The cash accounting methodology used by Social Security is not used by any other Fortune 500 company.
The change forced on the Post Office to go to an accrual based accounting system has caused all sorts of issues.
Social Security has 5.3 trillion in infunded liabilities(ie money that needs to be paid by our children). Hopefully, there will be enough jobs to support this.
I tend to disagree with you just a bit. You stated in part, ". . . and for the next three decades money was set aside, with a plan to pay it out when the baby boomers retired."
It is my understanding that the idea that money is set aside for SS is an urban legend. It is actually a pay as you go system and extra funds are used elsewhere. The very first SS recipients had paid little or nothing in and were paid by current workers at that time, and the process has continued to this day. The problem seems to be the ever decreasing numbers of workers contributing vs. the ever increasing numbers of retirees taking from the system.
Also, I think if we can put aside the thought that a Ponzi scheme is essentially where fake profits are reported, SS seems to be set up with the identical mechanics of a Ponzi, in that it requires continuous payments from current workers to fund current retirees.
However, I think that the argument that SS may or may not be a Ponzi scheme tends to muddy the waters and sends the discussion off track on what is needed to rectify the issues.
So, not a Ponzi Scheme, but a redistribution of wealth... and that makes it OK? Also, if there is money set aside, why was there a threat (and some in the past) to stop the cheques? If there is money in some savings account just for SS, why would there be an issue?
Yes, I'm young (30) and do not expect to get SS because it's a non-sustainable system as it's setup. There needs to be major reform if it is to survive.
Hi David, this is great, thanks. I would like to suggest you have a look at http://volunteerstays.com/, it is for people who love to travel and want a
local experience with hosts in different countries. It's a great site
if you want to stretch your travel dollars, work exchanges in return for food and accommodation. Do check it out.
I typically pack my lunch everyday (as does my husband and step-son). I try not to keep extra cash in my pocket, because then I'm tempted to go out and buy a bagel sandwich instead. :)
Of course, every once and a while, the bagel sandwich is exactly what I need, so I'll get one. :)
Another option is to rent text books or purchase an ebook version. Unfortunately publishers have found this to be profitable and are not discounting as much as one would think. Chegg and cheaptextbooks.com are two good places to start. I remember my college days and sharing an apartment with 5 other friends to save money. We had a great time together and we split rent and food 5 ways!
Buying quality will most often save you money in the long-term. I buy Rockport shoes because they are good quality and last. I could buy a cheaper shoe but they just don't seem to last as long. Some items, especially when it comes to groceries, we will buy what is on sale because the quality is usually similar to the name brand. If you comparison shop you can find quality products on sale.
It is a ponzi scheme it will eventually fail there isn't enough workers to support the program and your totally wrong. You can't continue to pay people 10 times the amount received for the amount they put in the system. This program has been a lie where it has been used for everything else it was suppose to be used for. There is 18 different programs that have been added to sucking the money away from this program. At one time there were 40 people paying to 1 person in receiving benefits and that ratio is down to 3 to 1. They system needs changed and the younger under 40 person needs to have a choice where to put their money after all it is their money to begin with.
To everyone saying Alya has bad spelling, I'll just say this. I don't think she's spelling anything wrong. I'd say she's British. "Apoligised...practising...learnt." That's how they spell stuff there. Kind of like they use colour and favourite.
Dobie, I can understand your impression. Life isn't great yet---as I mentioned we're going to have bad credit for quite awhile--but now we have a chance at recovery before we die. Interestingly enough our mortgage was sold twice. Our first mortgage company ---the one we entered into a good faith agreement with--flew the coup two years ago. The companies who bought the loan from them have been jerks---one wouldn't assign us and account number nor give us an address to send the loan payments to for six weeks. It's hard to feel like you're bonded to something that keeps changing on the other end. They've also gotten from me in interest payments the entire amount of the original loan.
Dobie, I can understand your impression. Life isn't great yet---as I mentioned we're going to have bad credit for quite awhile--but now we have a chance at recovery before we die. Interestingly enough our mortgage was sold twice. Our first mortgage company ---the one we entered into a good faith agreement with--flew the coup two years ago. The companies who bought the loan from them have been jerks---one wouldn't assign us and account number nor give us an address to send the loan payments to for six weeks. It's hard to feel like you're bonded to something that keeps changing on the other end. They've also gotten from me in interest payments the entire amount of the original loan.
Yep! In just the past 2 months, I've won an iPad 2, an LED TV with surround sound, a Neiman Marcus Gift Card, disposable razors, an iPhone charger, and a Target Gift Card. Most of my wins come from Facebook at the moment (you can read about entering those here: http://www.wisebread.com/secrets-to-finding-and-winning-facebook-promoti...). I also have an article about some of the things I've learned about winning over the years. Some of my bigger wins since 2002 include a trip for 2 to San Francisco, a bicycle, a free year of massages, and a private movie screening for 100 guests. You can read that article here: http://www.wisebread.com/sweeping-101-what-the-real-winners-know
Thanks, and don't hesitate to ask any questions you may have about entering and winning!
I realise this is an old discussion but I will still post my comment for the benefit of anyone else who may stumble across this article. As a Christian I don't see the benefit in boycotting Christmas. What does that achieve? It avoids the pitfalls of Christmas but it avoids the benefits too - drawing people's attention to Jesus and what he did for us; time with family; exchanging gifts as a symbol of love and affection for each other.
SD said: "But, as I mentioned in my very first post, the system was being gamed. Neither you nor I approved loans to borrowers knowing they were unlikely to ever pay them back. Neither you nor I found appraisers who would okay almost any purchase price, even when it was much higher than the property really was worth -- more money for the lender and the real-estate agent that way. Neither you nor I took a hardball stance against homeowners suffering through the worst recession since the '30s. "
I agree with this. And if someone defaults on a loan that never should have been made - that is something completely different. Don't get me wrong - I do believe that the person taking the loan is just as responsible as the mortgage company making the loan and that both should suffer for their bad decision. As for appraisers - I don't really blame them much If someone is willing to sell a property for a price, and someone else is willing to buy it at that price - then that is what the property is worth. I did not do anything to prevent "homeowners suffering" as you put, other than refusing to participate in the bubble. I am not quite sure what I could have done.
SD said: "Likely Maggie's lender didn't do most of those things, either. But plenty of lenders did and now the every homeowner has been hurt, including you and me. The banksters got a slap on the wrist; a few of them went out of business, leaving golden parachutes floating toward earth. Based on the articles I've read lately, the banks seem to be doing okay for themselves once again.
So where does that leave the people acting in good faith? Sure, people like Maggie and like me and my partner could have continued to pay on houses in which we could not live. I figure it would have taken *us* the better part of a *decade* to pay off the difference between what the mortgagor said the house was worth and what it actually turned out to be worth. And that does not include the additional cost of insuring and maintaining an empty house. Meanwhile, we're old enough to have to worry about ever being employed if we lose our jobs and to think about whether we've saved up enough money for any kind of retirement. The tens of thousands we would have had to pay for that underwater house could go to much better purposes. "
I'm sorry, but that argument sound a lot like "other people did bad things, so now it's okay for me to do bad things to other people". I do not agree with that. I'm not arguing that bankers didn't really mess things up. I don't think most of them even got a slap on the wrist. And yes, if I had my way, there would be a lot more unemployed bank execs/mortgage dealers/etc. But that doesn't change the fact that most real estate transaction come down to a buyer saying "I want that house and I am willing to $x for it.". There was never a guarantee that the house would go up in value, or that it wouldn't go down in value. Granted, no expected the drop in home prices that happened in the last couple of years - but at the end of the day it is the same house that the buyer wanted. At one point in time the buyer was willing to pay the price that was asked.
SD said: "And, frankly, it's not like we walked away from this unscathed. There still was a lot of money spent getting the house on the market. And our credit will be dinged for *years*. Did you know that a bad credit rating can disqualify you from being hired for some jobs? It wasn't easy to choose a strategic default. But, financially speaking, maintaining the high moral ground in the mortgage market is a very expensive pursuit."
Yes, there are consequences to a "strategic default". I do not mean to be harsh - but there should be consequences to breaking your word and I actually think they should be more severe than they are, not less. I don't want to come off as being holier-than-thou. I have never been in your or Maggie's situation and I hope I never am. But you cannot just, as you put it, maintain the moral high ground when it isn't costly. It's easy to do the right thing when it doesn't cost you much - the real test is if you do it when it is expensive. I don't know if I would pass that test or not. I don't think anyone knows until they are actually in that situation. It's easy to type an answer on a forum, and a lot harder when it's your home, money and future actually on the line. I do understand that. But the fact that people do it, doesn't make it right.
The cash accounting methodology used by Social Security is not used by any other Fortune 500 company.
The change forced on the Post Office to go to an accrual based accounting system has caused all sorts of issues.
Social Security has 5.3 trillion in infunded liabilities(ie money that needs to be paid by our children). Hopefully, there will be enough jobs to support this.
I tend to disagree with you just a bit. You stated in part, ". . . and for the next three decades money was set aside, with a plan to pay it out when the baby boomers retired."
It is my understanding that the idea that money is set aside for SS is an urban legend. It is actually a pay as you go system and extra funds are used elsewhere. The very first SS recipients had paid little or nothing in and were paid by current workers at that time, and the process has continued to this day. The problem seems to be the ever decreasing numbers of workers contributing vs. the ever increasing numbers of retirees taking from the system.
Also, I think if we can put aside the thought that a Ponzi scheme is essentially where fake profits are reported, SS seems to be set up with the identical mechanics of a Ponzi, in that it requires continuous payments from current workers to fund current retirees.
However, I think that the argument that SS may or may not be a Ponzi scheme tends to muddy the waters and sends the discussion off track on what is needed to rectify the issues.
And with the absurdity of this post, I'm removing WiseBread from my RSS feed.
So, not a Ponzi Scheme, but a redistribution of wealth... and that makes it OK? Also, if there is money set aside, why was there a threat (and some in the past) to stop the cheques? If there is money in some savings account just for SS, why would there be an issue?
Yes, I'm young (30) and do not expect to get SS because it's a non-sustainable system as it's setup. There needs to be major reform if it is to survive.
I bring my lunch fr0m home more days than the lunches I purchase. I also bring my own pop, condiments, snacks, and treats.
I make my breakfast and lunch and bring both to work with me. It's so much cheaper than my coworkers who go out and spend $5-15 on lunch.
Hi David, this is great, thanks. I would like to suggest you have a look at http://volunteerstays.com/, it is for people who love to travel and want a
local experience with hosts in different countries. It's a great site
if you want to stretch your travel dollars, work exchanges in return for food and accommodation. Do check it out.
You're right, Social Security is not a Ponzi scheme--it's worse.
A Ponzi scheme is a voluntary contribution; Social Security is required.
I typically pack my lunch everyday (as does my husband and step-son). I try not to keep extra cash in my pocket, because then I'm tempted to go out and buy a bagel sandwich instead. :)
Of course, every once and a while, the bagel sandwich is exactly what I need, so I'll get one. :)
Another option is to rent text books or purchase an ebook version. Unfortunately publishers have found this to be profitable and are not discounting as much as one would think. Chegg and cheaptextbooks.com are two good places to start. I remember my college days and sharing an apartment with 5 other friends to save money. We had a great time together and we split rent and food 5 ways!
Buying quality will most often save you money in the long-term. I buy Rockport shoes because they are good quality and last. I could buy a cheaper shoe but they just don't seem to last as long. Some items, especially when it comes to groceries, we will buy what is on sale because the quality is usually similar to the name brand. If you comparison shop you can find quality products on sale.
"They never lied and said that your contributions were waiting to pay your pension when you retired."
Then why do so many people believe that's how Social Security works?
It is a ponzi scheme it will eventually fail there isn't enough workers to support the program and your totally wrong. You can't continue to pay people 10 times the amount received for the amount they put in the system. This program has been a lie where it has been used for everything else it was suppose to be used for. There is 18 different programs that have been added to sucking the money away from this program. At one time there were 40 people paying to 1 person in receiving benefits and that ratio is down to 3 to 1. They system needs changed and the younger under 40 person needs to have a choice where to put their money after all it is their money to begin with.
You are correct of course :) but "inter-generational transfer" sounds like some mumbo-jumbo PC rubbish. Call it what it is -- a "pyramid scheme".
Nice list! One of the most extensive I've found so far. Why not add www.coupondu.com which is a great site with daily updated coupons...
To everyone saying Alya has bad spelling, I'll just say this. I don't think she's spelling anything wrong. I'd say she's British. "Apoligised...practising...learnt." That's how they spell stuff there. Kind of like they use colour and favourite.
damn i live in the middle of montana :(
Dobie, I can understand your impression. Life isn't great yet---as I mentioned we're going to have bad credit for quite awhile--but now we have a chance at recovery before we die. Interestingly enough our mortgage was sold twice. Our first mortgage company ---the one we entered into a good faith agreement with--flew the coup two years ago. The companies who bought the loan from them have been jerks---one wouldn't assign us and account number nor give us an address to send the loan payments to for six weeks. It's hard to feel like you're bonded to something that keeps changing on the other end. They've also gotten from me in interest payments the entire amount of the original loan.
Dobie, I can understand your impression. Life isn't great yet---as I mentioned we're going to have bad credit for quite awhile--but now we have a chance at recovery before we die. Interestingly enough our mortgage was sold twice. Our first mortgage company ---the one we entered into a good faith agreement with--flew the coup two years ago. The companies who bought the loan from them have been jerks---one wouldn't assign us and account number nor give us an address to send the loan payments to for six weeks. It's hard to feel like you're bonded to something that keeps changing on the other end. They've also gotten from me in interest payments the entire amount of the original loan.
I like packing a lunch b/c the food is usually healthier and tastier. If I'm in a pinch I will buy lunch.
Yep! In just the past 2 months, I've won an iPad 2, an LED TV with surround sound, a Neiman Marcus Gift Card, disposable razors, an iPhone charger, and a Target Gift Card. Most of my wins come from Facebook at the moment (you can read about entering those here: http://www.wisebread.com/secrets-to-finding-and-winning-facebook-promoti...). I also have an article about some of the things I've learned about winning over the years. Some of my bigger wins since 2002 include a trip for 2 to San Francisco, a bicycle, a free year of massages, and a private movie screening for 100 guests. You can read that article here: http://www.wisebread.com/sweeping-101-what-the-real-winners-know
Thanks, and don't hesitate to ask any questions you may have about entering and winning!
Linsey Knerl
I realise this is an old discussion but I will still post my comment for the benefit of anyone else who may stumble across this article. As a Christian I don't see the benefit in boycotting Christmas. What does that achieve? It avoids the pitfalls of Christmas but it avoids the benefits too - drawing people's attention to Jesus and what he did for us; time with family; exchanging gifts as a symbol of love and affection for each other.
I pack, once a month I treat with co-workers at the local cafe
karenmed409 at comcast dot net
SD said: "But, as I mentioned in my very first post, the system was being gamed. Neither you nor I approved loans to borrowers knowing they were unlikely to ever pay them back. Neither you nor I found appraisers who would okay almost any purchase price, even when it was much higher than the property really was worth -- more money for the lender and the real-estate agent that way. Neither you nor I took a hardball stance against homeowners suffering through the worst recession since the '30s. "
I agree with this. And if someone defaults on a loan that never should have been made - that is something completely different. Don't get me wrong - I do believe that the person taking the loan is just as responsible as the mortgage company making the loan and that both should suffer for their bad decision. As for appraisers - I don't really blame them much If someone is willing to sell a property for a price, and someone else is willing to buy it at that price - then that is what the property is worth. I did not do anything to prevent "homeowners suffering" as you put, other than refusing to participate in the bubble. I am not quite sure what I could have done.
SD said: "Likely Maggie's lender didn't do most of those things, either. But plenty of lenders did and now the every homeowner has been hurt, including you and me. The banksters got a slap on the wrist; a few of them went out of business, leaving golden parachutes floating toward earth. Based on the articles I've read lately, the banks seem to be doing okay for themselves once again.
So where does that leave the people acting in good faith? Sure, people like Maggie and like me and my partner could have continued to pay on houses in which we could not live. I figure it would have taken *us* the better part of a *decade* to pay off the difference between what the mortgagor said the house was worth and what it actually turned out to be worth. And that does not include the additional cost of insuring and maintaining an empty house. Meanwhile, we're old enough to have to worry about ever being employed if we lose our jobs and to think about whether we've saved up enough money for any kind of retirement. The tens of thousands we would have had to pay for that underwater house could go to much better purposes. "
I'm sorry, but that argument sound a lot like "other people did bad things, so now it's okay for me to do bad things to other people". I do not agree with that. I'm not arguing that bankers didn't really mess things up. I don't think most of them even got a slap on the wrist. And yes, if I had my way, there would be a lot more unemployed bank execs/mortgage dealers/etc. But that doesn't change the fact that most real estate transaction come down to a buyer saying "I want that house and I am willing to $x for it.". There was never a guarantee that the house would go up in value, or that it wouldn't go down in value. Granted, no expected the drop in home prices that happened in the last couple of years - but at the end of the day it is the same house that the buyer wanted. At one point in time the buyer was willing to pay the price that was asked.
SD said: "And, frankly, it's not like we walked away from this unscathed. There still was a lot of money spent getting the house on the market. And our credit will be dinged for *years*. Did you know that a bad credit rating can disqualify you from being hired for some jobs? It wasn't easy to choose a strategic default. But, financially speaking, maintaining the high moral ground in the mortgage market is a very expensive pursuit."
Yes, there are consequences to a "strategic default". I do not mean to be harsh - but there should be consequences to breaking your word and I actually think they should be more severe than they are, not less. I don't want to come off as being holier-than-thou. I have never been in your or Maggie's situation and I hope I never am. But you cannot just, as you put it, maintain the moral high ground when it isn't costly. It's easy to do the right thing when it doesn't cost you much - the real test is if you do it when it is expensive. I don't know if I would pass that test or not. I don't think anyone knows until they are actually in that situation. It's easy to type an answer on a forum, and a lot harder when it's your home, money and future actually on the line. I do understand that. But the fact that people do it, doesn't make it right.
Sure, it was this one. http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Samsung+-+24%22+Tall+Tub+Built-In+Dishwasher...