Aielyn said:
First of all.. PLEASE stop posting your responses INSIDE your quote of my post. It makes it frustrating to try to respond to your posts. If you want to make it easy to respond, use the numbers the way I've been doing - it makes it a lot easier to keep track of things.
2. And that's something more that the US has to fix. Saying that it's a bad idea because of the other problems is silly.
3. The point of superannuation is that some of the money you earn during your working years is kept aside ready for when you retire. Investment, etc, is intended to increase the amount of money you have in that account. But it's still your money, even if you can't access it, yourself, until you reach retirement age (although there are special circumstances that allow you to access some of it early). And you can effectively put it into a bank for the interest that way... but you still can't get at the money outside of those special cases. As for putting it into real estate for rent... first, few people have that much money in their super account that they can buy real estate with it (at least, not until near the end of their working life, at which point investment isn't a big concern). Second, real estate is a very volatile market, as demonstrated by your own country's massive screwing of the world economy due primarily to something relating to real estate.
That being said, it is possible to invest your super in real estate.
4. And you'd replace it with... what? Increased tax burden on people through full pension? Or allowing old people to completely lose out when they retire, especially those who paid into Social Security all their lives?
One of the big problems with the Libertarian movement (and I'm guessing you're libertarian of this sort) is that they have a lot to say about their ideological view on how things should be set up, but they never actually think about the negative consequences of the change, either short-term or long-term.
5. It's a cyclic problem that is experienced all over the world........ except Australia. Food for thought.
|
First of all.. PLEASE stop posting your responses INSIDE your quote of my post. It makes it frustrating to try to respond to your posts. If you want to make it easy to respond, use the numbers the way I've been doing - it makes it a lot easier to keep track of things.
OK
2. And that's something more that the US has to fix. Saying that it's a bad idea because of the other problems is silly.
its a bad idea based on USA's current situation which isn't gonna change soon
3. The point of superannuation is that some of the money you earn during your working years is kept aside ready for when you retire. Investment, etc, is intended to increase the amount of money you have in that account. But it's still your money, even if you can't access it, yourself, until you reach retirement age (although there are special circumstances that allow you to access some of it early). And you can effectively put it into a bank for the interest that way... but you still can't get at the money outside of those special cases. As for putting it into real estate for rent... first, few people have that much money in their super account that they can buy real estate with it (at least, not until near the end of their working life, at which point investment isn't a big concern). Second, real estate is a very volatile market, as demonstrated by your own country's massive screwing of the world economy due primarily to something relating to real estate.
real estate is actually pretty stable thoughout history,its just volatile because of Fiat Printing right now as are all other investments
That being said, it is possible to invest your super in real estate.
4. And you'd replace it with... what? Increased tax burden on people through full pension? Or allowing old people to completely lose out when they retire, especially those who paid into Social Security all their lives?
One of the big problems with the Libertarian movement (and I'm guessing you're libertarian of this sort) is that they have a lot to say about their ideological view on how things should be set up, but they never actually think about the negative consequences of the change, either short-term or long-term.
i wud let the old social security be there
but i wud bring in a new persion systme which pay out pension to the amount you have invested like if a billionaire invests,10million per year then he wud get the same at retirement not limited to $1000-2000
i align with Liberatarianism but i'm not an hardcore liberatrian as that would we Anarchy.I am more of a National-Socialist or Empire-Beauracracy-minded
As countries develop and progress,they need to do all this welfare as its expected by the people.
but its not that u will get everything free.
Affirmitive Action,Food Stamps,etc wud be scraped by me
5. It's a cyclic problem that is experienced all over the world........ except Australia. Food for thought.
Australia is a young country so its cycle is not as mature as USA or Europe
Also every country of region have their own cycles,they don't all go together
for example,Russian Cycles are different from Western(USA,Europe) and Chinese
