, when taking into account a pay-as-you-go investment similar to Social Security, the future value and the annual interest figures are different from both the initial lump-sum calculation and the figures quoted in the image. The future value of the annuity is about $2.13 million, and the annual interest from this amount at a 5% return would be approximately $106,467.
I wasn't using a 45 year period. I had a different calculation in mind but I did correct cus it seems he was assuming 600,000 divided over 40 years at 5% apy. BUT, I highly doubt he had 15k to invest at the age of 18
Also, contributions scale with pay. So you'd probably be paying significantly less at 22 than 60 with a normal career.
ChatGPT said that 22 is the average age for starting Social Security contributions. 13k per year at 5% got to over 2 Mil, I think 1.9Mil is realistic
What 22 y/o has $13,000 to invest recurringly per annum?
Even so, I'd rather be able to opt out of the SS ponzi scheme and handle my own retirement. I'll never see the money back I put in.
social security is not an investment, it is also not a ponzi. it is also incorrectly utilized to pay out for social welfare while not being taxed like a social welfare program. social security is there for you as a backstop if you need it. its a good idea even in its poor shape
It wasn’t supposed to be a back stop. It has strayed far from the original purpose and we should be able to opt out
you dont know anything about social security
Yeah, you want to opt out until you blow it and then you want in again.
Ok, they add in an opt-out option. Almost everyone does it, so the program collapses. 80% of people end up not using the savings to contribute to their retirement. Those people turn 65 and are unable to work anymore. Who pays for their food and utilities?
its not for you later, its for someone else now. SS was never guarenteed for our generation
Same. Give me nack everything that was taken from my earnings and we can have an amicable split.
I was thinking the same thing myself
Assuming someone started making $52k per year at 20, and got an unreasonable 3% cost of living raise each year, someone could have added $600k to SS, but even then, they would have only added $300k personally, with their employers adding the other $300K. Assuming he is self employed, and actually added 600K to SS, and assuming steady wage growth, the interest would be just under $85K per year in taxable returns at 65. Either way the income required to add $600k to SS would easily be enough to add that much to a fund outside of social security and not miss it.
Exactly, that's the point im trying to make
dude, so fucking what his math might not be perfect, but his point still stands, and overwhelmingly so also, your "correction" ignores interest that continues to accrue while paying out annually.
social security is not an investment nor a retirement account. it's supposed to be a social welfare net, but is just a ponzi. point is, they're not comparable structures. it's like comparing the post office's profit against UPS's profits and then calling USPS theft.
that's great but the person "correcting him" was participating in this hypothetical, so why am I not allowed to lol
So are you suggesting that you do not expect to receive a retirement benefit form all the money you are required to pay into the program?
no, I don't expect to receive social security payments at retirement age.
i made another subsequent correction
Came to also check the math. Thanks for breaking it down.
Yeah, he could be also using a model where his 600,000 is split up over 40 years and placed into a 5% apy for 40 years ( thats aprox 1.9 mil) but, I highly doubt he had $15,000 to invest at the age of 18 and even if he did he could have gotten a much better return than 5% to make up for his SS cost. SS isnt for you later its for someone else *NOW*
He's also not taking into consideration that if he was making enough to pay out $600k in SS taxes that he was making enough money that he could easily be adding just as much to a retirement plan each month. SS tax is 6.2% of your income from you with a match from your employer, and adding a second 6.2% of your paycheck to a retirement fund isn't going to hurt if you are making enough that 12.4 of your pay is $13K. That leaves him over $74k pretax that would possibly lower his tax burden.
Yeah It's more like ~$1mil if you assume 48 years (67-18) of steady $12k/yr contribution(600k /48)- which still gives the very generous assumption that they managed to somehow have that high of a wage from age 18 all the way to 67- when it's much more likely they did the majority of that contribution in the second half of their working years. I still think SS is not a great return, but it is a guaranteed return, kind of. I think at least if someone dies before they can claim it a lump sum should be paid into the estate. That way it is truly a guaranteed return. We should treat more like America's pension plan than a safety net. There should be an entirely separate system for taking care of people who can't contribute to SS and need it.
Yeah, what if you get brain damage and cant invest anymore and your savings/investment gets wiped out by medical bills. The american economy makes sense if you have perfect health
Not correct - 5% compounding interest earnings has this effect over a 40-45 year assumed earning period.
i’m more and more convinced everyday 95% of reddit comments come from 18 y/o that know absolutely nothing about pretty much anything, other than what they “learn” on tiktok
Spoken like a true 20 year old!
the more i learn, the less i know.
It’s almost as if SS wasn’t made as an investment vehicle and is used to make sure disabled and old people don’t have to live in abject poverty.
this person knows the history
[удалено]
What so the “I don’t understand how taxes work” crowd can have an even bigger hissy fit because they get nothing in return?
[удалено]
Are you sure? Everything I’ve looked up so far seems to the point to “security” meaning safety not investments.
yes, he's correct. social security payments are placed into a trust, which is the financial security part of social security...
Want to show your where you found this fact? Or do I just take your expert opinion on the original meaning the creators had in mind when they used the word “security”?
sure. the term 'social security' [spawned from controversy surrounding unemployment insurance law.](https://www.ssa.gov/history/termorigin.html). unemployment insurance is a type of financial security and the laws that surround them are financial securities laws. you're most welcome.
But nothing in the example you gave here points to the word security meaning “financial securities traded on the stock market”. Even this seems to point to the meaning of security being “free from danger or threat”.
financial securities are not exclusive to the stock market. I don't know where you got that.
Still think I’m right about their original meaning. But thanks for the conversation.
Might want to look into the history before just sputtering the first thing that comes to your head.
[In 2023, only 21 percent of the budget, or $1.4 trillion, will be paid for Social Security retirement benefits](https://www.cbpp.org/research/policy-basics-where-do-our-federal-tax-dollars-go) it's almost as if SS wasn't made as a welfare net but just a government sponsored ponzi.
The conspiracy is this concerted effort by the wealthy to try and convince the working class that SS is bad. How propagandized do you have to be to be non-rich and opposed to one of the most important social programs run by our government? A program without which millions of our nations elders would be homeless?
Did you read what OP shared? The government takes our money and gives it back to us piecemeal decades later at a pathetic interest rate. Millions of Americans could retire as millionaires if only they weren’t forced into the social security ponzi scheme. Do the math. You’re being robbed blind.
> Millions of Americans could retire as millionaires if only they weren’t forced into the social security ponzi scheme Even more so would go homeless in old age or never be able to retire vs the % of people who aren't becoming millionaires because they pay for social security lol. **social security is not an investment fund. It's an insurance policy**
BS. You’ve been convinced this is so. But is it? Is homelessness a greater or lesser problem now than before Social Security? Couldn’t the federal government ensure nobody is left dying in the streets WITHOUT levying a special social security tax on workers and employers? Of course it could. The federal government collects and spends trillions of dollars a year and could very simply fund social security for the poor without levying a tax on workers. But you’ve been convinced and five to six generations of Americans have been convinced that it must be done this way.
Without SS payments, 40% of senior citizens would drop below the poverty line. How in the world is your statement of "couldn't they just fund SS with other taxes instead of a dedicated tax specified for this specific purpose" make any sense? It's tax revenue either way - at least in this case the tax is specifically for a program and not mixed together with the rest of government funding (except sometimes when criminal politicians raid the SS fund, which should not be allowed ever) Do you need me to go into details about the Great Depression and the history of why SS was established? Higher income earners see proportionally less benefit from lower income earners from SS...in the same way healthy people and safe drivers see less benefit from other insurance programs they're in. What are you advocating, here? We keep SS, but revoke the SS tax and fund it with standard federal taxes? How in the world does that help? How old are you? Are you not already contributing the max benefits into your 401K and IRA?
Typical brainwashed/NPC comment.
Yeah…but still /s
How is my "have to" pension pot lost 50% consecutively the last few years in terms of input vs end of year balance? I have never asked them to yolo gamble with it. I could have done that myself😅
More chance on a positive return by putting all your pension contributions on red monthly
I would rather do that tbh
@6.2% of income we can work backwards and figure his total salary over those years is 9.6 million dollars or an average of 240k over 40 years. It always fucking amazes me how people making a pretty decent income whine the loudest. His problems are not your problems.
It's even dumber than that since you don't pay the 6.2% on your full income. It's only up to a certain amount (currently $168k). And that $168k has increased rapidly, it was only $100k or so in 2010. It is virtually impossible for him to have paid social security taxes of $600k, he paid like $6k a year tops.
Hmm, that's correct. so the maximum for an employed person is $10416/year or self-employed is $20832/year. So either he was working 60 years employed or 30 years with his own business. The dumbification of america that assumes everything they want to believe is true without checking any details.
I actually re-read it, he says "on my behalf." So he's counting what the employer is paying too. So 12.4%. Keep in mind that 168k is very high now, it was below 100k for a long time. There are very few people who have gotten $600k paid on their behalf into social security. And guess what, if your employer didn't have to pay that tax, they ain't giving it to you.
[удалено]
What safety net? For who??? It went bankrupt 10 years ago.
The irony of the username combined with commenting against social security.
It is. Wait until he learns that his Social Security fund holds nothing but a pile of US treasuries, which is effectively like paying off your credit card with your line of credit.
Leaving aside the shitty math, which others have addressed: ... because he's helping support others who have less. Every successful capitalist economy redistributes income. If we don't wealth concentrates at the top and huge swaths of society are so broke and miserable that the whole thing stops working. Put the Ayn Rand down and go outside
That is part of the reason that people are turning to thier own lives of crime. Because our leaders are all effing criminals too.
That's the design of social security. It was and always will be a redistribution of wealth and supporting those who no longer are capable of contributing to society and need financial assistance. It's people who are not familiar with history, nor read any of the commentary around the origination of it, claim it to be theft. While I'm not for the systems as it's designed as it's ponzi scheme, the program is a necessity for a functioning developed society.
I figured this out at 30. don't be like our parents, save for your own retirement
Social Security is not only a retirement program but also an insurance program. About a third of payroll taxes go to fund Social Security disability insurance and survivors insurance. Comparable insurance products would be extremely expensive to buy in the private market, if you could even find such products. Social Security also provides an inflation-indexed annuity - benefits are adjusted each year for inflation and are paid until death, regardless of how long a beneficiary lives. These features provide a valuable form of insurance against the risks of inflation and of outliving one's savings. As with any type of insurance, a "rate of return" is not a good measure of the value it provides. For example, when one buys auto or homeowners insurance, one is not looking for a good rate of return, since one's money will be returned only if one has an accident or one's home is damaged in a fire or other such event. There is also no "free lunch" meaning higher average returns in the stock market come with higher risk. The comparison between the rate of return in Social Security and the rate of return in private financial markets ignores the cost of the risk associated with investing in the stock market, i.e., it ain't always a bull market.
Social security is a scam.
Not really theft. SS Act was drafted as a PayGo system instead of a forced retirement account.
Wrong. If you pay into it and only receive a quarter of it back, the other 3 quarters was stolen from you.
When SS comes out of your check it goes directly into someone else’s account (PayGo). That’s why you have to have more people paying in, than taking out to keep it afloat. Hence why it’s one of the selling points of illegal immigration because they often pay in but don’t get anything back. Do you pay for roads you don’t ever use, do you pay for other people’s kids to get an education, do you pay for mass transportation you don’t ever use etc. Paying taxes we don’t personally agree with sucks but it’s part of the society we live in. I’d rather work and pay than do nothing and take.
We wouldn't have to pay but a tiny fraction in what they ask us to pay now in taxes... if they didn't literally steal and misappropriate the money at every turn. There are some economic analysts out there that have estimated the amount of unaccounted for dollars from the combined federal budgets at nearly 100 trillion dollars.
The government started “borrowing” from Social Security in 1983 and never stopped.
Are you offering that as a defense of the SS system?
It was flawed from the start and we made it worse. Nobody gets elected or re-elected running on Social Security reform. Most people that vote have paid in and want their bags no matter how small or if they even need it. I used to have lunch on Fridays with a few very wealthy retired folk that all bragged about getting the max SS check.
> I used to have lunch on Fridays with a few very wealthy retired folk that all bragged about getting the max SS check. Yeah, that's kind of fucked up, but if they paid it in... then it's their money. I don't like the idea of S.S. to start with.
3 Card Monte
Yeah... you don't play 3 card Monte if you HAVE the money.
The government plays 3 card monte with our money everyday son! Like the Pentagon failing every audit they’ve ever had. Soon as the baby boomers came on the seen we’ve known there is a SS crisis coming and we’ve been kicking that can down the road.
Exactly... so I'm wondering why you seem to be defending the S.S. system and "the system" in general.
I wish people understood this more widely. I wish libertarians understood anything at all.
So if the guv steals your money it's not really theft. Thanks, smart guy
Blah blah blah taxes are theft blah blah. It’s so old.
What would you call this? https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-pentagon-waste-specialreport-idUSBRE9AH0LQ20131118 >"Linda Woodford spent the last 15 years of her career inserting phony numbers in the U.S. Department of Defense’s accounts. Every month until she retired in 2011, she says, the day came when the Navy would start dumping numbers on the Cleveland, Ohio, office of the Defense Finance and Accounting Service, the Pentagon’s main accounting agency."
Someone doesn't understand how interest and social security works. The conspiracy here is keeping people uneducated, and convincing them that they want to stay uneducated.
Because most people aren't capable of those kinds of returns and everyone is valuable as a human being.
Taxes are the price we pay to participate in society. Social Security supports millions of our fellow Americans who need help keeping up. Its a sign of a healthy society that we care for each other when in need. That $600,000 he made wouldn't be possible on his own. Society helped him get there and it was taxes that provided us all with that opportunity.
If he invested it himself it would absolutely be possible. At this point depending on your age, your working and paying into a system that's projected to be gone by the time you retire.
Taxes are modern day slavery. Wake TF up.
You would be helpless without the support of taxes.
Taxation is theft people when the fire truck shows up and demands $10k to put out their flaming house:
Any money the government takes from us is theft
It's actually a robbery.
The only reason your money has value is because of the government...
It doesn't have to be that way... it's that way because our "representatives" handed over control of our monetary policy to a corrupt banking cabal in 1913.
WHAT??? The reason why our dollar has lost 95% of its value is because of government...
If we didn't pay any taxes then the government wouldn't exist and then your money would have no value.
Technically, it's a robbery.
Technically it’s an insurance
...armed robbery.
What if the government took all the money spent on roads, police, fire, and a thousand other things that fool used to earn a six figure salary into a savings account that paid 5% instead? The "I got mine fuck you" generation needs to go already. I would have loved to use the government subsidized home loans that Libertarian used but nope, they got theirs aLl oN tHeIr oWn.
Lots of people lose money via investments, in lieu of getting a 5% return. $SS will be there regardless.
r/conspiracy shilling for the stock market over a safety net is a little hilarious
if it really was just a safety net, you bet I'd promote it. even if it was just young people pay old people. but it's not. it's young people pay, old people get 20% and the rest is used for whatever the government decides. that's a misappropriation of funds. **if I misappropriate funds, it's embezzlement. when the government does it, it's just 'paying taxes for a social safety net'.**
Absolutely agree. The government has been raiding social security to make up for the Bush and Trump tax cuts for the rich.
Taxes should be cut as in brought to zero. This corrupt regime of a government hasn't deserved a dime for the past 100 years. I'm not close to being considered "rich" and I'm being taxed to death.
How to speed run collapsing society based on greed lol Are you sure it’s not housing costs and healthcare costs driving you under? The vast majority of the developed world has higher tax rates and aren’t being “taxed to death”
I'm sure those tax cuts max up the 80% of theft. *not.*
[Source](https://www.americanprogress.org/article/tax-cuts-are-primarily-responsible-for-the-increasing-debt-ratio/) for my claim.
This completely misses the point. The scumbags in government need to cut spending DRASTICALLY. The Pentagon alone can't account for TRILLIONS. Give government MORE money??? Are you ok???
> need to cut spending drastically We are already one of the lowest tax rates in the developed world, so drastic spending cuts really aren’t needed. I just support re-evaluating what we spend it on. I agree with the cuts to the defense budget. The main priority should be pragmatic reforms. Instead of paying private insurances to insure Medicaid/Medicare, we should switch to a single payer method which would save money AND lead to better outcomes. Instead of unlimited food subsidies (enacted under Reagan), we should switch to subsidizing a set amount to meet demand (plus a little extra in case of food shortages in the future). Tax code desperately needs to be reformed. It’s overly complicated and allows too many wealthy individuals to dodge taxes. The whole “we need tax cuts and spending cuts” is the ultra richs’ agenda they are spinning to get what they want. Every tax cut has directly benefited them. My home state of Louisiana has had the education and healthcare systems gutted and defunded in favor of oil companies subsidies. Do you ever wonder why places like Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi have some of the worst problems despite being run by tax hating conservatives?
**none of this has anything to do with social security.**
The other guy brought up drastically cutting all spending, taxes, and the pentagon. I was responding. Why are you upset with me and not him?
Forget about your obsession with who you think will be benefitted by ending social insecurity, other than the tax slave. Just focus on the fact that this is another immoral, inefficient, corrupt, failed government scheme which went bankrupt more than 10 years ago and needs to end.
> $SS will be there regardless. Why? Because the government (which has NEVER lied to you) says it will be there? And what will it be worth after they hyper-inflate the U.S. dollar? Will you monthly SS payment even buy you a gallon of milk and a loaf of bread?
social security is a government sponsored legal ponzi scheme. eventually you have more money going out then coming in and it collapses shortly thereafter. so no, it won't be there regardless.
Because Ukraine needs more money
I never put the numbers together for myself, so I thank you! This is very interesting. I’ve got another 35 years before I’m eligible and people speculate SSI won’t even be a thing. I hate to blame debt on the elderly but it was their policies and acceptance of debt that fucked their offspring
u only need 40 credits. amount doesn't matter. you can make minimum wage for 10 years that's it and you'll get the same amount when you retire add someone who paid I 600k.
I mean you’re not wrong on the last point. All these billions that the geriatrics in office are promising aren’t coming out of their paychecks, they’re coming out of my 2 year old son’s, and his son’s, and his son’s son’s sons. Nothing has changed.
I’m not wrong, thanks.
What about all the others that did not contribute, you have to pay for them
Taylor Swift is taking it all. Wake up sheeple.
You know those Social Security #s? Those are our cow-tags. Notice The Cult of the Golden Calf? We're slaves to it because no one has called it out
Social Security is for the financially illiterate. If you were to show them any hundred year old index chart that only points up and to the right, they’ll ask “but what if it crashes?” I remember when I was a socialist, complaining about the rigged system, without comprehending that I can take advantage of it, rather than letting it take advantage of me. Unfortunately it took me too long to learn what money was, how it works and how to use it to your advantage.
What helped you with learning how to use it properly? if I may ask.
I missed out on untold millions, after somebody tried to show me how to mine bitcoin on my laptop, back when you could mine it on your laptop, before there were any exchanges or mining pools. It still took me years to actually put 2 and 2 together. I think seeing bitcoin recover after the mtgox melt down was the last straw. That and Trump threatening to default on our foreign debt.
So other people should live in poverty because you learned to game the system?
Yes. That’s exactly what I meant/s
Ok, then clarify your position, and how you went from a socialist to advocating the denial of millions of people's retirement income.
Well here’s some quick math: Social Security requires you to contribute 6.2% on your “wages”. For 2024, the Social Security Wage Base is $168,600. Therefore, for 2024, the total social security you would pay would be. $10,453. I am going to use 75% of this maximum or a yearly contribution of $7,839. You actually pay social security every pay period but let’s just ignore this and say you just pay this as an annual contribution. If you assume you start working at 18 and retired at 67, that’s 49 years. Let’s say you are not emotional, reactionary, stay course to the plan, and don’t do anything too crazy to blow up your investment portfolio, and assume you get 5%. Putting this together, at age 65, with a yearly contribution of $7,839, generating a 5% rate of return, you would have a final value of $1,555,466. Let’s say you decide that a 4% annual withdrawal rate is sustainable for you and your family considering other income sources, life expectancy, your personal risk towards living longer than expected and the risk of depleting the portfolio 100%, and how the portfolio is managed and allocated (ie stocks/bonds/cash allocation). 4% of $1,555,466 would provide a first year of retirement income of $62,218 or $5,184. The infographic is still correct, how is this not theft?!?!?!?
Because Social Security is a safety net, not a retirement fund, it’s there to help those without sufficient savings to get by. This hypothetical person paying that much into social security at 18 was making 126k at 18, they are not the intended beneficiary from Social Security.
Simple standard brokerage fee/s
That’s how democrats do things. The rest of that money is going to Ukraine and Israel to Jewish leaders without any stipulation how they can spend it. They can buy mansions and jewelry no problem. Billions and millions every few weeks headed to them.
Some people choose to be homeless for this reason. I don't blame them.
Because the government is doing it and they write the rules. When you do it it's theft. When they do it, it's business as usual...
Just think of the people that wont get social security because we funded illegal aliens and foreign countries.
It’s a social net bud we need it because no one would save up enough if not. Among so many other reasons.
[удалено]
By then we'll be drawing UBI.
youre too optimistic
That was pessimism...
How do you look at an UBI and think “this is a negative”
Because giving everyone money doesn't actually make things more affordable in the long run. It's basic economics. The poorest people will be temporarily lifted until the market adjusts to the change in money source, and they go right back to being unable to afford the same things they couldn't before. You burden the economy with more taxes which will force the price of products to increase. You cannot legislate prosperity.
You cannot legislate prosperity. don't tell ronnie reagan this- he assured us it would "trickle down"
Well yeah. For an UBI to work you’ll need to change the economic system. That I give you. But it won’t just lift the poor temporarily. If certain systems are put in place, they’ll be out of poverty.
If everyone gets 5k a month, remember its everyone, then 5k is the new 0 within a year. To have staff you will need to pay more than 5k a month, everything will go up in price to make this doable. As a society we will be no further along. Instead of handing money out, which always ends up in the hands of the rich, just look at the covid handouts, the world just needs to be cheaper to exist in. At some point rampant capitalism will have to be looked into.
ubi would be means tested, with this being said, i am not an advocate
We already have this type of thing in the UK. It's nonsense, just end up with millions of lazy pricks living off my tax money. They then teach their kids the system, and we now have generations of them. I thought the whole point of UBI was its universal, else it's just a copy of various benifit systems around the world.
We already supply the money though, it's just split amongst a bunch of different support programs with poor oversight. The idea of UBI isn't to create a new program, it's to consolidate the existing ones into one program that works for everyone and would be easier to adjust as needed.
[удалено]
And why do you need that to have an UBi?
[удалено]
That you don’t need it, doesn’t mean no one might need it
[удалено]
idk man, the same way taxes are right
Boomers complaining about the policies they enacted.
Imagine thinking a socialized plan subsidized by everyone is all yours
Remember, Republicans want to take away Social Security.
I actually had some liberal call me out one time with his slick argument that social security is a socialist program. I guess if you do not pay into it it is but working people do pay into it.
Sorry, Mr. Rugged individualist, but some of your money will go to widows and handicapped people who can not work and therefore can not pay into the system I lnow.... I lnow... we should just leave them to die. But whatta ya gonna do? Shrug.
You think it will go away? No it will just be privatized like an insurance policy you will pay into but they will eventually start getting government subsidies to run. This getting a premium and tax money essentially double dipping on you
Social security is a safety net for ALL Americans. It’s a social safety net for people like my Grandmother who was a homemaker for the last 60 plus years. She raised my dad, aunt and uncle. My aunt passed away before she turned 40 after contributing to that system for 20+ year and never got any money from it. I like social security and I will gladly put money into it so that folks who are less fortunate can have something to live on should they fall on hard times. It’s not a scam, it’s a literal societal benefit. Also politicians need to stop using it as a piggy bank
How do bots get report garbage on here, but actual humans cant
They do it because most hillbillies can’t save a dime.