The consequences of vanishing wealth
You’ve probably seen the headline version: “U.S. families see prosperity plunge” is how this morning’s AJC front page puts it. And unfortunately, “plunge” is an accurate term.
The median American family — the mythical family at the dead center of the U.S. economy, with half of families being richer and half being poorer — saw its net worth plunge from $126,400 in September of 2007 to just $77,300 in September of 2010, a decline of $49,100 in perceived wealth in just three years’ time.
Again, “perceived” wealth is the accurate term. Much of that net worth came in the form of rapidly increasing home values, a rise that ended right about the time that the 2007 survey by the Federal Reserve was being conducted. And as we know, it wasn’t just homeowners or Fed survey-takers who perceived that home value as real wealth that could be counted upon and even spent. So did credit-card companies, banks, mortgage lenders, security brokers, Wall Street, purchasers of credit default obligations and federal regulators.
When the bubble burst, everybody who had counted upon that false wealth being real took a hit. But nobody took a harder hit than the homeowner. According to one recent study, almost a third of all homeowners with a mortgage now owe their lenders more than the home is worth, which means their property reduces rather than enhances their net worth.
It’s no secret what happens when millions of people suddenly discover that they are several tens of thousands of dollars more poor than they thought. They stop spending and buying. When they stop spending and buying, companies start laying people off. When companies start laying people off, net worth plummets even deeper, and a destructive cycle begins.
Some of the lost wealth reflected above has been recovered since the most recent Fed survey was taken in September 2010. By then, the Dow Jones average had recovered some but not all of its previous value and stood at roughly 10,500. Today it’s at roughly 12,400, depending on how the market takes the news out of Europe.
And as usual, the decline in net worth was not felt equally across all income groups, as the chart below indicates. Because of the scales involved, net worth of families in the bottom 20 percent of incomes don’t show up well, but they fell by roughly a third between 2001 and 2010. However, the biggest hit was experienced by those in the 60-to-90 percent income groups, essentially the upper middle class. They were most likely to have a lot of their wealth tied up in their homes, and because they make a good amount of money and spend most of what they make, they also tend to be the group that drives a consumer economy.
Or not.
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
719 comments Add your comment
TaxPayer
June 12th, 2012
3:02 pm
Poor Ben still hasn’t figured out that those Bush tax cuts could have earned him over $85,000 per year in fed and payroll tax-free income. Now that’s a deal.
Paul
June 12th, 2012
3:02 pm
Thulsa
Good luck with your second paragraph. Personally, I feel conservatives’ blind allegiance with the ideology (defense spending is good and social programs are bad, for example) is but one of several reasons people leave the Republican Party.
But keep fighting the good fight. All this stuff goes in cycles. Just a short while ago people were wondering if the Republican Party was done for as a viable political entity. Now look at it. Same thing may happen with Democrats.
It’s just how politics works.
Jay
June 12th, 2012
3:03 pm
I’ll save you some trouble. $13,144 compounded over 30 years at 2% is $543,891.
And if inflation averages just 3 percent — which compounds as well — you’ve lost money on that investment, because your half-mill is worth less than the 13K was originally.
Simple math, as someone said.
Ben Shockley
June 12th, 2012
3:05 pm
By the way, for you guys making $30K per year or so like Steve, Paul, getalife, stands for decibels, etc, you can do the same math and find out that social security is a crappy deal for you too.
Ben Shockley
June 12th, 2012
3:06 pm
Taxpayer seems to think he knows something about the Bush tax cuts that everyone else doesn’t know. It’s all he talks about. It’s kind of sad, really.
Aquagirl
June 12th, 2012
3:06 pm
overall defense spending still is significantly less than the big 3 social welfare programs which as your link shows still constitute the majority of the budget as I pointed out earlier.
The beauty of that chart is it discourages lumping a bunch of stuff under “social welfare programs.” I see that did not work for you. What a surprise.
Your original point was whining about section 8 and other “undesirable” programs redistributing wealth and OH MAH PRECIOUS WALLET. That chart points out quite clearly those programs are not where the money is going. Sorry to blow your outrage out of the water but dancing and deflecting doesn’t help. Your money is being redistributed to programs from which you personally benefit, unless you strangle your parents when they turn 64 or are content to let them die unattended.
If you’d like to actually give a number or percentage of what portion of your taxes go towards non-Thulsa approved programs, maybe you’d look more concerned and less obsessive about “those people” getting your money. My bet is that hell will freeze over first because you know exactly how that number would make you look—-obsessive over “those people.”
stands for decibels
June 12th, 2012
3:07 pm
Jeez, this thing’s still trolling…
$13,144 compounded over 30 years at 2% is $543,891.
um…
http://www.moneychimp.com/calculator/compound_interest_calculator.htm
actually it’s 23,808.54.
but ok, I get your point, which is that if you were ADDING this amount every year, its half a million. If you actually get that annual interest rate, which people aren’t these days, but ok.
And if you’re going to draw that same income off of the 2% this is earning, it’s going to pay you an income that’s less than half of what SS actually pays, (and without a COLA). But hey, you’ve got half a million.
Face facts: if you’re not a sociopath who hates your fellow citizens, SS is a great deal. If you’re a name-shifting a-hole who picks fights online, you probably think it’s a cheat. It’s obvious where you stand.
really gone now.
Ben Shockley
June 12th, 2012
3:07 pm
Jay, an S&P500 Index fund has returned 9.23$ annually over the lst 20 years. Thats more than 2% higher than inflation.
simple math, like you said.
Ben Shockley
June 12th, 2012
3:08 pm
9.23%
Ben Shockley
June 12th, 2012
3:09 pm
Ummmmmm, actually my math assumes $13,144 contributed every year for 30 years.
Like I said, analysis isn’t your forte…
stands for decibels
June 12th, 2012
3:09 pm
oh, and thanks Jay, for stating the other obvious thing. you know, the whole “What’s a half million gonna be actually worth” dealie.
really really gone now…
the cat
June 12th, 2012
3:09 pm
Ben-I do not think you are all that as you seem to think you are. If you are bragging about making 100K/year you should know that is paltry to most people with two incomes in the family. And for you then to imply that someone making 30K is beneath contempt, well there is a word I would call you but Jay would get angry.
How does it feel in that rarefied air where you live?
Paul
June 12th, 2012
3:10 pm
stands for decibels
Don’t you know that you’re not supposed to be here because Ben overwhelmed you with facts and logic and you can’t handle his intellect so you ran away?
Golly stands, don’t you read any memos?
Ben Shockley
June 12th, 2012
3:10 pm
“Face facts: if you’re not a sociopath who hates your fellow citizens, SS is a great deal. If you’re a name-shifting a-hole who picks fights online, you probably think it’s a cheat. It’s obvious where you stand.”
Wow…very adult response.
Looks like stands doesn’t like to be confronted with facts.
getalife
June 12th, 2012
3:10 pm
Get your corrupt hands off SS and Medicare gop.Period.
Steve
June 12th, 2012
3:11 pm
Ben (the troll) Shockley – seeing that I gross over 115K a year…have SS, and put 12% into my 401K, I should be faring well (unless the market keeps tanking – I’m only 45 and have my funds invested moderately aggressively).
Normal Free...Pro Human Rights Thug...And liking it!
June 12th, 2012
3:11 pm
Paul,
Speaking of the Republican Party, I told this last night, but I got a Mitt Romney “Give me money and help save America” (spelled correctly this time) letters. I couldn’t help myself, but I took out my Sharpie and on the send in donation part, I wrote, “Not only no, but Hell no!”. I mailed it back to them this morning. I know I was being childish, but it felt sooooo good.
If there was still a moderate, willing to work across the aisle, looking out for all Americans,
GOP out there, I’d be with them, but….Today’s GOP is…well, it’s not me, is all….
stands for decibels
June 12th, 2012
3:11 pm
read much, Harry?
your point, which is that if you were ADDING this amount every year, its half a million.
Bags of hammers laugh at you.
really, truly, deeply gone now.
DBCOOPER
June 12th, 2012
3:12 pm
N.C. Poll: Romney 48, Obama 46
Very important swing state and site of Democrat Convention.
Not looking good for the O team. America will speak loudly in November. Very Loudly.
Paul
June 12th, 2012
3:12 pm
Oh, and sfd, don’t contradict Ben on compound interest calculations. He has a masters in finance and earns over six figures and is really, really, really smart.
So you can’t be right.
Ben Shockley
June 12th, 2012
3:12 pm
Looks like the libs don’t appreciate having the absurdity of social security laid out in black and white.
Kind of sad, really.
Thulsa Doom
June 12th, 2012
3:12 pm
Aquagirl,
Sorry dear but your link only verifies what I’ve been saying all along- that the big 3 plus other social welfare programs constitute the majority of the budget. Dancing around that point doesn’t change the central point of what I said. Nuff said.
Joe Hussein Mama
June 12th, 2012
3:12 pm
B. Shockley — “Paul, if you want to call Social Security an insurance plan instead of a retirement plan”
There’s no “want” involved. As I told you yesterday, that’s what it IS.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OASDI
“why don’t you compare how much life insurance you can buy for a $13,144 annual premium and get back to us on what a great deal it is. But then that would wreck your narrative.”
OASDI isn’t and has never been represented to be *life* insurance. But hey, don’t let that wreck your narrative.
getalife
June 12th, 2012
3:12 pm
ben,
cons lie so I don’t believe you.
Thanks.
the cat
June 12th, 2012
3:13 pm
dbcooper-the women of the country have not yet begun to roar. We will in good time-something about an October surprise………….
Ben Shockley
June 12th, 2012
3:13 pm
“really, truly, deeply gone now”
buh-bye
Tommy Maddox
June 12th, 2012
3:13 pm
Oh Obama’s doing a swell job. Just ask anybody!
Don't Forget
June 12th, 2012
3:14 pm
TD, I think the big thing that’s holding back financial capital is in one word uncertainty.
That is probably true although I put more emphasis on global concerns especially since that is what the markets are responding to these days. I’d one other thing to your list though. There is still a lot of bad debt out there and the banks are hoarding cash in case those debts fail. In other words, it’s a multiplier of the uncertainty.
josef
June 12th, 2012
3:14 pm
Not to be the teacher here, but y’all keep saying that “Ben thinks this,” or “Ben thinks that.” Your subject and verb do not agree.
MICK
I see you were right on my question.
AND BTW
The memo is out. We should be talking about Elizabeth Warren, but not the cheekbones this time.
TaxPayer
June 12th, 2012
3:14 pm
Poor Ben. I take it from his response that he really does not know about the Bush tax cuts and how those qualified dividends and capital gains are taxed.
Ben Shockley
June 12th, 2012
3:14 pm
“Oh, and sfd, don’t contradict Ben on compound interest calculations. He has a masters in finance and earns over six figures and is really, really, really smart.”
Being smarter than a liberal doesn’t necessarily make you really, really, really smart.
Ben Shockley
June 12th, 2012
3:15 pm
Poor Taxpayer. He has some point to make about the Bush tax cuts, but is just not articulate enough to actually make it.
That Black Guy
June 12th, 2012
3:16 pm
Steve
June 12th, 2012
10:27 am
Our CONGRESS’s failure to lead. Presidents aren’t dictators, they don’t have ultimate power.
_______________________________________________________________________
So using that logic:
They weren’t Bush’s wars
It wasn’t Bush’s economic meltdown
Right?
the cat
June 12th, 2012
3:16 pm
Ben-I’ll bet you are real fun at parties aren’t you?
Ben Shockley
June 12th, 2012
3:16 pm
““Oh, and sfd, don’t contradict Ben on compound interest calculations. He has a masters in finance and earns over six figures and is really, really, really smart.”
I am flattered that you have committed my resume to memory though.
zeke
June 12th, 2012
3:17 pm
must be a slow work day for the upper crust
Joe Hussein Mama
June 12th, 2012
3:17 pm
B. Shockley — “I’ll save you some trouble. $13,144 compounded over 30 years at 2% is $543,891. Would you rather have half a million or a social security check? LMAO.”
Why can’t I have *both*?
“By the way, wise investing easily gets you 7% or so annually with very little risk, and as I said, the older you get, the more you move into safer investments.”
Shrug. Why are you positing that the two are mutually exclusive?
“Liberals just really aren’t too bright.”
I’m bright enough to know that I can have SSI *and* multiple income streams from various retirement and investment plans. You, however, seem to be claiming that we’re saying the exact opposite.
Thulsa Doom
June 12th, 2012
3:17 pm
“Personally, I feel conservatives’ blind allegiance with the ideology (defense spending is good and social programs are bad, for example) is but one of several reasons people leave the Republican Party.”
Paul,
And you’re probably right. I have seen several con politicians like Palin say that defense cuts are off the table which to me is astounding and simply not realistic. My hope is that they are just saying that and using that position as a bargaining chip to extract cuts in other areas and then relenting and going along with defense cuts.
Anyway Doomy out for a little while to get some more work done. Ya’ll play nice and have fun.
Jefferson
June 12th, 2012
3:18 pm
Ben thinks he is a know it all smarty pants, but I don’t think so.
Joseph
June 12th, 2012
3:18 pm
I will give Obama credit for one thing. That knows how to burn through money better than any President in our nations history!
http://www.foxbusiness.com/government/2012/06/12/may-budget-deficit-up-from-year-earlier/
Paul
June 12th, 2012
3:19 pm
Normal
It’s like I said to Thulsa – you’ve explained why people leave the GOP.
the cat – from earlier regarding Romney and his finger on the trigger. I will agree I despise his foreign policy advisors (and I picked ‘despise” carefully). But if he wins, I hope he goes the Bush route in his first month: fire them, marginalize them. It’s just a hope is all, but these guys are like roaches, leaving government service, hiding out in think tanks and the private sector, then scurrying back when there’s another chance for them to try out their ideology without any accountability.
People like Romney spent years identifying b@llshi!!ers and phonies in their careers. I hope that’s one skill that transfers over to the public sector.
And one other thing to keep in mind: I think most presidents, partway thru their first honest to goodness National Security Briefing, have a real “oh no” moment. When they realize just what’s out there, what’s come close, what’s developing, and what responsibility they, as president, have.
Jay
June 12th, 2012
3:19 pm
You chose the government bond example, Ben, not I. And you chose it specifically to avoid the problem of what happens in stock market collapses.
Now, when the fallacy of your approach is exposed, you suddenly want to switch back to index funds as your approach, which gets you back to the problem of stock market collapses.
Question: what would a Dow index fund have done over the last five years? Clue: The Dow five years ago was at 13,500; today it is at 12,400. Now adjust for inflation and ….
Ben Shockley
June 12th, 2012
3:20 pm
“You, however, seem to be claiming that we’re saying the exact opposite.”
No, I’m saying that social security is a ponzi scheme ripoff, and I said it quite clearly. I can’t be responsible for liberals who can’t comprehend simple concepts.
Thulsa Doom
June 12th, 2012
3:20 pm
” In other words, it’s a multiplier of the uncertainty.”
Don’t forget,
That probably says it best. Doomy out.
Normal Free...Pro Human Rights Thug...And liking it!
June 12th, 2012
3:20 pm
Ben Shockley
Ben, I’ll admit to making just over 34,000.00 a year right now, and I’ve never made over 18.00 an hour in my lifetime. What I have done, however, is save. When I take my Social Security next March, I will do so with two rental homes, my primary home, two cars and a motorcycle paid for. I will also have my other Government check, Navy Retirement, as a back up. My wife will have her S.S. check too. We will be OK.
If I had not cashed in my IRA’s when I did, and I’ll admit to you that I listened to my gut, I would have lost just about all of it. But I used that money to pay off everything just before the housing bubble burst. I was very lucky, but now I’m set for a…not great, but comfortable life of retirement. I can even work part time doing what I want and not what I have to. Yeah, used properly S.S. is a good thing.
josef
June 12th, 2012
3:21 pm
SFD
“Bags of hammers laugh at you.”
I don’t care who you are, thass funny.
Joe Hussein Mama
June 12th, 2012
3:21 pm
B. Shockley — “Ummmmmm, actually my math assumes $13,144 contributed every year for 30 years. Like I said, analysis isn’t your forte…”
It pretty clearly isn’t yours, either, because you appear to be leaving out the fact that one’s *employer* contributes half of that amount. The employee’s contributing only half of that to get your end result.
getalife
June 12th, 2012
3:21 pm
joe,
I laugh when the pee party say they are fighting the gop establishment.
Watch c span to see the gop house spend like there is no pee party.
Paul
June 12th, 2012
3:21 pm
josef 3:14
Oh, I know. But it flows kind of nicely, doesn’t it? Kinda like Jimmy Kimmel doing Karl Malone.
Jay
June 12th, 2012
3:23 pm
Ben, I think your masters is in bluster, not finance.
Ben Shockley
June 12th, 2012
3:23 pm
“Question: what would a Dow index fund have done over the last five years? Clue: The Dow five years ago was at 13,500; today it is at 12,400. Now adjust for inflation and ….”
And like I said a couple of pages ago, if your age is such that the market will not have time to recover should there be a downward move, you move out of the market and into safer instruments.
I chose the governmetn bond example when challenged to provide a zero-risk example. But then you knew that.
There was, and is, no fallacy to my approach. Myself, and millions of other ordinary Americans, are investing for their own future quite successfully. It does require personal responsibility and independent thinking, and I know those things are like kryptonite to liberals.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
June 12th, 2012
3:24 pm
Ben thought he could move the goalposts and not get caught.
Ben thought wrong.
Socialism — BOO!
Jay
June 12th, 2012
3:25 pm
A good — and honest — financial adviser would never have forgotten to account for inflation in promising what a gov’t bond investment would produce. It’s elementary.
Ben Shockley
June 12th, 2012
3:25 pm
“It pretty clearly isn’t yours, either, because you appear to be leaving out the fact that one’s *employer* contributes half of that amount. The employee’s contributing only half of that to get your end result.”
To comprehend what a joke social security is, you have to include all the funding.
Like I said, not your forte…
Jay
June 12th, 2012
3:25 pm
I certainly would not want to be a client of someone who would misrepresent outcomes in that fashion.
Aquagirl
June 12th, 2012
3:26 pm
but your link only verifies what I’ve been saying all along- that the big 3 plus other social welfare programs constitute the majority of the budget.
Except…that’s not what you said. Did you want me to re-post your 1:16? Memory getting soft? Not that what you’re saying now makes any sense, any more than “the big three plus the U.S. Geological Survey fund constitutes the majority of the budget.”
Ah, Doomy, at least you’ve learned to skedaddle when you’ve cornered yourself. Enjoy your workday while the gub’mint redistributes your wealth to programs that benefit YOU. Why this is an outrage is only known to the fake conservative mind.
Joseph
June 12th, 2012
3:26 pm
I wonder when Romney wins and Repubs take the Senate will he say dems can come along for the ride but have to ride in the back of the bus?
the cat
June 12th, 2012
3:26 pm
Gosh-being called out by Jay over and over and over. Ben-give it up!
Joe Hussein Mama
June 12th, 2012
3:26 pm
B. Shockley — “No, I’m saying that social security is a ponzi scheme ripoff, and I said it quite clearly.”
No, you quite clearly said “Would you rather have half a million or a social security check? LMAO.”
You are *quite clearly* representing SSI and retirement investment income as being two different things.
“I can’t be responsible for liberals who can’t comprehend simple concepts.”
Can your condescension, boy. Your characterization of OASDI as being somehow equivalent to *life* insurance makes the rest of your ranting quite suspect.
If you want an adult conversation, then act like it and quit being a Richard. If, OTOH, you’re only here for a confrontation, maybe you should consider the fact that our host has begun calling your on your goalpost-shifting.
Ben Shockley
June 12th, 2012
3:27 pm
A good – and honest – financial advisor woudl tell you that you can realize returns that are many times better outside of social security than within.
Jay
June 12th, 2012
3:27 pm
“I chose the governmetn bond example when challenged to provide a zero-risk example. But then you knew that.”
Yes, I did know that. I also knew that the example you offered of how wonderful the return would be was in fact total bull, a fact that you yourself have now conceded as well.
Ben Shockley
June 12th, 2012
3:28 pm
“Gosh-being called out by Jay over and over and over. Ben-give it up!”
He has yet to make a valid point.
Paul
June 12th, 2012
3:28 pm
Normal
I’m happy for you. ‘Listening to your gut’, intuition, whatever – can’t explain it but it works.
Navy retirement? Good for you and the humility with which it comes across. Same with your decisions and how they worked out. No chest thumping or air of superiority. You illustrate what I was trying to get across to a couple other people the other day who may tout past service and possessions, but it comes across in an entirely different way.
Really, thank you.
TaxPayer
June 12th, 2012
3:28 pm
Ben,
I done told you about the tax break for qualified dividends and capital gains that are in the Bush tax cuts. Besides, shouldn’t you be aware of them given your claim to have a degree in finance. Taxes are covered somewhere along the way in obtaining that degree, aren’t they Ben. By the way, unless you are self-employed, you would not be having more than 6.2 percent withheld for social security. Then, there is you 1.45 percent contribution toward Medicare which would be to cover your retirement health insurance (or 80% of it) that you would receive in addition to your retirement social security benefit. For the maximum of $106,800 taxed at 6.2 percent, once the reduction in payroll taxes is removed, that would be $6622 per year for you to invest on your own to cover that social security benefit and $1549 per year to invest to cover your future health insurance.
Ben Shockley
June 12th, 2012
3:29 pm
Jay, investors routinely realize returns 2% above the rate of inflation with very little risk.
True or false?
Ben Shockley
June 12th, 2012
3:30 pm
Tapayer…this is really getting boring…my employer’s match goes into the fund too. Unlike liberals, I’m aware that money doesn’t grow on trees.
Very sad.
Thulsa Doom
June 12th, 2012
3:31 pm
Jay,
I gotta go and I’m not sure what Ben is referring to exactly but my guess is that he may be talking about a lot of indexed annuities out there that have a guaranteed principal, a guaranteed minimal interest credit such as 3%, and locked in gains that are either monthly or yearly.
For example if you have one of these and its a year long point to point annuity and the market is down for the year you may just get the 3% interest credited and that’s it- principal is guaranteed also.
In a month to month annuity you lock in gains each month the market is up and those gains are credited to your account. You don’t get to keep all the gain since you are not taking any risk but you typically get to keep 75% of the gain for example.
Lets say the market is down for the year but it lost about 10% just this past month. But it was up substantially for most of the year. In a month to month you would have locked in gains every month that it was up and in this past month where we had a correction you wouldn’t have lost anything- not even the previous gains you had already locked up. You just wouldn’t have made anything this past month is all.
I suspect this is what Ben is talking about. He probably has a month to month annuity that locks in his gains and is indexed to the S&P 500. He will make money several months out of the year but will never lose any money- not the principal nor the already credited gains from the up months.
Joe Hussein Mama
June 12th, 2012
3:32 pm
B. Shockley — “To comprehend what a joke social security is, you have to include all the funding.”
What a dishonest misrepresentation.
You included all the inputs into SSI, and then used the same amount to calculate your private-investment numbers. However, you failed to account for the fact that if you *opted out* of SSI somehow, you wouldn’t HAVE half of that amount, as it’s employer-contributed.
You’re no financial expert, Shockley, and if you’re using the same sort of sleight of hand on your taxes, I sincerely hope you don’t get a visit from the IRS and the GA DOR any time soon.
“Like I said, not your forte…”
I’d rather have an *honest* financial adviser, thanks. ‘Analysis’ like yours is liable to lead to trouble.
Ben Shockley
June 12th, 2012
3:32 pm
Oh no…a guy named Hussein just caled me “boy”…guess that was supposed to be a slam? Try harder.
josef
June 12th, 2012
3:32 pm
NORM
I see you’re all set to leech off the government the rest of your life…
zeke
June 12th, 2012
3:33 pm
and let us not forget who was at the helm for 8 years ben…..repubs not all that smart either…and w let chris cox and his morons draw checks while finance fundamentals eroded…thank you repubs
Joseph
June 12th, 2012
3:34 pm
Ben Shockley:
If you keep throwing facts and data at these libs their heads will explode!!!
Thulsa Doom
June 12th, 2012
3:34 pm
Ben Shockley
June 12th, 2012
3:27 pm
A good – and honest – financial advisor woudl tell you that you can realize returns that are many times better outside of social security than within.
Yep. Even very safe investments like annuities blow away the return on SS.
josef
June 12th, 2012
3:34 pm
I betcha Ben owns stock in Whole Foods…
Joe Hussein Mama
June 12th, 2012
3:34 pm
B. Shockley — “Try harder.”
Tell us again how comparing SSI to life insurance makes any kind of financial sense. (laughing)
They BOTH suck
June 12th, 2012
3:35 pm
“It will spoil his fantasy that the bottom 50% of wage earners are paying their own way.”
Ben: lower ranking military enlisted personnel all said a collective “thank you”
Butch Cassidy
June 12th, 2012
3:35 pm
Damn, just got here. What is this, the Ben Shockley show? I read the article about middle class wealth dropping (which has been happeningfor about 30 years) and all of a sudden I’m in a rant as to how good or bad social security is. WTF?
TaxPayer
June 12th, 2012
3:36 pm
And Ben, once I start collecting my social security payout, I will recover my full investment in three years. But the Medicare benefit is the real benefit. I’ll recover that paltry amount probably in less than a year assuming a comparable free market health insurance plan will cost anything close to what I’m currently seeing plans run for retirement age folks. Damn, I’m glad I’m over 55 since that is the magic cutoff age that Republicans have decided to use in their future plans for entitlement elimination.
Paul
June 12th, 2012
3:36 pm
Ben Shockley still thinks social security is his investment for his retirement.
Ben Shockley doesn’t consider widows and orphans and old people.
Did Ben Shockley have a mother?
St Simons - official approver of E Warren's cheekbones
June 12th, 2012
3:36 pm
wow, for a while I thought ajcdotcom had gone into some joint venture
with Clearchannel to publish their transcripts here in some godawful
guerilla marketing scheme.
Ben Shockley
June 12th, 2012
3:36 pm
“However, you failed to account for the fact that if you *opted out* of SSI somehow, you wouldn’t HAVE half of that amount, as it’s employer-contributed.”
If you take half that amount and use realistic conservative returns, you get a similar result.
Social Security is a joke..can’t polish a turd…
bman
June 12th, 2012
3:37 pm
3 1/2 years into his term & the bad news continues to flow. But hey, tell Obama “you’re in”.
Normal Free...Pro Human Rights Thug...And liking it!
June 12th, 2012
3:37 pm
Paul,
Thank you, but I’ve always tried to listen to that “whisper”
————————
Josef,
Don’t cha know? I’m a librul freeloader, good fer nuttin but handouts!
TaxPayer
June 12th, 2012
3:38 pm
Ben,
Your employer match would not go into your pocket if payroll taxes were eliminated. That goes to the company CEO for a job well done.
barking frog
June 12th, 2012
3:38 pm
Ben Shockley
Why don’t you opt out of
SS and Medicare ?
getalife
June 12th, 2012
3:38 pm
They may raise the retirement age.
The market is unsteady with uncertainty.
That whole congress has to act our we go back to a recession thingie is lurking.
The EU is collapsing.
Austerity failed.
Jay
June 12th, 2012
3:38 pm
False, Ben.
What was the Dow back in January of 2000, well over 12 years ago? It was 11,700.
Just to keep pace with inflation would require the Dow to be at 15,600 today. It is instead at 12,400.
So I would say false. Are you telling your clients that you can get them inflation plus 2 percent “with very little risk,” Ben?
If so, the SEC might be interested in talking with you.
josef
June 12th, 2012
3:39 pm
I was saying last night I didn’t think Ben was WOW ’cause he wasn’t posting fast enough. I think I might ought to revise that.
zeke
June 12th, 2012
3:40 pm
bman, your arse would be fighting in iran if yosemite sam mccain was in charge and the top 1% would have even more of your wealth…..in all likelihood
Joseph
June 12th, 2012
3:40 pm
Ben you can’t tell these dimwits nothing. Their master told them everything is fine….
Joe Hussein Mama
June 12th, 2012
3:40 pm
B. Shockley — “If you take half that amount and use realistic conservative returns, you get a similar result.”
So? You’re *still* comparing SSI to a retirement plan, which is manifestly is not.
Anyone who wants a “private account,” as Congressional Republicans like to call it, can open one TODAY if they want to, and SSI doesn’t inhibit them in any way from doing just that.
“Social Security is a joke..can’t polish a turd…”
It’s only a turd if you think it’s a retirement plan. Which you pretty clearly seem to think it is.
Ben Shockley
June 12th, 2012
3:41 pm
“Tell us again how comparing SSI to life insurance makes any kind of financial sense. (laughing) ”
Tell us again how social security is anythign but a ponzi scheme (laughing)
Joseph
June 12th, 2012
3:41 pm
barking frog:
Because the gubmint forces you to pay in….
josef
June 12th, 2012
3:41 pm
PAUL
“Did Ben Shockley have a mother?”
At least not in Spanish!
bman
June 12th, 2012
3:42 pm
Zeke…excuses to the bitter end eh
Adam
June 12th, 2012
3:42 pm
Can any of you wise lefties point out a time when increased taxes led to less spending by the Federal Government?
Can you point out a time when DECREASED taxes led to less spending by the Federal Government?
TaxPayer
June 12th, 2012
3:42 pm
Ben,
You really really truly don’t know about how to get that $85,000 without paying any federal income tax or payroll tax thanks to the Bush tax cuts, do you? Be honest now.
barking frog
June 12th, 2012
3:43 pm
Joseph
Exactly. Just like income tax.
So the entire argument is
silly.
They BOTH suck
June 12th, 2012
3:43 pm
josef
Ben is like the little kid whose mother has told him to be quiet or stop doing something and he keeps saying, “but mama….”,
but mama…….”, “but mama…………..”
Joe Hussein Mama
June 12th, 2012
3:43 pm
B. Shockley — “Tell us again how social security is anythign but a ponzi scheme”
If SSI = Ponzi Scheme, then so is every insurance policy, no matter what sort of insurance it is.
Once again, SSI is *insurance.* Not a retirement plan.