Cutting Planned Parenthood Would Increase Medicaid Births, C.B.O. Says

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

9 minutes ago, Teddy B said:

Recipe here: http://www.ohbiteit.com/2013/02/testosteroni-macaroni.html

Edited March 17, 2017 by elmcitymaven
Clarity

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

Bacon is a trigger word for people that have weight issues. Please refrain 

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

38 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

Bacon is a trigger word for people that have weight issues. Please refrain 

[OriZ 3,165]

11 hours ago, smilesammich said:

sorry but, life is chaos. choices are great and we do have them but at the same time, stuff happens. life happens. some people have, through no choice of their own, financial responsibilities to people other than themselves. it seems absurd to me to think that personal financial choices should be lone predictor of a person's quality of life during working years and "retirement". it's totally unrealistic. it all comes down to how uncontrollable factors AND personal choices manipulate a person's 'prime working years'. 

 

9 hours ago, smilesammich said:

i believe we have established that working people are expendable until proven otherwise. born rich, you ain't got to prove a damn thing.

 

 

Excuse me for getting back onto the topic of the thread before we resume the silliness, but if we go back to being serious just for uno momento, I have not had a chance to reply yet earlier, I'm sorry but I don't understand how now this basically became "another tax"...wasn't this about you saving for your retirement? And now all of a sudden you're ok with paying because it helps others. Odd but ok. I am definitely not anti the poor or the elderly and I believe I've made that quite obvious throughout the years but correct me if I'm wrong. I also don't believe anybody said anything about the elderly being expendable.  We all have grandparents, not just those of us who believe it should be mandatory. And we all care about them, which is precisely why I don't think they should be forced into such low returns. Basically they are forcing them to accept about 3% annually on avg, where had they invested that same money into nothing more than  a passive index fund, the return would be at least twice as high. The reason why I say twice even though it can actually be alot more than that, is because it would depend on valuations at the level of investment. If you started investing in obscene valuations like the ones we're seeing today, or the ones we saw in 2000, or 1929, or to a lesser extent 2007, you should probably expect to see an average annual return of  around 3-6% over the next 30-40 years of your life(albeit with severe interim losses first). However if we're talking extremely undervalued levels such as the early 80's especially, but to a lesser extent 2009, and to an even lesser extent 2003, then you're looking at returns in the teens, in some cases the high teens.

 

So I mean take for example even someone like you you've mentioned before you're working poor and have no money to invest, well what if the money SS takes from you, what if instead you could have bought an index fund with that money? You would be alot wealthier many years down the line. Now you can say, well, most people don't know how to do that, they'll only end up losing, it's too risky, and that's where education which I've mentioned earlier comes in. Educate people, teach them about it, I mean who doesn't wanna make alot of money eventually so of course they will invest, most of them will anyway, if they know what the return they can actually get is, and with no more work than giving it to SS. So I'm not anti the poor I'm not anti anybody, as a matter of fact the opposite is true, the reason why I think it is such a failed system and that we shouldn't just double down on it is precisely because I'm in favor of people like yourself having a better return rather than paying for others today only for you to not only end up saving less than you could have but possibly not even getting anything at all.

 

And that might have been all the money they would have had to invest but instead it all went into SS, they had nothing else left to invest anywhere else so of course they rely on it the most, because they know nothing else and because that's what they have been forced to use all their life. Classic example of the government creating reliance. So that thing with how many of them rely on it is kind of moot to me. Also, a big reason for SS was the great depression. It wasn't necessarily because people weren't saving enough on their own, it was a bad time, but it was also a time with many less options than today to save for retirement. So we can't compare the two periods or assume if people weren't forced to invest these days they wouldn't. Today you have so many options available that we don't know what would happen and it's all speculation at this point. Unfortunately we will never find out the answer because I don't see this changing any time soon.

 

Ok, now we can resume all silliness.

 

 

[OriZ 3,165]

8 hours ago, Teddy B said:

Off with yer tallywhacker!

I knew some Clinton supporters who promised to do that if Trump gets elected. They never did, but I'm figuring it's because they didn't really have one to start with 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Note I said supporters, not voters