|
|
|
Boron10
Religion Moderator
USA
1266 Posts |
 Posted - 09/09/2007 : 10:56:04 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Originally posted by Penyprity
What kind of fuzzy math is this. 45 years ago, the average wage wasnt $5,580 a year, so they sure werent paying in nearly that much. Also, most people these days dont work 45 years before they retire. |
Inflation. The cost of goods is comparable to wages over time. |
If you are going to put numbers that are adjusted for inflation, you should include a statement to that effect. You should know better than to try such a trick. It is dishonest. |
 |
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 09/09/2007 : 10:59:50 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Boron10
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Originally posted by Penyprity
What kind of fuzzy math is this. 45 years ago, the average wage wasnt $5,580 a year, so they sure werent paying in nearly that much. Also, most people these days dont work 45 years before they retire. |
Inflation. The cost of goods is comparable to wages over time. |
If you are going to put numbers that are adjusted for inflation, you should include a statement to that effect. You should know better than to try such a trick. It is dishonest.
|
I explain this:
| Assuming inflation corresponds with wage increases this is a maximum of a little over $500,000 you would have payed in over a 45 year working career. |
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 09/09/2007 : 11:01:36 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Boron10
If you are going to put numbers that are adjusted for inflation, you should include a statement to that effect. You should know better than to try such a trick. It is dishonest.
|
Maybe you should read the thread before claiming dishonesty.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Penyprity
Skeptic Friend
64 Posts |
Posted - 09/09/2007 : 12:05:43 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
As you see the system is a slush fund for the government on the backs of the common worker. Why again do you think this is a good system? |
Jerome, it was crystal clear from Peny's posts that she thinks if the original system were left alone, it would have worked. Leaving it alone would obviously include not using it as a slush fund. How is it you are able to misunderstand so drastically?
|
The point is she does recognize it as currently a slush fund.
|
No I dont!!!. I think the money has been mis-managed. But that is a far cry from a slush fund.
Besides, when they instituted the program they still thought understood that it was a slush fund. The life expectancy was low enough that few would have ever been paid. It was a scam from the start and continues to be a scam.
|
Im sure you were in the room with FDR and his pals when they came up with this idea to help seniors from ever having to suffer the effects of the depression, or the like again. Yes, Im sure scam and slush fund was what they were thinking. |
Make your vote count. Become a supreme court justice......Peny |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 09/09/2007 : 12:40:28 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Penyprity
No I dont!!!. I think the money has been mis-managed. But that is a far cry from a slush fund. |
O.K., sorry. You state that SS has been mismanaged since when?
Im sure you were in the room with FDR and his pals when they came up with this idea to help seniors from ever having to suffer the effects of the depression, or the like again. Yes, Im sure scam and slush fund was what they were thinking.
|
How do you remedy the fact that the life expectancy was 58 years and the pay out started at 62. I do not think that FDR was so misinformed that he did not know the life expectancy.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Penyprity
Skeptic Friend
64 Posts |
Posted - 09/09/2007 : 12:41:36 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Originally posted by Penyprity
What kind of fuzzy math is this. 45 years ago, the average wage wasnt $5,580 a year, so they sure werent paying in nearly that much. Also, most people these days dont work 45 years before they retire. |
Inflation. The cost of goods is comparable to wages over time.
|
Huh? This is a non-response.
| Not true. Since they started off paying way less then you suggested. Also, your break even point does not include what the employer pays in for you. We are talking about what comes out of your pocket and goes back into your pocket...right? |
| Inflation. I did include what the employer pays. This is a tax on the employees labor. |
|
Yes, and you should not have, was my point. When you speak of putting money into something, like a retirement fund, and you try to figure out how much money it would take for you to earn back your original investment, you cannot add in funds you have not actually put in. So employer contributions would not factor into the equation.
| You dont think they should have been paying into some kind of retirement plan, and that perhaps the debt they created was their own bad judgement? I suspect that if a person needs the money that is going to social security to pay their debts, they would be spending that money unwisely as well. Yes, it would be theirs to do with as they wished, but when they get older and dont want to work anymore, they will still have debt(no doubt) and no retirement income at all. |
| So, because you suspect that people make incorrect choices the government should take their money and as you said mis-manage it? I do not understand this logic. |
|
You said that the person might need the money to pay off their debt, and I suggested that the person would probably not do that. That anyone in that much debt and using every cent of their earnings, every month, to pay on their debt, would probably not have enough money at the end of the month to pay into a retirement plan of their own. Do I think the government should take care of some of that burden? Sure, why not? I dont know anyone who is sorry to be receiving social security. Do You?
What happens to the senior who has no retirement plan, no social security and no savings and is no longer able to work? Do they end up in some state run facility? Do they just become homeless, living in missions, if they are lucky? I am not sure what you are suggesting. At least with a minimum of social security, they can get housing. I deal with a lot of seniors in my work, and believe me when I tell you, social security, as screwed up as it may be, is a lifeboat for them.
| The government was taking money out of social security way before the 1980s. Money they never paid back. So they doubled the tax to rescue their own mis-managed funds. I am suggesting that if they never screwed with it in the first place, it would have been just fine. |
As you see the system is a slush fund for the government on the backs of the common worker. Why again do you think this is a good system?
I dont know you very well. Are you a communist? I have seen it at work from all kinds of different levels. Believe me when I tell you, without it, these people would be in real trouble. Some still are but to no fault of the system. As stated, Social Security was not supposed to be a persons entire retirement fund..it just worked out that way for so many. Probably because they did not mangage their own money properly and did not set up their own retirement plans...as stated before.[quote] |
Make your vote count. Become a supreme court justice......Peny |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 09/09/2007 : 13:35:01 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
American life expectancy in 1930
| Life Expectancy: Male, 58.1; Female, 61.6 |
Collecting SS at 62 when life expectancy was 58 was a scam from the beginning. |
By the way, the above shows a serious misunderstanding of the term "life expectancy." It is, after all, an average. Specifically, in 1935 overall life expectancy in the U.S. was 61.7 years, which means that half the people born in 1935 would die before attaining that age, while the other half would live longer than that (up to 120 or so). One of the primary factors leading to a low life expectancy was infant deaths - and they certainly wouldn't have paid into Social Security at all.
I haven't found life expectancy by occupation, but I suspect that farmers, who were excluded from the 1935 Act, had a lower life expectancy than, say, white-collar workers. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Penyprity
Skeptic Friend
64 Posts |
Posted - 09/09/2007 : 13:39:31 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Originally posted by Penyprity
No I dont!!!. I think the money has been mis-managed. But that is a far cry from a slush fund. |
O.K., sorry. You state that SS has been mismanaged since when?
|
I believe in 1953, Eisenhower appropritated $1.5 million to buy land and get plans and specs for a new buerau of old age and survivor insurance building
Im sure you were in the room with FDR and his pals when they came up with this idea to help seniors from ever having to suffer the effects of the depression, or the like again. Yes, Im sure scam and slush fund was what they were thinking.
|
How do you remedy the fact that the life expectancy was 58 years and the pay out started at 62. I do not think that FDR was so misinformed that he did not know the life expectancy.
|
I dont. But, your figures are incorrect. Your life expectancy figues are an average from birth. This includes a large portion of individuals who never reach social security age (or pay in for that matter. Mortality at birth was quite high back then). Try these numbers on for size: in 1940 53.9% of males lived from age 21 to 65,and were expected to live 12.7 years beyond 65. And 60.6% of females,to live 14.7 years beyond 65. In 1940 9.0 million people lived beyond 65. Social Security was enacted in 1935 but did not actually start until January 1936.[quote] |
Make your vote count. Become a supreme court justice......Peny |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
 Posted - 09/09/2007 : 13:48:24 [Permalink]
|
If I were a dishonest salesman, I would be rich beyond comparison.
 |
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 09/09/2007 : 15:21:46 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
If I were a dishonest salesman, I would be rich beyond comparison. |
So would I. So what of it?
In 1948, median income for all men was $199.67 a month, while the average SS benefit was only $25.13 a month. In 2005, the median income for the same group was $2,606.25 per month, while the SS benefit was $955.00. So SS benefits have gone from being 12.6% of median income up to now being almost 36.7%.
It is such changes that have turned what was a workable program for helping to support a smallish group of very old people for a few years (on average) into the mess that it is today. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 09/09/2007 : 15:39:01 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
If I were a dishonest salesman, I would be rich beyond comparison. |
So would I. So what of it?
In 1948, median income for all men was $199.67 a month, while the average SS benefit was only $25.13 a month. In 2005, the median income for the same group was $2,606.25 per month, while the SS benefit was $955.00. So SS benefits have gone from being 12.6% of median income up to now being almost 36.7%.
It is such changes that have turned what was a workable program for helping to support a smallish group of very old people for a few years (on average) into the mess that it is today.
|
Nice stats, they go to show that this was a scam form the beginning.
At the levels you describe for 1948 assuming that the rate of decudtion did not increase beyond 2%:
$2160 is payed over 45 years of working.
A benefit of $25.13/mth requires one to live until 69.2 years the break even.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 09/09/2007 : 15:56:01 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Nice stats, they go to show that this was a scam form the beginning.
At the levels you describe for 1948 assuming that the rate of decudtion did not increase beyond 2%: |
Good grief, Jerome, why not take the thirty seconds to check to see that the rate didn't go up to 3% until 1950, and thus not assume anything?| $2160 is payed over 45 years of working. |
Impossible. In 1948, people could only have paid into SS for 13 years, so the average person had paid in a total of $622.97.| A benefit of $25.13/mth requires one to live until 69.2 years the break even. |
Nope, only two years and one month beyond 65. You shouldn't calculate from 62, because for those first three years one only gets reduced benefits.
Plus, plenty of people did live to 72.2 anyway, so what's the problem? Ida May Fuller paid $24.75 into the system, and had received $22,888.92 by the time she died at age 100. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Penyprity
Skeptic Friend
64 Posts |
Posted - 09/09/2007 : 16:04:11 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
If I were a dishonest salesman, I would be rich beyond comparison.
|
Or in jail |
Make your vote count. Become a supreme court justice......Peny |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 09/09/2007 : 16:39:59 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Impossible. In 1948, people could only have paid into SS for 13 years, so the average person had paid in a total of $622.97. |
And here is the Ponzi scheme. Those that get in early have an advantage over the system and receive more than payed.
Can not not see?
What ever information about which ever year will show that those that began the scheme did O.K. (not well), and those on the back end are screwed. This is what a ponzi scheme is.
The amazing thing is this Ponzi scheme is not voluntary. It is mandated by government.
This is the same as running numbers. Ponzi is illegal unless the government does it.
Running numbers (Lottery) is illegal unless the government does it.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 09/09/2007 : 16:45:10 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Penyprity
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
If I were a dishonest salesman, I would be rich beyond comparison.
|
Or in jail
|
If I were running a ponzi scheme, yes.
The government hates competition.
Think of the lottery.
The lottery has the worst odds of any gamble one can reasonably make; worse than one armed bandits.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Penyprity and Thoughts of Scholl Taxes
