Social Conservatism = nanny state!

[DamnYankee]

It all depends on when one retires.

No it doesn't, because again we are talking about a 45 year investment period. If the economy is down when they retire then they still got the benefit of higher annualized returns during growth periods. Plus they don't take the money out all at once, but live on the income from interest. When rates are low they simply dip into the principle or put off major expenses.

 

[NOVA]

I seldom see anyone so fuckin' wrong on so many issues as Jughead...
God damn...I'm glad hes on the "other" side....
=========================================================
Seriously is having a national religen not nannyism?

Is legislating who people can marry not nannyism?

Is telling women what medical procedures they can have done to there bodies not nannyism?

Is promoting traditional values not nannyism?

Is limiting what books your children can read not nannyism?

Is deciding where religous institutions can build because others might be offended not nannyism?

You are allowing the possession of a weapon that makes it too easy to limit another person's ultimate freedom to live.

Was Tipper for warnings on record lables or was she for limits on what could be sold?

It was the Bush Admin who freaked out about Janet Jackson's tit.

the Liberals are for more individual freedom.

When a woman is facing a late term decision between her life and the life of her unborn, the Republicans belive they should step in and nanny that decision for her!

SO you believe its the governments place to tell a woman she has to choose certian death over aborting her late term fetus?

Every one who voted on the version of the partial birth abortion ban that past about 5 years back.

According to the Religous Right Christianity is the national religen.

---------------------------------

:lol:

Trying to explain things to him would only be a waste of time....

 

[cawacko]

As long as there is sufficient money in SS to look after them if they fail. That's the reason behind SS. Unless you think no one will fail. Unless you believe every investor, every stock on your "conservative list", is going to do well.

And as I noted earlier what will happen when emergencies arise? Does the 55 year old guy lose his job and home because he can not afford a hip replacement even though he has the money in a private SS account? He will be unemployed so he won't be contributing to his private account any more meaning he will end up with less money at retirement than if he took some money out now and had the operation.

If someone loses their job and defaults on their mortgage do we allow them to lose their home when they have funds in a private SS account? Rather than take, say, ten thousand to cover the mortgage for a period of time until he gets back to work do we prevent him from accessing that money resulting in a much greater loss due to losing his home from a repo sale?

There's a reason for SS. Other ways were tried for literally thousands of years. People did end up destitute. I's not a fear. It's a legitimate concern. Who do you propose pays for the destitute? Should we have a sur-tax on the retiree's pension who made good on the stock market so we can support the guy who didn't fare well? Would you be willing to accept the right to invest privately if it came with the obligation to help support the less fortunate, through additional taxes, if you did well? If not, what's your solution?

Dude, unless I am mistaken on this you can not borrow against future SS moving owed to you so your examples are not even an option. You cannot borrow against your SS to make housing payments etc.

As what is being proposed today is the option of having 7% in a personal account. You know math, 7% percent is not 100%. For the sake of argument lets take a worse case senario. Someone chooses a personal account and the 7% option. They lose all that money. They still have 93% of their SS coming to them. People are not going to be walking around homeless and starving with 93% of their SS money. So what you fear won't happen in a worse possible case senario. Of course the possibility of that senario even happening is about zero so you are just playing the fear card.