Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: SAJ

you know what this reminds me of, all the geeks who give YOU financial advice but haven't got two dimes to rub together, they are driving the 1985 Chevy Blazer OK

it is a good rule not to take financial advice from anyone unless they too are financially successful......

Krugman sounds like a guy who must not have a penny in his 401K or even have a 401K, maybe not even a penny in his savings account, he probably is in hock up to his eyeballs, living the high life in NY, and he's giving the world advice on finances and economics.....or how else besides being a fraud or liar, could he forget about those accruing PRA's

what really gets my goat about Social Security and the Canadian equivalent is that if you die, so do the benefits, in other words, Social Security is a welfare program to begin with, not a pension program......


12 posted on 05/02/2005 3:46:56 PM PDT by littlelilac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]


To: littlelilac
Oh, I imagine Herr Krugboy has a few bob tucked away. Really, it'd be quite difficult NOT to have a tidy little stack salted away, given his salaries, honoria, and royalties.

Unless, as is distinctly possible in Krugboy's case, one happens to be a total wastrel.

I should **dearly** love to go up against this quasi-Marxist loony-tune ''economist'' in a straight-up head-to-head investing/trading contest, say of 1 or 2 years' duration, and pull down his pants (metaphorically speaking) in public for all the world to see.

13 posted on 05/02/2005 3:54:20 PM PDT by SAJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: littlelilac

No one ever said that it was not a welfare program. That does not mean that it is not also a pension program. Essentially, they are both annuities paid out as a percentage of previous wages. If you want to call it welfare, an annuity, or a pension program makes little difference. However, I think that it is much more than welfare because social security is a pay as you go system in which those that pay in now will receive benefits in the future. In that sense, you are saving for the future. If it was absolute welfare, then people would be getting something for nothing and those that pay into the system would be supporting those that do not. Therefore, if it is welfare as you say it is, then personal savings accounts are a moot point. If you are not paying into the system that rewards you later, then how is the government going to create a personal savings account out of money that is earmarked for others?

There are also survivor or dependent death benefits with which one must contend - this is more of the welfare aspect of it. Additionally, the social security program provides benefits to the disabled as well. While that was not the original intention of the law, it did lay the ground work for it.


18 posted on 05/03/2005 4:35:07 AM PDT by JBev (Ahem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson