Social Security in the U.S. is a Ponzi Scheme

[Poor Richard Saunders]

When you have no counter argument it's better to not reply than to post something as utterly stupid as the above.

It seems you don't take your own advice.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

This person has two legs to walk on. Walking doesn't cost anything. Bus fare is another option for this person and it is fairly cheap ($780/yr in my neck of the woods). Add $780 onto his yearly expenses if you wish, otherwise this person lives in an apartment that is close enough to where he works so that he can walk to and from work each day.

So your person isn't an average American. Only 8% of households in the US don't have a car.

This person gets health insurance through his employer; that expense is taken out of his paycheck pre-tax. I've already included that expense in my calculation.

I wonder how their employer is able to buy health insurance for employees that provides all health services and drugs for free for 40 years and it only costs the employee less than $300 per month

This person lives in an apartment and utilities are included in the rent rate. I've already included that expense in my calculation.

Where can a person rent an apartment with all utilities included in the US for $1000 per month?

Donations don't cost anything.

Otherwise, add a few dollars here and there if you wish. Often enough, shirts and pants can be purchased for a few dollars each if you go to the right places or take advantage of the right sales. Lots of people sell clothes at garage sales for a little of nothing.

It must be all those garage sales and stores having fantastic sales within walking distance of this mythical person since they don't have a car.

This person gets paid for the typical holidays that private-sector workers get paid for (New Years, Memorial, Independence, Thanksgiving, Christmas, etc) 2,080 hours/year is a standard guesstimate for total hours worked per year (40hrs per week, 52 weeks per year). This person might also have overtime opportunities and work overtime for extra money.

Why are you assuming that this person owns a car? Maybe he walks to work each day. Maybe he rides the bus each day. Maybe he rides bike around. Auto insurance isn't a part of this person's expenses.

Why are you assuming that this person spends his entire working life living in an apartment that is within walking distance from their job?

See above. Gasoline isn't a part of this person's expenses.

Included in this person's rent rate.

Included in this person's rent rate.

This person has health insurance through his employer and that rate is taken out of his paycheck pre-tax. Already accounted for. See above.

And the person has no co-pays and all drugs are free? Where can the rest of us find this health care in the US? Not only that, where can we all find clinics, dentists and hospitals within walking distance of our homes?

Clothing does NOT have to cost $400/year. Not even close. See above.

Sure. Because all employers don't care if their employees show up in second hand clothes and the incorrect type of shoes.

This is all included in my calculation. See above. See my prior post. The math is there, dude.

LOL. Only if the person is a complete myth and lives rent free in your head.

I'm "admitting" that YOUR claim that they "can't" retire a millionaire is bullshit. See above. See prior post. See calculations.


I forgot nothing. See above. All necessities are included (and I was even quite generous with phone/internet).

You've done nothing other than show us that you have absolutely no clue how to read, comprehend, perform basic math calculations, or even how to "pinch a penny".

 

[gfm7175]

So you do not know what they are doing. That already showed. Trump aims to kill SS. They said they were going to stop checks as soon as next month. Then the blowback made them change. You are so proudly wrong. https://www.americanprogress.org/article/trumps-plan-defund-social-security/

How long have Democrats fear mongered over "OMG they're getting rid of SS!!!!!" ???

 

[T. A. Gardner]

I'll put you in agreeing to eliminate the Social Security that the US citizens paid into.

No, I'd rather see social security done like the federal TSP (401K) plan is operated. That is, it is invested in part in private securities at a good ROI. Imagine if say, 30 to 40% of social security monies were invested in the stock market, another 30 to 40% in various bonds, and the remainer into government securities.

Just the infusion of that much money into the stock and bond market would result in a huge increase in the US GDP. It would infuse corporations and the like with a mass of new money they would use to increase productivity.

 

[Uncensored2008]

It seems you don't take your own advice.

So, NUHN UHN then?

 

[gfm7175]

So your person isn't an average American. Only 8% of households in the US don't have a car.

1) There's no requirement for "my person" to be a so-called "average American".
2) YOUR "person" (someone making $15/hr) is NOT an "average American" either, since only 13-ish% of people in the US make $15/hr or less.

Remember, your claim was that it is NOT possible for someone making $15/hr to retire as a millionaire and that saving $300/month was required in order to do so. I'm simply showing you precisely how someone making $15/hr is perfectly capable of paying for life's necessities while stowing away $300/month, as YOU claim is required in order to retire a millionaire. It might involve walking/biking/bus riding to work rather than driving a personal automobile to work.

I never claimed that it would be a glamourous life, but it IS a possible life, which is all that is required.

I wonder how their employer is able to buy health insurance for employees that provides all health services and drugs for free for 40 years and it only costs the employee less than $300 per month

I wonder why you are running away from what is relevant and trying to distract with what is irrelevant. What is relevant is that the employee has health insurance from his employer and that the employee's cost of that health insurance is deducted from each paycheck pre-tax. It doesn't matter what the employer pays; it only matters what the employee pays.

Where can a person rent an apartment with all utilities included in the US for $1000 per month?

Wisconsin (including Madison and Milwaukee). I know first hand that it's possible because I work for a company that offers such apartments with such amenities at such prices. It's definitely not glamorous housing at such a price, but it IS housing. You can also reduce the amount of rent that you pay by having a roommate and splitting the rent between the two of you.

It must be all those garage sales and stores having fantastic sales within walking distance of this mythical person since they don't have a car.

When you're in a city, many houses ARE within walking distance. That's the very nature of living in a city. If it's a larger city (a couple of Wisconsin examples are Madison and Milwaukee), then they have public transit systems. In Madison, for example, you can buy unlimited bus fare for $65/month.

Why are you assuming that this person spends his entire working life living in an apartment that is within walking distance from their job?

Because this person (to be able to set aside $300/month) needs to "pinch pennies", and that's a good way to cut out a lot of unnecessary expenses. I used to work with someone who lived within walking distance from work and who always walked to work each day. Again, I've personally seen it. I know that the stuff I'm saying here is all possible because I've personally witnessed it all. You can't get me to "unsee" what I have already seen with my own two eyes.

And the person has no co-pays and all drugs are free? Where can the rest of us find this health care in the US?

Maybe this is a healthy person who isn't taking any drugs. Maybe this person doesn't go to the doctor much or take drugs much. Like I said at the outset, there's SOOOOO many variables involved.

Not only that, where can we all find clinics, dentists and hospitals within walking distance of our homes?

Madison, WI, for example. Usually larger cities include multiples of all that stuff within city limits. Even a small city like Columbus, WI has a clinic, a dentist, and a hospital all within city limits. If in Madison, then guess what, there's a bus system for $65/month.

Sure. Because all employers don't care if their employees show up in second hand clothes and the incorrect type of shoes.

Why do you look down on second hand clothes as if they are filthy rags? Much second hand clothes are actually quite nice yet. In fact, I received plenty of second hand clothes from a family member a while back and much of it was really nice dress shirts and pants. There was even a three piece suit and some ties included in there!

You seem quite snobbish and detached from the reality of a person who "pinches pennies".

LOL. Only if the person is a complete myth and lives rent free in your head.

Such people are very real (even if they aren't the "average American" in the wage earning sense). You're just too snobbish and look down on them. The VAAAAAAAAAAAAST majority of Americans make more than $15/hour btw, so this whole thought exercise is an extreme example, but it shows that it's still possible for such a person to retire a millionaire if they choose to live a rather unglamorous life in order to make it work.

 

[Nordberg]

No, I'd rather see social security done like the federal TSP (401K) plan is operated. That is, it is invested in part in private securities at a good ROI. Imagine if say, 30 to 40% of social security monies were invested in the stock market, another 30 to 40% in various bonds, and the remainer into government securities.

Just the infusion of that much money into the stock and bond market would result in a huge increase in the US GDP. It would infuse corporations and the like with a mass of new money they would use to increase productivity.

Markets crash, SS was set up to be as certain as possible.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

1) There's no requirement for "my person" to be a so-called "average American".
2) YOUR "person" (someone making $15/hr) is NOT an "average American" either, since only 13-ish% of people in the US make $15/hr or less.

26 years ago about 50% of people made $15 or less. You seem to think 40 years is 365 days long.

Remember, your claim was that it is NOT possible for someone making $15/hr to retire as a millionaire and that saving $300/month was required in order to do so. I'm simply showing you precisely how someone making $15/hr is perfectly capable of paying for life's necessities while stowing away $300/month, as YOU claim is required in order to retire a millionaire. It might involve walking/biking/bus riding to work rather than driving a personal automobile to work.

When did I make that claim that you are now attributing to me? I said they would have to save MORE than what they were paying in FICA.

I never claimed that it would be a glamourous life, but it IS a possible life, which is all that is required.

It would be an impossible life to maintain for 40 years without an incredible amount of luck. No vacations or any other travel. No going out to bars or restaurants. No going to the movies or a sporting event. No friends. It sounds like they would have to be you, holed up in your apartment spending all your time on the internet.

I wonder why you are running away from what is relevant and trying to distract with what is irrelevant. What is relevant is that the employee has health insurance from his employer and that the employee's cost of that health insurance is deducted from each paycheck pre-tax. It doesn't matter what the employer pays; it only matters what the employee pays.

The problem isn't that their employer is paying some of the health insurance. The problem is that almost no insurance covers 100% of all costs. Even the premium plans require everything to go through their network of providers. who would all have to be within walking distance of your mythical person. The ability to walk there in the middle of winter if you had trouble breathing because of the flu.

Wisconsin (including Madison and Milwaukee). I know first hand that it's possible because I work for a company that offers such apartments with such amenities at such prices. It's definitely not glamorous housing at such a price, but it IS housing. You can also reduce the amount of rent that you pay by having a roommate and splitting the rent between the two of you.

When you're in a city, many houses ARE within walking distance. That's the very nature of living in a city. If it's a larger city (a couple of Wisconsin examples are Madison and Milwaukee), then they have public transit systems. In Madison, for example, you can buy unlimited bus fare for $65/month.

Because this person (to be able to set aside $300/month) needs to "pinch pennies", and that's a good way to cut out a lot of unnecessary expenses. I used to work with someone who lived within walking distance from work and who always walked to work each day. Again, I've personally seen it. I know that the stuff I'm saying here is all possible because I've personally witnessed it all. You can't get me to "unsee" what I have already seen with my own two eyes.

When did they retire as with a million dollars in their retirement accounts? Since you claim to have seen it surely that must be the case.

Maybe this is a healthy person who isn't taking any drugs. Maybe this person doesn't go to the doctor much or take drugs much. Like I said at the outset, there's SOOOOO many variables involved.

Yes, there are so many variables involved which is why the likelihood is low and would require a lot of luck in avoiding the many things that confront people in real life.

Madison, WI, for example. Usually larger cities include multiples of all that stuff within city limits. Even a small city like Columbus, WI has a clinic, a dentist, and a hospital all within city limits. If in Madison, then guess what, there's a bus system for $65/month.

I am curious if you can find one household with working age people in Columbus that doesn't have a car.

Why do you look down on second hand clothes as if they are filthy rags? Much second hand clothes are actually quite nice yet. In fact, I received plenty of second hand clothes from a family member a while back and much of it was really nice dress shirts and pants. There was even a three piece suit and some ties included in there!

When did I say I looked down on second hand clothes. I am curious when the last time was you actually went to a second hand store and looked at prices.

You seem quite snobbish and detached from the reality of a person who "pinches pennies".

ROFLMAO. You really have no clue about how and why people spend money or what things cost in the real world.
I was putting $2000 into an IRA in the late 80's while earning about $25,000. But at that point, rents were $300 and food for a month was $100.

Such people are very real (even if they aren't the "average American" in the wage earning sense). You're just too snobbish and look down on them. The VAAAAAAAAAAAAST majority of Americans make more than $15/hour btw, so this whole thought exercise is an extreme example, but it shows that it's still possible for such a person to retire a millionaire if they choose to live a rather unglamorous life in order to make it work.

The VAAAAAAAAAST majority of Americans did NOT make more than $15 an hour every year for the last 40 years. Is it possible to save a million dollars making $15 an hours? Yes, with a lot of luck. Is it likely that 100% of Americans would be able to retire with over one million dollars if they simply invested their FICA money in a retirement account? No. That would be impossible.

One million in savings would result in an annual retirement payout of $40,000 to stay within the 4% needed to last them their lifetime. Not exactly a grand retirement.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

No, I'd rather see social security done like the federal TSP (401K) plan is operated. That is, it is invested in part in private securities at a good ROI. Imagine if say, 30 to 40% of social security monies were invested in the stock market, another 30 to 40% in various bonds, and the remainer into government securities.

Just the infusion of that much money into the stock and bond market would result in a huge increase in the US GDP. It would infuse corporations and the like with a mass of new money they would use to increase productivity.

And where is this money coming from? Taking that much money out of government spending would result in a huge decrease in the GDP and a major recession if not a depression.

I don't think you quite understand how the stock market works. The price of TESLA stock going up $19 a share today doesn't mean TESLA suddenly got $10 billion dollars in new money. It means TESLA didn't get one cent in new money. The only way for a corporation to get new money is to issue new shares which dilutes the values of the existing shares.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Markets crash, SS was set up to be as certain as possible.

If the stock market truly crashed and didn't recover within a year or two--at most--then we as a nation have bigger things to worry about than whether you will get social security and be able to retire comfortably.

 

[Nordberg]

If the stock market truly crashed and didn't recover within a year or two--at most--then we as a nation have bigger things to worry about than whether you will get social security and be able to retire comfortably.

You miss the point. The market goes up and down. The costs of healthcare, the cost of living and hospital profits only go up.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

You miss the point. The market goes up and down. The costs of healthcare, the cost of living and hospital profits only go up.

No, you miss the point. You don't invest in the stock market short-term. You invest for the long run. Over some 20-year period, any 20-year period, the stock market outperforms bonds, or simple interest-bearing accounts. The objective is to get social security where it is paying its way and giving people a decent ROI just as they get from an IRA, 401K, or other investments. That the return on social security money put in is on the order of about 1%. Even conservative investing over 20 or 30 years, or more, would result in a 5 to 10% ROI depending on what you invested in and how lucky and aggressive you were.

That means for equal amounts invested, you do better than with social security.

The cost of living, and that sort of thing have no impact on the ROI you make on money invested. Sure, they impact how far that money will go, but that's separate from the amount you get from the investment itself.

 

[gfm7175]

26 years ago about 50% of people made $15 or less. You seem to think 40 years is 365 days long.

You seem to think that today is 26 years ago, or even 40 years ago. It's not. You are also ignoring your original argument (see below).

Did apartment housing cost $1,000/month back in 1999? In Madison, it was around half that at the time, so if you wish to apply $15/hr to even 26 years ago, let alone 40 years ago, then you'd have to cut the housing expense in half. You'd also have to cut the phone and internet prices down significantly, as well as the food prices. Saving $300/month off of a $15/hr wage back then would be much EASIER than it is today, and it's possible even TODAY (as I've shown) let alone back then.

1999 pricing:

$23,400 - $6,000/yr housing = $17,400
$17,400 - $1,500/yr groceries = $15,900
$15,900 - $900/yr (phone, internet) = $15,000

$15,000/yr > $3,600/yr

When did I make that claim that you are now attributing to me? I said they would have to save MORE than what they were paying in FICA.

See post #20 (along with all of your other posts). Your whole point was that someone could not make $15/hr and save enough money to retire as a millionaire over the course of 40 years. NOTE: You didn't say anything about "40 years ago" until after you were proven wrong; you originally just said "over [the course of] 40 years".

I showed you how that person COULD do so, but now you keep trying to change the rules of the discussion because you realized that you said a stupid thing (but won't openly admit it).

It would be an impossible life to maintain for 40 years without an incredible amount of luck.

Difficult is not impossible. You seem to think that this person would make $15/hr for 40 years straight.

No vacations or any other travel. No going out to bars or restaurants. No going to the movies or a sporting event. No friends.

Not every life is glamorous.

It sounds like they would have to be you, holed up in your apartment spending all your time on the internet.

I don't have an apartment and I'm outside most of the time during weekends.

The problem isn't that their employer is paying some of the health insurance. The problem is that almost no insurance covers 100% of all costs. Even the premium plans require everything to go through their network of providers. who would all have to be within walking distance of your mythical person. The ability to walk there in the middle of winter if you had trouble breathing because of the flu.

You keep forgetting about the bus system. You must REALLY hate it. Maybe this person treats ailments at home instead of going to the doctor.

When did they retire as with a million dollars in their retirement accounts? Since you claim to have seen it surely that must be the case.

You really can't follow along with a conversation, can you?

Yes, there are so many variables involved which is why the likelihood is low and would require a lot of luck in avoiding the many things that confront people in real life.

IOW, you're admitting that it IS possible. Thank you.

I am curious if you can find one household with working age people in Columbus that doesn't have a car.

Columbus is a small town with no public transit, so I bet that most citizens there have cars. Madison is a different story though.

When did I say I looked down on second hand clothes.

Your very last comment. You acted as if employers would be up in arms about people showing up in second hand clothes (as if those clothes were filthy rags).

I am curious when the last time was you actually went to a second hand store and looked at prices.

You can easily get clothes at such stores for a few dollars per item. It is rather easy to get cheap clothes.

ROFLMAO. You really have no clue about how and why people spend money or what things cost in the real world.

That's YOUR issue, dude.

I was putting $2000 into an IRA in the late 80's while earning about $25,000. But at that point, rents were $300 and food for a month was $100.

Exactly. $15/hr was easier to live on back then than it is now.

The VAAAAAAAAAST majority of Americans did NOT make more than $15 an hour every year for the last 40 years.

The VAAAAAAAAAAAAAST majority of Americans will NOT make $15/hr every year for 40 years. The VAAAAAAAAAAAAAST majority of Americans paid MUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCH less for expenses for the last 40 years than they do now.

Is it possible to save a million dollars making $15 an hours? Yes, with a lot of luck.

Precisely. So just admit that you were wrong and we can end this exchange.

Is it likely that 100% of Americans would be able to retire with over one million dollars if they simply invested their FICA money in a retirement account? No. That would be impossible.

Per your savings requirements, yes. Under $300/month is definitely less than $300/month.

One million in savings would result in an annual retirement payout of $40,000 to stay within the 4% needed to last them their lifetime. Not exactly a grand retirement.

Sure, but it IS a retirement nonetheless.

It is possible to retire a millionaire while making $15/hr. Not at all easy, not at all extravagant, but still possible.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

You seem to think that today is 26 years ago, or even 40 years ago. It's not. You are also ignoring your original argument (see below).

Did apartment housing cost $1,000/month back in 1999? In Madison, it was around half that at the time, so if you wish to apply $15/hr to even 26 years ago, let alone 40 years ago, then you'd have to cut the housing expense in half. You'd also have to cut the phone and internet prices down significantly, as well as the food prices. Saving $300/month off of a $15/hr wage back then would be much EASIER than it is today, and it's possible even TODAY (as I've shown) let alone back then.

1999 pricing:

$23,400 - $6,000/yr housing = $17,400
$17,400 - $1,500/yr groceries = $15,900
$15,900 - $900/yr (phone, internet) = $15,000

$15,000/yr > $3,600/yr

See post #20 (along with all of your other posts). Your whole point was that someone could not make $15/hr and save enough money to retire as a millionaire over the course of 40 years. NOTE: You didn't say anything about "40 years ago" until after you were proven wrong; you originally just said "over [the course of] 40 years".

I showed you how that person COULD do so, but now you keep trying to change the rules of the discussion because you realized that you said a stupid thing (but won't openly admit it).

You are the one that made the claim it was impossible to do the math and yet here you are claiming the math proves you right when the math is impossible.

Difficult is not impossible. You seem to think that this person would make $15/hr for 40 years straight.

Not every life is glamorous.

I don't have an apartment and I'm outside most of the time during weekends.

You keep forgetting about the bus system. You must REALLY hate it. Maybe this person treats ailments at home instead of going to the doctor.

You really can't follow along with a conversation, can you?

IOW, you're admitting that it IS possible. Thank you.

Columbus is a small town with no public transit, so I bet that most citizens there have cars. Madison is a different story though.

Your very last comment. You acted as if employers would be up in arms about people showing up in second hand clothes (as if those clothes were filthy rags).

You can easily get clothes at such stores for a few dollars per item. It is rather easy to get cheap clothes.

Clothes for a year -
5 collared shirts- $50 ($20-50 each new)
10 t-shirts - $50
9 underwear - $20 - (New, because who wants used?)
10 socks - $30 - (New, because who wants used?)
3 - jeans - $30 ($40-70 each new)
3- other pants - $30
1 - shoes - $20
1- winter boots - $30
1 - light coat - $15
3 sweatshirts - $30
1 - winter coat - $20
1 - pair gloves - $10
2 load of laundry per week @ $8 per week - $416 (don't forget to wash your sheets and towels.)
Total - $751
And that is some pretty basic mostly used clothing. Used means it won't last as long as new.

That's YOUR issue, dude.

Exactly. $15/hr was easier to live on back then than it is now.

And back then 50% of wage earners earned less than $15. You don't seem to get it. in 2000, 20% of households made less than $18,000.

The VAAAAAAAAAAAAAST majority of Americans will NOT make $15/hr every year for 40 years. The VAAAAAAAAAAAAAST majority of Americans paid MUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCH less for expenses for the last 40 years than they do now.

I see you have abandoned your position that the math is impossible to do.

Precisely. So just admit that you were wrong and we can end this exchange.

Per your savings requirements, yes. Under $300/month is definitely less than $300/month.

Sure, but it IS a retirement nonetheless.

But it isn't guaranteed. What are you doing for the people that had their retirement savings stolen by unscrupulous investment gurus?

It is possible to retire a millionaire while making $15/hr. Not at all easy, not at all extravagant, but still possible.

Never said it was impossible. It seems you want to beat the shit out of your strawman.

 

[ADreamOfLiberty]

There is a lot of math in this thread, but there is no need for it.

The social security trust fund is entirely "invested" in US treasury bonds.

That's like "investing" in the mongol horde, the SS, or the mafia. A debt from thieves can only be fulfilled by stealing.

Since the social security administration's only real assets are YOUR PROPERTY AND INCOME we can safely say it was a pyramid scheme and that it doesn't matter how little you can make in private investment since it's above the negative net utility provided by SSA stealing from you (twice) and then paying you back a percentage of your own wealth.

 

[ULTRA MAGA]

You are the one that made the claim it was impossible to do the math and yet here you are claiming the math proves you right when the math is impossible.

Clothes for a year -
5 collared shirts- $50 ($20-50 each new)
10 t-shirts - $50
9 underwear - $20 - (New, because who wants used?)
10 socks - $30 - (New, because who wants used?)
3 - jeans - $30 ($40-70 each new)
3- other pants - $30
1 - shoes - $20
1- winter boots - $30
1 - light coat - $15
3 sweatshirts - $30
1 - winter coat - $20
1 - pair gloves - $10
2 load of laundry per week @ $8 per week - $416 (don't forget to wash your sheets and towels.)
Total - $751
And that is some pretty basic mostly used clothing. Used means it won't last as long as new.




And back then 50% of wage earners earned less than $15. You don't seem to get it. in 2000, 20% of households made less than $18,000.

I see you have abandoned your position that the math is impossible to do.

But it isn't guaranteed. What are you doing for the people that had their retirement savings stolen by unscrupulous investment gurus?

Never said it was impossible. It seems you want to beat the shit out of your strawman.

Why do you continue to be unable to grasp that there is no relationship between your SS and your expenses?

Completely irrelevant. I think TDS is at the root of these mental incapabilities.

 

[Ross Dolan]

You are the one that made the claim it was impossible to do the math and yet here you are claiming the math proves you right when the math is impossible.

Clothes for a year -
5 collared shirts- $50 ($20-50 each new)
10 t-shirts - $50
9 underwear - $20 - (New, because who wants used?)
10 socks - $30 - (New, because who wants used?)
3 - jeans - $30 ($40-70 each new)
3- other pants - $30
1 - shoes - $20
1- winter boots - $30
1 - light coat - $15
3 sweatshirts - $30
1 - winter coat - $20
1 - pair gloves - $10
2 load of laundry per week @ $8 per week - $416 (don't forget to wash your sheets and towels.)
Total - $751
And that is some pretty basic mostly used clothing. Used means it won't last as long as new.




And back then 50% of wage earners earned less than $15. You don't seem to get it. in 2000, 20% of households made less than $18,000.

I see you have abandoned your position that the math is impossible to do.

But it isn't guaranteed. What are you doing for the people that had their retirement savings stolen by unscrupulous investment gurus?

Never said it was impossible. It seems you want to beat the shit out of your strawman.

You are attempting to rationally explain why the simplistic suggestions made by right-wingers for complex political/economic issues are, for the most part, bullshit and counter productive. You would have a better chance of success if you turned your efforts to teaching quantum mechanics to honey badgers. Honey badgers, after all, are smarter and more open-minded than those folk.

 

[gfm7175]

You are the one that made the claim it was impossible to do the math and yet here you are claiming the math proves you right when the math is impossible.

You keep making this false claim even though anyone can go back to the beginning of the conversation and see that I actually said that there's so many variables involved that it ends up being random numbers at the end of the day.

Clothes for a year -
5 collared shirts- $50 ($20-50 each new)
10 t-shirts - $50
9 underwear - $20 - (New, because who wants used?)
10 socks - $30 - (New, because who wants used?)
3 - jeans - $30 ($40-70 each new)
3- other pants - $30
1 - shoes - $20
1- winter boots - $30
1 - light coat - $15
3 sweatshirts - $30
1 - winter coat - $20
1 - pair gloves - $10
2 load of laundry per week @ $8 per week - $416 (don't forget to wash your sheets and towels.)
Total - $751
And that is some pretty basic mostly used clothing. Used means it won't last as long as new.

I don't pay anywhere near $750 per year for clothes, and who goes through that much clothing each year? I have a shirt from grade school that I still wear to this very day (over TWENTY years later!). I have shirts that I've regularly worn to work for many years now.

And back then 50% of wage earners earned less than $15. You don't seem to get it. in 2000, 20% of households made less than $18,000.

You keep shifting all over the place instead of staying focused. You said $15/hr, so stick with it. You said that a person can't retire on $15/hr (then later admitted that one COULD do so).

I see you have abandoned your position that the math is impossible to do.

I see that you're still under the delusion that I ever held that position in the first place. SEE ABOVE.

But it isn't guaranteed.

But it IS possible.

NOTHING is guaranteed, dude. That's the whole point that I'm making when I say that these numbers are all essentially random numbers to begin with because there's soooooo many variables involved and soooooo many assumptions that must be made.

What are you doing for the people that had their retirement savings stolen by unscrupulous investment gurus?

What are you doing for people who lost a large chunk of their retirement savings in a stock market crash?

Never said it was impossible.

YES YOU DID!!!!! STOP DENYING YOUR OWN POSTS, DUDE!!! You're currently contradicting yourself, first saying that it was impossible (via your position against mine) but now saying that it IS possible.

It seems you want to beat the shit out of your strawman.

It seems you want to beat the shit out of your paradox.

It IS possible to retire as a millionaire off of a $15/hr wage.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

You keep making this false claim even though anyone can go back to the beginning of the conversation and see that I actually said that there's so many variables involved that it ends up being random numbers at the end of the day.

Since it is only random numbers how can you say with any confidence that anyone can save a million dollars? They can't be random numbers and an exact result.

I don't pay anywhere near $750 per year for clothes, and who goes through that much clothing each year? I have a shirt from grade school that I still wear to this very day (over TWENTY years later!). I have shirts that I've regularly worn to work for many years now.

My list doesn't include $750 for clothing. It includes $416 to wash the clothing since you can't wear dirty clothes.
I doubt you have only 10 T-shirts in your drawer. They are lucky to last 50 washings. I have T-shirts that are 15 years old but I rarely wear them. I don't walk everywhere but I walk enough that I have to replace my walking shoes every year at over $100 per pair.

You keep shifting all over the place instead of staying focused. You said $15/hr, so stick with it. You said that a person can't retire on $15/hr (then later admitted that one COULD do so).

I see that you're still under the delusion that I ever held that position in the first place. SEE ABOVE.

Random numbers can't result in an exact number. Your position is clearly one where the math is impossible.

But it IS possible.

NOTHING is guaranteed, dude. That's the whole point that I'm making when I say that these numbers are all essentially random numbers to begin with because there's soooooo many variables involved and soooooo many assumptions that must be made.

What are you doing for people who lost a large chunk of their retirement savings in a stock market crash?

YES YOU DID!!!!! STOP DENYING YOUR OWN POSTS, DUDE!!! You're currently contradicting yourself, first saying that it was impossible (via your position against mine) but now saying that it IS possible.

Cite where I said it was impossible.

It seems you want to beat the shit out of your paradox.

It IS possible to retire as a millionaire off of a $15/hr wage.

No paradox. The only paradox would be your claim that it is random numbers and then you get a result that isn't random.

 

[gfm7175]

Since it is only random numbers how can you say with any confidence that anyone can save a million dollars?

Because it's happened many times already.

They can't be random numbers and an exact result.

Who claimed any "exact result"?

My list doesn't include $750 for clothing. It includes $416 to wash the clothing since you can't wear dirty clothes.

Ahhhh, yup you're right. I missed that final line item.

I doubt you have only 10 T-shirts in your drawer. They are lucky to last 50 washings. I have T-shirts that are 15 years old but I rarely wear them. I don't walk everywhere but I walk enough that I have to replace my walking shoes every year at over $100 per pair.

I have more than that. I also make more than $15/hr. They last more than 50 washings. My hiking shoes are less than $100 and they last for years. I take lunch time walks (a couple miles a day) and I walk for miles most weekends.