417 Comments
User's avatar
Anne's avatar

the whole "$1,000 in an account for babies" - what I haven't read is who sets up these accounts? who controls them? who is getting paid for managing them? what brokerage firm wants three million accounts of $1,000 each to manage? (3.6 million babies are born every year). Someone is going to get rich from these accounts; but not the babies.

Ari Chase-Ramos's avatar

"...would teach people all about [finance]..."

So the government engineered a complicated mechanism that doesn't exist in the free market that helps the rich dodge taxes and benefits only a certain class of people, the wealthy from big cities and the hoity-toity college-attending elites who can withdraw it tax free for college expenses, and this is supposed to be a lesson about finance?

kckitty's avatar

What does "additive" mean in this article?

RRJKR's avatar

Future historians will refer to these times as the "Age of Stupidity" or the era of "Dumbshitery"

RRJKR's avatar

During the "Socialist" Eisenhower Administration, the top income tax bracket was 91%. The bulk of FICA tax is borne by low to middle wage earners and that should not be.

RRJKR's avatar

Has President Dipshit figured out yet that WE pay the tariffs, not foreign countries?

kckitty's avatar

He will not admit it!

Fogrot's avatar

There were about 3.5 million babies born in the US last year. Let's say that number goes down just a bit to 3 million. 3*10e6*10e3 = 3*10e9 = 3 billion dollars a year. Where is this money coming from? I'm sure it won't come out of Donnie's golfing weekends, or his new blinged-up jet, or the White House ballroom, or the ICE budget. Maybe next Bessant inane plan will be to use leaves as money, since it literally grows on trees.

RRJKR's avatar

The ICE budget is the biggest boondoogle waste of taxpayer money in history. Every "illegal" could be documented in a 30 minute process, then go to work and pay taxes. NO!! we have to spend hundreds of billions of dollars rounding them up and deporting them or sending them to concentration camps. Don't dare call yourself a "conservative" if you support this kind of waste!

Zyxomma's avatar

Ta, Dok. Once upon a time, I wanted to raise the cap on Social Security. Now I want to demolish it. Make the rich pay.

RRJKR's avatar

There should be NO cap. Remove the cap and we can reduce FICA tax to less than 3%

Hank Napkin's avatar

Who shall become the ENRON of SOCIAL SECURITY? Eric? Is that you Eric?

Hank Napkin's avatar

And will we have another "Keating Five"? Of course we will!

clairence's avatar

The stock market is not a lesson in compound interest. Ffs!

GrannysKnitting's avatar

on the face of it, its a good idea, for those who can afford to keep topping it up - but a lot of people won't be able to and i suspect the fees of maintaining the account will rapidly spiral to the point where they eat whatever is in the account anyway. yet another 'good idea on paper' that they can argue isn't being utilised by the 'lazy and ungrateful' poor

Goonemeritus's avatar

The trick is to kill your relatives when the turn 65. A few generations and it could add up to a nice little nest egg.

kckitty's avatar

How about ME (66 years old) I am caring for very old parents; 89/90 and was just told that Dad/age 90 is in perfect health! wtf? I have been caring for old parents for 10 years!!!

Goonemeritus's avatar

Been there, you will miss them when they are gone.

Dudley Didwrong's avatar

Shhhhh! Don't mention this to my kids.

Tom65's avatar

I’m in the first wave of Gen X (born in ‘65) and I’m five years from retirement. I’m fortunate enough to have a robust 401k and I’m among the last who actually has a pension forthcoming, so I won’t do too badly without SS, but godammit I’ve paid into this system since I was 14 and I want my fucking money.

RRJKR's avatar

The money you pay in FICA tax does not go into an account for you. It goes to provide benefits for current recipients. When you begin to draw retirement benefits, future taxpayers (if there are any) will pay for you. Social Security has been technically in the red since day one.

Tom65's avatar

I entered into a contract with the government that, in exchange for the money taken out of my paycheck, I would have a source of income in retirement. If it’s bankrupt, or close to it, it’s because these greasy motherfuckers couldn’t keep their hands off of it.

RRJKR's avatar

Correct on both points. However to keep SS solvent we must have more current workers paying in and raise or eliminate the FICA cap. Rather than throwing people who want jobs out of the country we should be making jobs for them, Trump was always the most horrible business manager in history Everything he touched turned to shit. He has not improved with age. he’s even worse now!

Elderly John's avatar

Numbers like 9% growth were being mumbled around. I would imagine the load on these "accounts" would be on both ends, and an occasional "handling fee" might pop up when least convenient. What's the point of privatization if you can't grift off $20 or $30 million now and then?

irish379's avatar

Leave nothing to chance

Remember when Roe v Wade was "settled law" and people warning about it being overturned were derided as "chicken little's"

These pricks will not rest until every last bit of The New Deal and Great Society have been eliminated

Hank Napkin's avatar

"backtracking mode" is the key feature that allows TACO functions to function.