Investing in the next generation

[Hawkeye21 1,853]

What do you guys think of this proposal?  I think it's pretty interesting.

 

[weepaws 2,459]

Maybe they can help the parents, it’s pretty darn sad that one pays 7-8 dollars for one gallon of gas, and one gallon of milk.  Those children’s future is in doubt.  

[JustinCharge 2,397]

49 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

What do you guys think of this proposal?  I think it's pretty interesting.

the proposal of $7k to each at birth just identifies who is bad at math.  the government can spark massive inflation whenever it wants and thereby confiscate that wealth. hell, many nations just discard their currency and make a new one in an economic crisis, which would make that offer worthless. 

Since we went off the gold standard in the 1970s, weve already had 2 bouts with inflation. 

i suppose gold would be a better offer.  or even land.

Here's an acre of land for $5k. 

https://www.landsearch.com/properties/section-3-lot-357-hawley-pa-18428/1163519

[Hawkeye21 1,853]

2 minutes ago, JustinCharge said:

the proposal of $7k to each at birth just identifies who is bad at math.  the government can spark massive inflation whenever it wants and thereby confiscate that wealth. hell, many nations just discard their currency and make a new one in an economic crisis, which would make that offer worthless. 

Since we went off the gold standard in the 1970s, weve already had 2 bouts with inflation. 

i suppose gold would be a better offer.  or even land.

Here's an acre of land for $5k. 

https://www.landsearch.com/properties/section-3-lot-357-hawley-pa-18428/1163519

Land would be awesome but taxes are paid on land.

[Alias Detective 1,179]

1 hour ago, Hawkeye21 said:

What do you guys think of this proposal?  I think it's pretty interesting.

 

Please - who is in charge of the money?  Federal Gov't? individual?  What happens if you die before retirement?  Disability?  I could go on forever why it makes no sense and will never work. 

 

The idea is dumber than a box o rocks.

[Alias Detective 1,179]

Let me manage my own social security dollars.....that's a way to make future millionaires.

[Horseman 1,513]

A - Nothing is keeping parents from doing this themselves.

B - If you don't have an extra 7K to invest in your child on day one you're not in a position to be having kids.

/thread

[Hawkeye21 1,853]

31 minutes ago, Horseman said:

If you don't have an extra 7K to invest in your child on day one you're not in a position to be having kids.

The population would be exponentially smaller if this were actually true.  It's a pretty bad take.

[Alias Detective 1,179]

18 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

The population would be exponentially smaller if this were actually true.  It's a pretty bad take.

He didn't say never have kids, rather when you have the $7,000 then maybe its time to take the rubber off.

 

51 minutes ago, Horseman said:

A - Nothing is keeping parents from doing this themselves.

B - If you don't have an extra 7K to invest in your child on day one you're not in a position to be having kids.

/thread

 

[Horseman 1,513]

Just now, Alias Detective said:

He didn't say never have kids, rather when you have the $7,000 then maybe its time to take the rubber off.

 

 

Thanks.  Correct, without a bunch of other assumptions made this is a simple time shift.  

[Hawkeye21 1,853]

5 minutes ago, Alias Detective said:

He didn't say never have kids, rather when you have the $7,000 then maybe its time to take the rubber off.

 

 

I understood what he meant.  Do you know how many people would have to wait much years in order to have children with this line of thinking?  While it would be really nice, I think it's a pretty ignorant statement.

[Horseman 1,513]

3 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

I understood what he meant.  Do you know how many people would have to wait much years in order to have children with this line of thinking?  While it would be really nice, I think it's a pretty ignorant statement.

How many people would have to wait much years?

And from then on nothing changes, it's a simple time shift in one generation.  We'd survive.  

[Hawkeye21 1,853]

8 minutes ago, Horseman said:

How many people would have to wait much years?

And from then on nothing changes, it's a simple time shift in one generation.  We'd survive.  

Having an extra $7,000 is a lot of money for someone in their early 20's wanting to start a family.  I know I couldn't have done it.

[Horseman 1,513]

2 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

Haven't an extra $7,000 is a lot of money for someone in their early 20's wanting to start a family.  I know I couldn't have done it.

DUH!

[Hawkeye21 1,853]

1 minute ago, Horseman said:

DUH!

So, you're saying I shouldn't have had my first child then?

[Horseman 1,513]

3 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

So, you're saying I shouldn't have had my first child then?

If your "interesting" idea were law, and you really really wanted to start a family, how log would it take you to save up 7K?

Because whatever your excuse of an answer is, it's a lot better than your "interesting" idea that we magically just give everyone 7K.  What that really means is you want other people to give it to you. 

[Vikings4ever 496]

2 hours ago, Alias Detective said:

Please - who is in charge of the money?  Federal Gov't? individual?  What happens if you die before retirement?  Disability?  I could go on forever why it makes no sense and will never work. 

 

The idea is dumber than a box o rocks.

Looks like that total assumes about 8% interest every year. Nothing safe gives that level of interest. So that would require actual investment, which entails risks, and Democrats have fought tooth and nail whenever the idea of investing Social Security money has been floated. And we all have seen the state of many public pension funds.

So it's either risky (in return or to the taxpayers) investing by individuals, risky investing by the government, safe investing by individuals/governments that won't produce nearly that return, or kicking the can down the road and expecting taxpayers in 65 years to pick up the check.

[Alias Detective 1,179]

5 hours ago, Alias Detective said:

Let me manage my own social security dollars.....that's a way to make future millionaires.

 

3 hours ago, Vikings4ever said:

Looks like that total assumes about 8% interest every year. Nothing safe gives that level of interest. So that would require actual investment, which entails risks, and Democrats have fought tooth and nail whenever the idea of investing Social Security money has been floated. And we all have seen the state of many public pension funds.

So it's either risky (in return or to the taxpayers) investing by individuals, risky investing by the government, safe investing by individuals/governments that won't produce nearly that return, or kicking the can down the road and expecting taxpayers in 65 years to pick up the check.

[frank 2,144]

How about investing in the original series?

[Engorgeous George 1,162]

I would need more facts on the program.  Would it be administered by congress?  Where would the money be held and could congress raid that trust fund?  On average, how much has interest outstriped inflation in 65 years?  A million may sound impressive, but in 65 years do they have roughly the equivilent wealth of $7000.00 now or more?  Will the capital gained be taxed upon distribution?

 

Once the money is sitting there, if indeed congress left it alone, what would be the outcry to take it early, like for college, a starter home, or when there is a medical emergency.  Do we really think this money would be there upon retirement?  

I am not a big believer in magic bullets, but I am willing to hear more before denigrating this idea.

 

[easilyscan 558]

So many things wrong here. Where does one begin ?

If you print more money & everyone has it, then the price of everything will go up so that having $1M at retirement will be below the poverty line for 65+, that's how inflation works.

Where does the funding come from ? By that I mean, does the US government (already 100+ trillion in debt) add another 20 trillion per year to that figure, raise taxes, cut spending lol, or somewhere else ? What about Social Security ? Shouldn't be any need for that if everyone's going to be a millionaire at age 65. 

Remember when W wanted Americans to be able to put part of their SS money into privately managed accounts? The swamp doesn't like this, they need to control every penny and have as many of you as possible be dependent on the govt.

 

I borrowed everything that follows from a different forum.

If everyone is a millionaire when they retire, how much is the condo in Del Boca Vista going to cost? $4 million or so?

What he's proposing is basically SS except starting at birth vs. at employment (which is never, for some) SS is a huge hoax & if I could end it I would. Why would I trust the government to manage/"save" my money better than I can (although there's a lot of adults that have no idea what 2+2 equals so they do in fact benefit.) 

Will this make certain Dads stay in there kids lives? 

I’m sure if it happens it will evolve into anyone who doesn’t pay bills or work gets all the money and everyone else’s taxes increase.

$1 million in 65 years would be worth the equivalent of about $145k with a 3% annual inflation.  This may be the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard 

Think the murder rate for 65 year olds might go up slightly

And the granddaddy of them all.

Imagine the chaos at the border when illegals realize every anchor baby gets 7k. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Mark Davis 165]

It's basically a redistribution since we have huge deficits today and would have to borrow or print the money.  That $7000 would be worth less and less in real dollars with every new birth.