General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIf the government invested $100 a month
If the government were to set aside for someone $100 a month beginning at birth, and that money grew at a rate 5% above inflation, $605,000 would have been set aside by the time that person turned 66 years old. They government could keep collecting 5%, and provide the person with $30,000 a year, the equivalent of a job paying $15 an hour. When the person dies, the $605,000 could be returned to the tax payers.
edhopper
(33,606 posts)5% over inflation, I wouldn't need the Gov. savings
Massacure
(7,525 posts)I challenge you to find a a 65 year period where the S&P 500 has a CAGR lower than 5.5%.
http://www.moneychimp.com/features/market_cagr.htm
edhopper
(33,606 posts)Public money going into the stock market.
It will skew the market and enrich the 1%.
How can the market reflect buy/sell when there is so much continuous buying.
How about just raising the cap and raising the monthly.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)Want to make more than 5% on your money?
Mortgages. Yeah, building loans.
edhopper
(33,606 posts)and turn them into derivatives.
hunter
(38,325 posts)We all ought to be "trust fund" kids, even if it's just a small safe studio apartment, good food, free education, appropriate medical care, and a few generous mugs of beer or glasses of wine with dinner, or cannabis deserts.
Build mindless robots to do the crappiest most dangerous jobs, and make certain every human job pays beyond any "living wage" and is a satisfying job worth doing.
metalbot
(1,058 posts)Because that's almost exactly what you are arguing, except based on who contributes. If you run your numbers based on 50 years of SS contributions, you may be surprised that you get to about the same amount (on the order of $600k for average salary earners if you could somehow get 5% over inflation).