Post #53517 by albaby1 on the US Policy board

Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy ❤

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (33)

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

No. of Recommendations: 8

At 2% growth I would have had $580k, at 5% I would have had $1.1M and at 8%...$2.2M. That's a nice retirement at less money outlaid by the feds (as I would have dropped off the retirement rolls as far as they're concerned).

But now, with me nearing my mid-50s? No deal. They can pay me according to the current SS schedule (around $40k).

What are you complaining about, then? The NPV of a $40K per year annuity is about $700K, give or take.

It is a retirement system. The reason that it's structured as a pension, rather than as a self-directed fund, is because they don't want to get stuck holding the bag for people who take a lot of risks and end up with too little money. The whole point is to prevent people from not having enough to avoid abject poverty in their old age. That means modest - but certain - returns.

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

Print the post

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (33)

Prev | Next

Announcements

US Policy FAQ

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

A community forum supporting civilized, and highly helpful, self-educating investors that come together for Shrewdness and merry spirits. These message boards closely follow the look and feel of the old message boards at boards.fool.com prior to the boards redirected to discussion.fool.com. Shrewd'm is not affiliated with the comprehensive and excellent investment website, The Motley Fool (TMF), in any way. The Shrewd commmunity here has owed, and continues to owe, gratitude to The Motley Fool for nurturing a culture of jovial irreverence towards Wall St, and that tradition will continue here.