Official State of the Union Thread

[phunky.buddha]

Originally posted by pissedoffsol@Feb 3 2005, 01:36 PM
it's on cspan for liek the next 5-days straight. lol

[post=455893]Quoted post[/post]​

True.

 

[Battle Pope]

Originally posted by pissedoffsol@Feb 3 2005, 01:27 PM
real estate is too unstable.

its all about precious metals.

silver, gold, platinum baby

[post=455937]Quoted post[/post]​

All about the plat y0

 

[Cashizslick]

Originally posted by pissedoffsol@Feb 3 2005, 12:55 PM
and i bet you aren't on welfare either.

the majority of americans can plan and save for themselves....

others who can't even make it by today can't afford the dime to put away to save for later.

[post=455809]Quoted post[/post]​

True, but the mere fact that our country supports a system that encourages unproductive lifestyles is detrimental to our society.

The current welfare system is supposed to help provide for people who cannot find a job or are unable to work -> thats all good in theory, but when teenage girls in Springfield MA find out its easier for them to sit around and have kids then to work, the system fails.

 

[nfn15037]

How about this: We got rid of social secutiry and teach people....GASP....financial responsibility! The gov't should't have to be responsible for saving for anyones retirement. Get an IRA and a savings account and quit bitching about the $800 a month you would have gotten from social security.

 

[Airjockie]

Originally posted by pissedoffsol@Feb 3 2005, 03:27 PM
real estate is too unstable.

its all about precious metals.

silver, gold, platinum baby

[post=455937]Quoted post[/post]​

Dont count on the metals for your retirement...they are stable now...but forty years from now...they may be worth absolutly nothing...other things might hold up their value...gold might be super plentiful, or synthictical made...and will be the value of copper...same can be said about other materials...like platinum may be worth the same as carbon fiber today....and other metals might be super rare.......

as we venture more into our earth, and now space travel is around the corner...it's like the time when spice was the only value....

40 years is a damn long time.....and we've already seen what about 20 years has done to the world...from "pong" to GT4....from a huge ass building for a computer to palm pilots....


We do not know the future.....

 

[Celerity]

Originally posted by nfn15037@Feb 3 2005, 05:18 PM
How about this: We got rid of social secutiry and teach people....GASP....financial responsibility! The gov't should't have to be responsible for saving for anyones retirement. Get an IRA and a savings account and quit bitching about the $800 a month you would have gotten from social security.

[post=455982]Quoted post[/post]​

Someone finally gets it !

And if you're poor, then there is no better place in the world to be poor than in the US. Also, remember to differentiate Welfare from Social Security.

I'm also sure that the government won't let you rot in a box. What they are intending is to make government assistance harder to come by than it is today. It's like in 40 years there won't be any money in the pockets of the government. If your stocks went bust on the eve of your retirement - Or if you're too old to work (Remember, it's tough for people over the age of 40 to get work unless they are seriously skilled) then they won't abandon you.

Who knows, perhaps they will even have the money to give you assistance (not just unemployment) during any times out of work. Tax breaks for taking care of your parents, not that tax breaks will be needed. What he's talking about is taking the $100.. $200 or even more per week you give to FICA, SS, and your overall taxes back to you. A plan like this goes hand in hand with the administrations flat-tax plan.

Then you'll see fair taxing. All this "No billionaire left behind" talk will ebb for the more enlightened "You own a business that gives 100's of people work, You shouldn't be punished by extremely high taxes" philosophies.

That Philosophy, by the way, is what everyone is foaming at the mouth for. Tax cuts aren't aimed "at the rich". The old-money people like the Rockefellers aren't given any tax break. The tax break is for the president of your company (Perhaps even you) for strengthening the economy.

I can lead into that more as well, Email me if you want.

-> Steve

 

[Celerity]

Originally posted by Airjockie+Feb 3 2005, 05:19 PM-->

pissedoffsol

@Feb 3 2005, 03:27 PM
real estate is too unstable.

its all about precious metals.

silver, gold, platinum baby

[post=455937]Quoted post[/post]​

Dont count on the metals for your retirement...they are stable now...but forty years from now...they may be worth absolutly nothing...other things might hold up their value...gold might be super plentiful, or synthictical made...and will be the value of copper...same can be said about other materials...like platinum may be worth the same as carbon fiber today....and other metals might be super rare.......

as we venture more into our earth, and now space travel is around the corner...it's like the time when spice was the only value....

40 years is a damn long time.....and we've already seen what about 20 years has done to the world...from "pong" to GT4....from a huge ass building for a computer to palm pilots....


We do not know the future.....

[post=455984]Quoted post[/post]​

This is also brilliant thinking from someone in the know. Not stated because he's my best friend, but because he knows (As an experienced adult) that investments are good, but the best way to save money is by making sound financial decisions and purchases. BRIAN.



-> Steve

 

[Airjockie]

Example given...

I bought the AE86, put about a thousand hours of work into it, blew it up, fixed it, blew it up again, dumped all the money into to it, and had the hopes that the drift phase and a rich kid would buy it out from me for more than what I put into it...

in short, I dump $6K's plus into it, to much work into it, too many headaches, and a kid is coming up to buy it from me for less than half of what I put into it....and sadly.....he's got the connections, and more parts, and a brand new...not rebuilt, zero mile crate engine going in it, and more goodies to make it awesome...so what I started will only be half of what that car will be.

right now I'm also taking a huge gamble on this new house I got...I bought it for $169Ks, I'll prolly dump about $50K's into it, and it might end up being worth about $225Ks on the market...but the location and the house next to me might only be worth about $150KS..at the time I move on..so I'll lose again.


Ohh well...I'll just enjoy what I have, what I built, and what I can do for a while..

I got the 401K..and will soon start doing the stock market, and I might get into the metals...but I'm not going to depend on just one source for my future...and when I get out of the game...I'm moving to Thailand to open up a diving shop...in about 40 years, artifical lungs will be availible for us hard smokers, and body replacement clones will have grown me a new body to use...hell...I've only seen 32 years so far..and from what has changed since I was a kid...I can only imagine whats in the future....

 

[Battle Pope]

Lofty dreams, there, Airjockie. I'm sure everything will work out though.

Even in just my short 19 years, I've learned that almost nothing you purchase will appreciate in value.

 

[ahedau]

This is what bothered me about last night's speech...

Afghanistan - check
Iraq - Check
Syria - next?
Iran - better watch out!
North Korea - play along or else...

Bush is a lame duck prez in the first month of his second term. He basically has two years before he looses all political clout. As a negotiator, you do not open up the process with what you will settle for, you open it up at a high enough number that the opposition will work to an amount that is still palatble to you.

Rather than bitch & moan about the President's lofty opening shot for reforming SS, why don't they come up with an alternative? I think this is really hurting the Dems. They just complain about Bush but don't offer any meaningful solutions.

Let's hope that BOTH sides are able to resolve this problem (I hope we can all agree there IS a problem) without partisan bickery.


EDIT:

I've learned that almost nothing you purchase will appreciate in value.

if there was ever an exception, real estate/land is it.

 

[Celerity]

Originally posted by Airjockie+Feb 3 2005, 06:33 PM-->

Example given...

I bought the AE86, put about a thousand hours of work into it, blew it up, fixed it, blew it up again, dumped all the money into to it, and had the hopes that the drift phase and a rich kid would buy it out from me for more than what I put into it...

in short, I dump $6K's plus into it, to much work into it, too many headaches, and a kid is coming up to buy it from me for less than half of what I put into it....and sadly.....he's got the connections, and more parts, and a brand new...not rebuilt, zero mile crate engine going in it, and more goodies to make it awesome...so what I started will only be half of what that car will be.

You could have had that too... Had you decided to make the car a priority, and putz about getting a house.

So many Americans, myself included (Shit, myself ESPECIALLY) Have grown used to a world where anything can be ours. And I'm all pissed off that I can't have the hot car and the neat house and the awesome job. Shit, there are people who are happy as hell in, say, Malaysia who are all excited as hell that working on $20 a day, they can get a car !

I could, right now, afford some of the best steel out there. I could get a new car, a 01 Civ Si, S2000 or anything like that - And I could pull it off. But then, where would that branch my future to ?

Honda people ! Come back to your roots ! Poor cars with low-buck go-fasties for cheap insurance !

Airjockie@Feb 3 2005, 06:33 PM
..and from what has changed since I was a kid...I can only imagine whats in the future....

[post=456048]Quoted post[/post]​

Yeah, You were telling me something about how quickly "the Wheel" turned to Drifting

-> Steve

 

[ahedau]

Originally posted by Blanco@Feb 3 2005, 10:20 PM
It's all well and good to say that Welfare is for the lazy, when you're not a single parent working two jobs and relying of Welfare to fill in the gaps. Stop looking at the stereotype and look at the people who really need it. Welfare benifits have already been cut dramatically. It's nice to know that Americans are so willing to help their fellow Americans in a time of need. We're there for the rest of the world, but our own people can fend for themselves.

As far as Social Security, it should be part of the retirement plan and not the entire thing. A personal savings account with long-term high interest would be a far more stable idea than stocks. It's not difficult to have $1 million to retire on when you're 65 if you start a savings account in your 20's. This same principle could serve for SS taxes put into a government held personal retirement account, collectable under the same conditions. That takes SS taxes out of a pool and puts it into the individual's hands, you were out of work for five years and didn't pay any taxes, then you don't get anything into your SS account in that time and you don't get as big of a payoff when you retire. Just one of my "armchair politician" spur of the moment thoughts. Feel free to flame it to Hell and back to Allah.

[post=456143]Quoted post[/post]​

problem w/ welfare is that its too easy to be a freeloader. When my wife came off when I got my current job with great benefits the social worker was down right RUDE about it. When she went on WIC with our second child the social workers were worse than rude that she didn't--make that wouldn't apply for welfare despite her many cries that she didn't need it. Are there people that need welfare, sure. It's great that we have it. I just wish we did more skills training as a requirement for benefits. But this thread ain't about welfare.

We shouldn't be using the SSA surplus interest to fund government programs. The dems like the status quo, th President isn't quick to shake that tree. If we stop using the interest (we weren't supposed to ever start) then we'd have to raise taxes to make up for the loss in "revenue."

If George gets his way as explained in his address, someone is going to inherit a tax increase. G.W. wants his cake and to eat it too. Let's see what he winds up with.

Like I said, I don't care who comes up with a better SSA plan or tax code for that matter, flat-tax, national sales tax, I don't care. JUST DO IT!!

 

[DarkHand]

Originally posted by nfn15037@Feb 3 2005, 04:18 PM
How about this: We got rid of social secutiry and teach people....GASP....financial responsibility! The gov't should't have to be responsible for saving for anyones retirement. Get an IRA and a savings account and quit bitching about the $800 a month you would have gotten from social security.

[post=455982]Quoted post[/post]​

That's all well and good, but it goes against my theory that a large majority of the inner city and poverty-level people in this country are kept that way almost purposely; Essentially, the rich need shoulders to stand on.
And Social security is a major part of that. Keep them from weening off the government to keep them in a constant state of poverty. Remove social security from the equasion without removing the poverty-dependance part and we're in for huge trouble.

 

[Cashizslick]

Originally posted by Blanco@Feb 3 2005, 10:20 PM
It's all well and good to say that Welfare is for the lazy, when you're not a single parent working two jobs and relying of Welfare to fill in the gaps. Stop looking at the stereotype and look at the people who really need it.

[post=456143]Quoted post[/post]​

Well, this is kinda hard to do when the number of people who are seriously in need of welfare are vastly outweighed by those who leech off the system.

Dont get me wrong, im not saying this system is wrong and that it doesnt help people, i just think that it needs to become harder to get.

 

[OldEMaltLiQuoR]

Social Security is supposed to help gaurantee someones retirement. By putting the money into personal accounts and depending on the performance of the stock market over the long run, your'e taking away this gaurantee and adding a risk factor.
I would hate to hear 40 years from now that all the money that I invested in my personal account is not available because the market has taken a turn for the worse.

Also, once you start diverting money from SS to personal accounts, you have to lower the age @ which people can still start recieving benefits. So instead of 30yrs from now, the system will in all actuality start failing 20yrs from now. That affects people that we are very close to like our parents.

 

[Battle Pope]

Originally posted by OldEMaltLiQuoR@Feb 4 2005, 08:43 AM
Social Security is supposed to help gaurantee someones retirement.

[post=456310]Quoted post[/post]​

The way we're spending it all, this theory is fubar'd now anyway!

 

[Cashizslick]

Originally posted by OldEMaltLiQuoR@Feb 4 2005, 10:43 AM
Social Security is supposed to help gaurantee someones retirement. By putting the money into personal accounts and depending on the performance of the stock market over the long run, your'e taking away this gaurantee and adding a risk factor.
I would hate to hear 40 years from now that all the money that I invested in my personal account is not available because the market has taken a turn for the worse.

[post=456310]Quoted post[/post]​

Wow, you obviously dont realize the ENTIRE SS system will be bankrupt in 40 yrs.


Buddy, i would rather gaurentee my own retirement by investing this money. Hell, even risk averse people like you could buy a 40yr Government bond that you would at least earn money for you to have access to when you retired (if the US govt does manage to default on a bond, we are all doomed anyways). Also, SS sux because if you die, you cant leave that money to somebody -> under Bush's new proposal, you COULD leave your personal account to your loved ones.


Malt, im not saying this to flame on you, but its amazing how so many people who are ignorant of market forces and economics hate this policy.
This plan can only benefit young people like you and me.

 

[OldEMaltLiQuoR]

Originally posted by Cashizslick@Feb 4 2005, 11:23 AM


Buddy, i would rather gaurentee my own retirement by investing this money. Hell, even risk averse people like you could buy a 40yr Government bond that you would at least earn money for you to have access to when you retired (if the US govt does manage to default on a bond, we are all doomed anyways). Also, SS sux because if you die, you cant leave that money to somebody -> under Bush's new proposal, you COULD leave your personal account to your loved ones.

[post=456320]Quoted post[/post]​

Thats exactly what I'm saying... investing your money is not a gaurantee. If you put $100 in the stock market today, on Feb 4 2006 there's a chance you'll have $500 and there's a chance that you'll have $25. And thats what people don't seem to realize.

I know that the current system is kapput, but we need to realize that private accounts may not be the cure-all that a lot of people think they are.

 

[Cashizslick]

Originally posted by OldEMaltLiQuoR+Feb 4 2005, 11:32 AM-->

Thats exactly what I'm saying... investing your money is not a gaurantee. If you put $100 in the stock market today, on Feb 4 2006 there's a chance you'll have $500 and there's a chance that you'll have $25. And thats what people don't seem to realize.

I know that the current system is kapput, but we need to realize that private accounts may not be the cure-all that a lot of people think they are.

[post=456326]Quoted post[/post]​

You didnt even read what i said so i will say it again.

1.) Personal Accounts are a gaurenteed retirement plan.

2.) You can choose to put ur money in the stock market OR (as i said before) you can purchase Govt or Corporate Bonds which are much less risky. You could even put ur money in the Bank at a whopping 2% interest.

3.) Personal accounts can be left do loved ones in a trust (i.e. will).

Malt, think of what a personall account would mean - you could buy stocks, buy Bonds, or open your OWN bank account - being in charge of your OWN future.
>>> if having the freedom to use your hard earned money in whatever way you want is not a OldEMaltLiQuoR@Feb 4 2005, 11:32 AM
cure-all

[post=456326]Quoted post[/post]​

then i dont know what is.

 

[Battle Pope]

It's not the "cure all". Nothing is going to be a "cure all". Anything you do with your money is a gamble. There is no such thing as a secured retirement, SSA or otherwise.

SSA money is going away gradually.

What do you want to do? Trust the goverment's irresponsible spending habits to provide you with "guaranteed retirement", or take your retirement into your own hands and possibly have money to live on when you're 65?