PDA

View Full Version : Saving Social Security



wolfdancer
01-27-2005, 01:57 PM
The new Bush plan, calls for investing part of your income into the stock market...but before you enter into this giant floating craps game..take this short aptitude test to see if you can survive in the Wall St. jungle
When I want investment advice, I get it from
a) Barron's
b) the Wall Street Journal
c) complete strangers I run into at the adult video store

When I get uo in the morning,I
a) shower
b) get dressed
c) start shorting drug stocks

In order to trade intelligently, one must have a
a) BA
b) MBA
c) mouse

Cisco is a company that manufactures
a) shortening
b) cowboys
c) I have no idea, but just bought 200 shares

When I am in a bar, and meet a beautiful woman
who seems attracted to me, I look at
a) her face
b) her body
c) CNBC

"Beating the spread", refers to
a) the way whipped cream is made
b) the way Honduran pheasant women clean
their bed coverings
c) I don't know

P/E ratio means
a) something to do with, like stocks, and junk
b) the number of times per hour, I have to use the bathroom
c) like I care?

A "tick" is
a) a nervous syndrome common to traders
b) something that lives in a traders hair
c) these questions are ticking me off

If you answered "C" to all of the questions
congratulations! You have what it takes !!!
But can you really beat the market?
Rumor has it that hidden within Dave Syrja's
Pool Tournament Software, are applications that
allow one to manipulate the market....to avoid
a "Martha Stewart" type SEC inquiry, due to use of
this, one should flee to Canada, where the death
penalty is illegal.

< This quiz from the jacket of
"The Trillionaire Next Door" >
For the market to function perfectly, there must
be both winners and losers though
as the Dutch found out in the 1630's..in the
Famed Tulip Market crash.
Now my idea for the Government to take over all the Indian Casinos, a precentage of your bet would go into your retirement fund
...anyway, eminent domain, and if they object...hey, we beat "em once...
Can the gov't efficiently run what was once considered an immoral business? They already have experience running
The Mustang Ranch, near Reno, Nv

Wally_in_Cincy
01-27-2005, 02:24 PM
[ QUOTE ]
For the market to function perfectly, there must
be both winners and losers <hr /></blockquote>

That's really not true. The performance in the overall market has averaged something around 10% per year since WWII IIRC.

I guess I should look it up.

glholzer
01-27-2005, 02:51 PM
Socialist ostrich drivel.

Privatizing SS incrementally, just as it was foisted upon us, will be the biggest empowerer of the individual since the original Constitution &amp; BofR.

Only complete fools could be against it. Every civil servant has a retirment pension fund invested in equities and bonds.

Hell, over 2/3rds of private Americans do as well, including Afr-Americans. That's part of the reason the Demos are loosing black voters.

The Founder's knew the evils of Govts, that's why they worked so hard to limit it severely, that men could run their own lives.

They well understood man's weaknesses and proclivity to buy influence.

wolfdancer
01-27-2005, 02:59 PM
If I sell you my "Buggy whip" stock, and the Amish decide to
travel by skateboard, thus collapsing that market segment,
or after paying another 80 billion to finance the war, we'll all be riding horses, and the stock will appreciate...in either case, we'll have a winner and a loser....or do you subscribe
to the "greater fool" theory...that stocks will continue to appreciate, as long as there is somebody willing to buy them?
I think the Market is a gamble, especially now where I once read that the avg. share in Yahoo, is turned over in 7 days.
I also bought Enron, and Global Crossing, missed out on Martha Stewart,Inc, and Krispy Kreme though.
I have carry over stock losses that'll last until I die.
My poor investment track record is not typical, but there's folks that have lost everything. The fund managers and brokers will be the winners.
I just don't think it is a good idea...and SS would have been ok if both parties hadn't raided the "excess"
Do you, as a loyal Republican, endorse this? Is it possible that in this one area, Pres. Bush may be making a mistake?
Possibly not speak Ex-Cathedra?
well, I know he has a different pipeline to God, than the Pope does....but just maybe...
He was not a successful businessman, discounting his baseball team ownership.
His, and his Dad's, HEC, is hovering around .50....and the original investors, have lost a fortune.

Wally_in_Cincy
01-27-2005, 03:23 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> ...do you subscribe
to the "greater fool" theory...that stocks will continue to appreciate, as long as there is somebody willing to buy them?
...<hr /></blockquote>

Stocks usually appreciate because the company is making money, not simply due to speculation. Proctor and Gamble is probably worth 10 times what it was in the 80's because they make billions of dollars a year.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr>
I think the Market is a gamble<hr /></blockquote>

Sure it is, to some degree. Are you aware that the SS reform/privatization is going to be voluntary? You can stay in the current system if you like.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr>
Do you, as a loyal Republican, endorse this?<hr /></blockquote>

Yes. I have been for it since I heard about the success of the Chilean system years ago.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr>
He was not a successful businessman, discounting his baseball team ownership.
<hr /></blockquote>

That is quite true. He had the misfortune/bad judgement to get in the oil business just as Texas oil was becoming more expensive to produce than they could sell it for. But that has little or nothing to do with SS reform. This proposal is not something Bush invented. It has been around for years.

I've posted an article about the Chilean system twice so I'm not going to post it again, since nobody bothered to comment on it.

wolfdancer
01-27-2005, 03:38 PM
Wally, I searched once for your post, and came up empty
do you have a link? I also think that SS has always been
a "pyramid scheme" of sorts...and is dependant on the
continous enrollment of new members. How will a percentage
of new wage earners, opting out of the system affect it?
I've also read where the system can survive for another 30-50 years, as is....so it's hard for me to make an informed judgement...esp being one of them baby-killing,Bush bashing, left wing liberals....an here all this time, I thought I was just a Democrat.
Say, that ain't your evil, alter ego, that has recently signed on...is it?

Wally_in_Cincy
01-27-2005, 03:50 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> Wally, I searched once for your post, and came up empty
do you have a link? .. <hr /></blockquote>

how chile privatized their pension system (http://www.billiardsdigest.com/ccboard/showthreaded.php?Cat=&amp;Board=npr&amp;Number=174254&amp;Foru m=npr&amp;Words=chile&amp;Match=Entire%20Phrase&amp;Searchpage =0&amp;Limit=25&amp;Old=3weeks&amp;Main=174254&amp;Search=true#Pos t174254)

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> ... I also think that SS has always been
a "pyramid scheme" of sorts...and is dependant on the
continous enrollment of new members. <hr /></blockquote>

I would describe it more as a "pay-as-you-go" system. But folks have come to assume that their money is just sitting around somewhere in a "lock-box" as AlGore put it.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> ..How will a percentage
of new wage earners, opting out of the system affect it?
<hr /></blockquote>

Ah, therein lies the rub. It's going to cost a lot. Hundreds of billions. But like the Fram guy used to say "Pay me now or pay me later". It will be cheaper in the long run to fix it now.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr>
I've also read where the system can survive for another 30-50 years, as is.... <hr /></blockquote>

Correct. Those are the predictions. But when the trust fund runs out all hell is going to break loose.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr>
Say, that ain't your evil, alter ego, that has recently signed on...is it? <hr /></blockquote>

No. I rarely post long unreadable tomes about the intent of the founding fathers without adding some sort of editorial comment.

I agree with most of his posts though.

highsea
01-27-2005, 03:51 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> Say, that ain't your evil, alter ego, that has recently signed on...is it? <hr /></blockquote>Nah, that's Qtec's evil twin brother. Can't you tell by the posting style? /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Kind of like Data and Lor, Star Trek TNG...

Ross
01-27-2005, 06:03 PM
I'm pretty liberal, but I happen to think the SS reform idea is a good one.

There are two very different aspects of this plan that get confounded:


1. Steering a proportion of retirement funds into investment vehicles such as money market accounts, the stock market, etc.

2. Transforming most of SS over many, many years from a taxpayer-funded/ government-controlled program to one where each individual own his/her own retirement account.

As you said, the current system is a little like a pyramid in that current retirees income are dependent on taxes paid by current workers. I think the current system actually makes average retirees MORE vulnerable in the long run. When the ratio of workers to retirees drops significantly-- as it is about to do -- the burden on workers gets so high they understandably start thinking about supporting laws to cut benefit levels.

If the youngsters of today can ultimately end up having government-mandated but individually owned private retirement accounts, they will not be vulnerable to legislated changes in their benefits.

Basically, the proposal is to make everyone put what they now pay in SS taxes into privately owned "401k-like" accounts. This means that the average person will end up have a larger slice of the nations business wealth, which is a good thing. As the nation prospers so will the workers that have put in the sweat to make it happen.

I know for many the recent tech bust is a scary memory. But over the very long haul people who have invested in stocks and bonds have done quite well for themselves.

I think it is a good idea even if I'm not a fan of it's chief proponent. But the devil is in the details and also in explaining and selling the plan to the public.

SecaucusFats
01-27-2005, 06:46 PM
Ross:

"I know for many the recent tech bust is a scary memory. But over the very long haul people who have invested in stocks and bonds have done quite well for themselves."

<font color="blue"> There's an old saying that goes like this: "Bulls make money, bears make money, pigs get slaughtered." </font color>

<font color="blue"> SF </font color>

SnakebyteXX
01-27-2005, 07:26 PM
[ QUOTE ]
There's an old saying that goes like this: "Bulls make money, bears make money, pigs get slaughtered."
<hr /></blockquote>

There was another one that too few people paid attention to back when the bubble was expanding and almost anything you bought gained value:

"Never confuse brains with a bull market."

Investing in the market is like playing poker with professionals. If you sit down to a game you'd better be ready to go head to head with the best there are. One of the things that facilitated the tech boom was the advent of online trading (no broker to advise when to buy and sell or even what to buy or sell). Profitably buying and selling stocks requires expertise and you don't get that expertise just because you happen to have enough funds to open an online account with Ameritrade.

When the market started collapsing all that dumb money from inexperienced investors was ripe for the taking. Very few inexperienced investors knew when to cut their losses and get the hell out. The pros new - they're the ones who ended up with all the money. It was the little inexperienced player who ended up getting wiped out.

These things go in cycles. It's only a matter of time before it happens again.

Snake

DickLeonard
01-28-2005, 07:29 AM
Wally here is what I would want if we are to go to SS Accounts. ANY TINKERING with the accounts, Companies false reporting of income,the offending company and its officer get 15 to 25 Years in Jail. No if, no ands, no butts.

I am still waiting for Kenneth Lay to get arrested, I quess he spent to much time in the White House trying to screw California with their energy problem to get himself arrested.####