What is Digg?Sponsored by Bing
When Should I Book My Flight Home for Christmas? view!
bing.com - Bing predicts if your fare is likely to fall by $50 or more within 7 days. Shockingly accurate.
235 Comments
- kplo, on 11/08/2009, -6/+97This will not end well.
- greaseddeafguy, on 11/09/2009, -16/+75how about we allow people to keep more of there hard earned money and then they can invest in their retirement as they see fit. SS and Medicare are broke, and now people think that gov't controlled healthcare is a good idea. What ever happened to personal responsibility?
- novenator, on 11/08/2009, -35/+93I still think it's good we didn't let the conservatives privatize it under W Bush. If it had all gone into the stock market, we would be facing an absolute disaster right now.
- JediPii, on 11/09/2009, -15/+65As opposed to the absolute disaster to come in a few years? Seriously, the system is going to collapse... Today's working young aren't going to benefit at all, and yet they're forced to fund this ponzi scheme. I've been paying into it for 20 years now. I'd be willing to forgo any claim on my benefits if they'd just let me out now... Heck, I'd be willing to keep paying half of what I pay now, even without future benefits, just to see a plan to eventually phase out the system.
- govsucks, on 11/09/2009, -7/+54Personal responsibility was replaced by whiney government dependent bitches. You didn't get the memo?
- elliotys, on 11/09/2009, -7/+51Social Security is a great idea, care for grandma and grandpa when they get old so they don't end up on the street and homeless. However it has become something that is not sustainable. The primary reason is simple demographics, followed by healthcare costs for the elderly, followed by a horribly unhealthy population which exacerbates the second reason.
The downfall of this country started with the baby boomers.75% of them are overweight, and 50% of them have saved no money for retirement. Of the other 50% who have saved money, only 25% of those have saved more than 25,000$ dollars. The complete lack of fiscal responsibility, and of personal responsibility, makes it hard for me to feel much sympathy for this generation and the humanitarian crisis they will soon face. If our generation does not learn from their mistakes, ie improve our health and savings accounts and healthcare system, then no one should expect to be able to retire at the age of 65. - Emperor03, on 11/09/2009, -17/+58These are the same people you are trusting to manage your health-care, good luck with that!
- Tzen, on 11/09/2009, -12/+44The market was on sale for a few months.
I continued to add to my 401k. My balance is double from one year ago and up 27% this year.
I can't believe some people still trust the government to take cares of them. - govsucks, on 11/09/2009, -2/+34It doesn't matter, the will of the hive outweighs the will of an individual.
Want this to change? Vote Libertarian. - rgemmell, on 11/09/2009, -18/+48Its not fair, I didn't ask for this, I don't want this. i'm only 20, I'm in college, I need that money now.
I don't want it to be "Privatized" I want it eliminated!!
I am sick of the government STEALING a wad out of my paycheck every damn week, I don't want this!!! - PeppermintPig, on 11/09/2009, -4/+24Grandma and grandpa would have seen larger returns if they put the social security program money instead into bonds or conservative investment plans.
- Bloodwine, on 11/09/2009, -3/+23FDR only intended people to draw SS for a few years max.
It was never intended to be used for 20+ years by the elderly. FDR didn't have the foresight to think that people would one day live longer when he set an absolute minimum age instead of a fluctuating age based on the average lifespan of Americans. - ramfire98, on 11/09/2009, -1/+21or Ponzi Scheme....
- govsucks, on 11/09/2009, -5/+24For more information on how Social SEcurity is run see: Fraud.
- hawkeyeracer, on 11/09/2009, -4/+23Anyone else feel like this ended abruptly just when it was getting good?
- PeppermintPig, on 11/09/2009, -7/+25"If it had all gone into the stock market, we would be facing an absolute disaster right now."
401K savings were damaged anyways due to the bipartisan effort to solve the problem through spending. The housing crisis was not regional: It's a bubble that continues today to grow because of bad policy.
The stock market contains diverse investment possibilities. For the whole thing to turn downward it takes more than an industry specific malinvestment or any sort of disaster (terrorism, crop failure, etc) to bring about the sort of cascading harm as has been seen in the last few years, for example. The likely culprits are also the obvious ones, such as political corruption, inflation, corporate welfare, etc.
Putting all your eggs in the government basket is not an improvement, nor is assuming it's not tied to the economy and market evaluations anyways. - TubaTechno, on 11/09/2009, -1/+17Seriously...who plans on being 70 years old and broke? It's the person's own responsibility to plan for their future. Social Security shouldn't be the "back up plan", but rather, the last resort.
- chinaman1212, on 11/09/2009, -0/+15Seriously? you believe this is W's fault?
- cdsfire, on 11/09/2009, -4/+18Is helping yourself an option?
- techster83, on 11/09/2009, -5/+19Social Security is basically an anti-poverty program for the elderly. As such, it's been a tremendous success.
The elderly aren't out on the streets, and they don't have to be a burden to their children. Remove the payroll tax cap and we'll be fine.
BTW, aesthetically, this infographic sucks IMHO. And using a spell checker wouldn't be a bad idea ("curent"). - govsucks, on 11/09/2009, -1/+15LoneStar,
I voted republican for years. WHat did I get? Did I get SS reform? Did I get Medicare reform? No, I got Prescription Drug Care benefits and the attack of Iraq when a majority of the hijackers where SAUDI ARABIAN!!!
No more man, I've had enough. Enough of voting for the lesser of two evils *****. Fool me once shame on you , fool me SEVERAL times as the Republicans have, SHAME ON ME!
If you want to continue the tit for tat for the next 1000 years with nothing ever changing, Then vote republican.
Also, when I read your name, I ALWAYS think about the movie Space Balls when Rick Moranis closes his dark helmet and says "Lone Star" and then the camera hits him in the helmet. JFYI :D - Shawn4168, on 11/09/2009, -14/+26What the infographic fails to mention about Obama's plan is that people making over $97,000 a year are a lot less likely to actually need Social Security. He wants them to contribute more, even though they already benefit less from this awful system. Yet another example of Obama wanting to punish success and reward irresponsibility.
- Tzen, on 11/09/2009, -9/+20The market was on sale for a few months.
I continued to add to my 401k. My balance is double from one year ago and up 27% this year.
I can't believe some people still trust the government to take cares of them. - surdelmundo, on 11/09/2009, -3/+14Read the article again.
The problem hits us in 2018. That is when SS income is less then SS payments. That has to be paid with new taxes, because the "fund" is nothing more than government IOUs. - mnocket, on 11/09/2009, -1/+12I'd be happy to take you up on that if you will refund my contributions. Overjoyed in fact.
- imgeddylee, on 11/09/2009, -6/+16LOCKBOX
- rgemmell, on 11/09/2009, -3/+13I don't blame him, I don't blame anyone for doing that, they stole the money he earned while he was working full time he has every right to take it back.
Thats why cheating on your taxes is not only morally justified, but morally encouraged!!! /s, but I'm serious on that first part, the money is already his I don't see anything wrong with taking it back. - dball48, on 11/09/2009, -2/+12Everything you need to know about social security http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme
- gerrylazlo, on 11/09/2009, -1/+11It's pretty obvious from the graphic that SS is definitely not broke.
And if you know anything about Americans, giving them their SS money to spend as they see fit is a dumb idea. They will fritter it away and in the end we'll end up supporting their destitute asses anyway. It's all a matter of easing our cash flow. - govsucks, on 11/09/2009, -3/+12I didn't ask you to eat 4000 calories a day and smoke and drink. I have MY OWN children and family to care for! Stop stealing my money to provide for your healthcare.
Still can't see the line right?
Civilized people don't forcibly take their neighbors property for their own use pal. - InactiveUser, on 11/09/2009, -6/+15Has anyone ever heard the word externalities?
Social security creates a more resilient and stable economy.
Why?
In severe economic shock the money available for social security, and those who receive it goes back into the economy. Rent, mortgages and food are paid for. This means landlords and homeowners avoid severe financial burdens and bankruptcy, the wheels on the basic economy still keep turning and government services are not overwhelmed by the unlucky ones lining up for food.
Money given to social security is paid back into the economy it does not simply dissolve into thin air like that graph is portraying. This means your neighbor still receives rent from his investments and his children keep going to school.
If Australia were to stop paying social security for unemployed today there would be...
2.5 million homeless people.
2 million working famalies put into severe financial stress on reduced property investment returns.
4 million small buisiness would face closure
adding
4 million people to the unemployed list
creating
an extra 400% increase in crime and theft.
adding
100% to your insurance bills
increasing
poverty, social dysfunction, breeding ignorance and decreasing urban and city wide livability and amenity. Increases in violent crime, increases in social hostility and your local area will fill with filth, litter and the abused.
Once the damage is done it cannot be easily undone. When a society fails to take of its own then that society will slowly decay.
- dingedarmor, on 11/08/2009, -4/+13Just the idea of retiring--even with a TDA and a retirement plan, seems out of reach--Social Security in but one leg of the retire stool but when 2 of the legs got gutted and the 3rd is mostly a fiction....Yikes!!!!!
- greaseddeafguy, on 11/09/2009, -0/+9I would say a program that politicians can rob from and bankrupt is clearly broke. Did you even consider that before running your mouth?
- mnocket, on 11/09/2009, -2/+10No. RTFA. When you pay into SS, the government spends the money immediately - on anything it wants to. No money is kept in a trust fund. What is kept in the trust fund is essentially an IOU. Since none of the money you paid is actually saved by the government to pay your benefits in the future, when you retire the government is betting they can receive enough money each year by taxing workers to pay your benefits. Remember, none of the money you payed while you were working still exists - the government spent it as soon as it got it. Now if the ratio of workers to retirees continues to decline, as it clearly has, by the time you retire the government's ability to collect enough money from workers may not be sufficient to pay your benefits.
- greaseddeafguy, on 11/09/2009, -1/+9I should not be taxed because people will just "fritter" their money away unless it is dolled out to them like parents giving an allowance. If idiots want to spend all their money on big TVs and chrome wheels, then they should be allowed to go bankrupt. The responsible folks can not shoulder the burden for the idiots.
- Tyrghast, on 11/09/2009, -3/+11They threw Bernie Madoff in jail for imitating the government.
- gerrylazlo, on 11/09/2009, -0/+8The system is not there to help those who can't help themselves. It's there to help people who have worked all their lives that want to stop at some point before they die. There is nothing wrong with what he is doing.
- tnvwboy, on 11/09/2009, -2/+9If we as a county/society would quit being a bunch of pussies and make people take responsibility for their actions this wouldn't be an issue. Squander your money and now you have nothing to retire with? That's your problem bud. If private charities want to help them, fine, but the government shouldn't be 'fixing' other peoples mistakes for them, period.
- Dan6963, on 11/09/2009, -0/+7Anyone notice the title?
- shannondoko, on 11/09/2009, -2/+9For the love of the flying spaghetti monster, will you people please PLEASE cite your sources.. Otherwise I'm just seeing a bunch of empty arguments fueled by mostly meaningless propaganda from either side.
Do your part. Fight ignorance. That's what is getting us into this mess in the first place. - greaseddeafguy, on 11/09/2009, -0/+7Charity is best left to the private sector, the gov't just wastes money. I am all for helping those that need it. I am all against the gov't running those programs.
- NJank, on 11/09/2009, -8/+15I didn't ask for an interstate on the West coast, I live in the suburban Baltimore. Stop stealing my money fixing damn roads I don't drive on!
I didn't ask for a fire department, I've never had a fire. Stop stealing my money to put out other people's fires.
I didn't ask for ...
Welcome to civil society: where you have implicitly agreed to participate in group governance (democratic republic in the US). where you accept the fact that not everything will be to your liking, and you're given some ability to work through the system to address that fact. where some decisions are made not for your benefit, but for overall societal benefit. where past governing bodies have decided that putting certain inefficiencies into the system is desirable to prevent some of the ills that would normally develop in society, despite the possibility of resultant reduction in net performance.
Taxes pay for agreed upon services (no, you don't get an a la carte menu). Now, stop being a crybaby and calling it stealing.
oh, and "i'm only 20, I'm in college, I need that money now." is the kind of thinking that currently has a bankrupt baby boomer generation unable to support its own retirement. - harinezumi, on 11/09/2009, -0/+6Any solution that is based on fundamentally changing the behavior patterns of the population is an automatic non-starter. Just see how well Communism worked out.
The vast mass of people _are_ lazy, selfish, incompetent with finances, and incapable of long-term planning. Railing about that and demanding that they clean up their acts will get you absolutely nowhere. When making policy, you need to address the reality of human nature mixed with local cultural prerogatives, not try to change people into something they are not and will never be. - TheBifman, on 11/09/2009, -3/+9Maybe I'm missing something...but where's the security in running out of money?
- mnocket, on 11/09/2009, -0/+6Not sure where you're going with this, but a person who earns $1M will pay the same amount as a person who makes $106,800 (the cap in 2009). They will both receive the same benefits. A person who earns less than $106,800 will pay less and receive lower benefits.
- mrkmrk, on 11/10/2009, -0/+5No, the government has made that illegal. In addition, they'll now be fining you for not paying "your share" into the massive public system--in which they forced you to participate in the first place.
Sweet scheme they've got going, isn't it? - niradg, on 11/09/2009, -0/+5you could argue that FDR didn't have the foresight, but I would say that it is the fault of politicians since then who haven't had the courage the raise the age. Raise it to 70 over the next 20 years. Problem solved.
- tnvwboy, on 11/09/2009, -0/+5@LongStar,
More and more people are registered Independents these days. I think that reflects a frustrated voter population tired of the current two party BS that we have to deal with year after year. - inactive, on 11/09/2009, -1/+6In the US, how many cars, Ipods, blackberries, MP3 players, $200 sneakers and flat screen TVs qualify as "high poverty?"
- greaseddeafguy, on 11/09/2009, -0/+5American's are some of the most generous people. As such, if you tax them less, they will have more money to give out. Any politician who tries to sell a social spending program doesn't give a damn about people, they are just buying votes to get re-elected. Look at FDR, he only gave out Federal Works Program jobs to those who pledged loyalty to him.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 236 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is