Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Chilean Private Retirement System Works

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Dec, 5 2004 @ 09:27 PM
link   
I for one like the idea as I will never see my Social Security at all, it will be broke by the time I get it, or the draw age will be 85. It is about time we look for some type of fix and I think what Chile did is great!


Chilean Private Retirement System Works

Jon E. Dougherty, NewsMax.com
Monday, Dec. 6, 2004
For years analysts and politicians have warned younger Americans their retirement benefits may be substantially reduced or gone completely when they quit working because the Social Security system is going broke.

But despite the bellicose rhetoric and dire predictions, lawmakers so far have done little to head off what they say is the inevitable collapse of the system.

And yet, even as American leaders haggle over the best fix -- or, at least, the best political fix -- there is a one gleaming, shining, real-life successful example staring them all in the face, and of all places it's in Chile, site of a recent visit by President Bush, who even said Santiago's system provided a "great example" of reform for the U.S. system.
How does Chile's program work? Basically it privatizes an individual worker's retirement benefits, and allows individual workers to manage their own remuneration, taking the process out of the government's hands completely.
source




posted on Dec, 5 2004 @ 11:24 PM
link   
Chile. Now there is a country. The Bush administration has supported a dictatorship with rape rooms, who did such atrocious crimes, it makes Saddam look like an alter boy. Rats up female genitalia? Yeah, that's Chile. Murder of children in front of parents, yep, Chile too. Saddam would be sick to his stomach what Chile has done.

Gen Pinochet, who both Bush's support, is on trial for crimes against humanity. The media that is controlled by the neo-cons, is trying to portray his reign as not so bad. I know people have short memories, but this is freakin' ridiculous!



posted on Dec, 6 2004 @ 09:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by curme
The media that is controlled by the neo-cons, is trying to portray his reign as not so bad. I know people have short memories, but this is freakin' ridiculous!



Oh common curme... What does all this have to do with their Social Security program... It sounds like a great system if you ask me. It's amazing how fast a liberal can resort to negativities on almost any issue at hand. Keep showing the true face of the liberals curme.



posted on Dec, 6 2004 @ 01:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by LostSailor
Oh common curme... What does all this have to do with their Social Security program... It sounds like a great system if you ask me. It's amazing how fast a liberal can resort to negativities on almost any issue at hand. Keep showing the true face of the liberals curme.


Thats kind of what I was thinking, WTF? Social Security to Pinochet? Ok so he was a P.O.S. , I wouldn't argue that point, hell we have supported worse but the topic was Social Security reform.....go figure.



posted on Dec, 6 2004 @ 05:49 PM
link   
OK I'll ask a question, under this system will it be just another 401k type of retirement plan(its called RRSP up here), and what will the gov't do to help the people who know absolutely nothing about Investing? Pay for economics courses or somthing? I kinda like this plan, but I want to know more before I fully support or oppose it.



posted on Dec, 6 2004 @ 06:30 PM
link   
I tell you what the government is going to do his privatization while the public will be uneducated about what is going to happened to their social security.

At the end who is going to lose, yeah you got it we are going to lose.

I will advised people to get a crash course on investment and understanding of what the government wants to do with your money before you find yourself in la-la land with your money bye-bye.


I guess will all be force to become investors.



posted on Dec, 6 2004 @ 06:42 PM
link   


I guess will all be force to become investors.


That might not be such a bad thing ya know. If the public of the US is more educated in economics and investing, the US public may not be taken advantage of as easily by corporate interests. Belive it or not there is alot of free information out there about investing. And also if it is private then you don't really have to invest in stocks. There are lots of options our there, I just think if somthing like this is going to go through then a massive education program has to happen.



posted on Dec, 6 2004 @ 10:04 PM
link   
The deal is that you can only invest in very low risk mutual funds. The risk is there but the advantages outweigh the risk imho, you can expect a 8-10% return on your investment vs none with Social Security. They keep raising the age in which you can draw Social security so some like me will never see it. It is a failed program, the give outs outweigh the receipts in 10 years.

Another advantage is that the money is yours and you can leave it to your kids, the government doesn't own it you do.



posted on Dec, 6 2004 @ 11:07 PM
link   
Hmm, the more and more I read and learn about this idea the more it interests me. Do they let you invest in bonds? What about say a GIC or somthing like that. They also have to have a strict approval and regulatory pathway for mutual funds wishing to qualify. Transparency has to be top-notch as well(and along with the Trnasparency aspect an aggressive education campaign involving everyone in every spoken language in the US I know its difficult, but so is the Baby Boomer bulge(in the retirment age demographic not the waistline bulge
))

My opinion is if this one thing can get Americans to really know their money it would be a good thing. Might even start a reverse trend towards savings like in Japan, it could slow down economic growth though.

Now how are we gonna solve the labor shortage that the retiring baby boomers are gonna cause.



posted on Dec, 7 2004 @ 07:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by sardion2000Now how are we gonna solve the labor shortage that the retiring baby boomers are gonna cause.


Thats is not the problem, it will require 2 workers to support 2 retirees? That is an impossibility.



posted on Dec, 7 2004 @ 07:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger

Originally posted by sardion2000Now how are we gonna solve the labor shortage that the retiring baby boomers are gonna cause.


Thats is not the problem, it will require 2 workers to support 2 retirees? That is an impossibility.


Nononono. I was talking about the Skilled Labor shortage. For instance in like 20+years there will be more retired people then people in the workforce. I'm just wondering how we are gonna solve that problem, maybe more automation as is the way Japan seems to be going.



posted on Dec, 7 2004 @ 08:21 PM
link   
Wait you fail to understand, even if all were high tech jobs, there isn't enough to support the system. It needs change and soon.



posted on Feb, 12 2005 @ 10:42 PM
link   
It would seem that this topic has become a 'target' again, the Chileans love their system, 80+% do not want it changed. That should speak wonders for it wouldn't ya think?



posted on Feb, 13 2005 @ 09:34 PM
link   
That's all fine and well. I'm even happy the Chilean systems works.
This is not Chile.

IF the sytem is truly broken--do any of us really know for sure--then it needs to be fixed.
But this will not help the workers in this country in the near future. This plan might be truly effective in a hundred years.



posted on Feb, 13 2005 @ 09:54 PM
link   
Well I know they take money out of my check every week and I will never see it, I will have to retire when I am 80 years old......It should be my choice...



posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 10:05 AM
link   
Yes, it should have been our choice. Hindsight is 20/20.
If you were 21 and just entering the job market, you'd have enough time to gather a nice retirement account.
I'm afraid the rest of us will have to "make do" with our own small investments and whatever we can still get from Social secuirty.
The reforms, if they happen, will not help you or me
, more likely our grandchildren.



posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 07:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by DontTreadOnMe
Yes, it should have been our choice. Hindsight is 20/20.
If you were 21 and just entering the job market, you'd have enough time to gather a nice retirement account.
I'm afraid the rest of us will have to "make do" with our own small investments and whatever we can still get from Social secuirty.
The reforms, if they happen, will not help you or me
, more likely our grandchildren.


Well we will be the first generation to leave behind a worse mess than we inherited, welcome to the fantasic results of socialism!



posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 08:18 PM
link   
Yes, Ed, one can only wonder what would have happened if the Great Society never happened.
Here's an interesting slant on US history:
The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History



posted on Mar, 6 2005 @ 03:37 PM
link   
Very good indeed, an excerpt,



From Publishers Weekly
This book is not so much politically incorrect as it is contrarian, as well as utterly contemptuous of anything supported by Liberals or "Intellectuals." At every opportunity, Woods quotes government leaders, media sources and "distinguished" academics who have said something that he feels backs up his view. That view is, by and large, classically conservative, with a focus on states’ rights and small government. Any flaws in or missteps by politicians become instant basis for rejecting them wholesale (i.e., Lincoln’s racial views; the fact that JFK’s two major books were ghostwritten), as Woods dredges up accusations both familiar and long-forgotten. The historical coverage is hardly comprehensive, since Woods focuses on telling the "truth" about issues Liberals have allegedly distorted, like the New Deal and the Civil Rights movement. Some ideas that he claims are controversial are anything but: most people know the Civil War was not fought primarily to abolish slavery, and it’s no secret that Stalin starved his people. Woods writes with zeal, and speckles his narrative with suggestions for further reading labeled "Books You’re Not Supposed to Read" (which are mostly Right-wing revisionist histories) and "PC Today" boxes containing a grab-bag of conservative gripes and assertions (i.e. "It is not true, as most people believe, that the Indians had no conception of land ownership and did not understand what they were doing when they sold their land to the Puritans"). Diehard Republicans may find this book an inspiring corrective to supposedly Liberal-biased history texts, but others will be put off by Woods’s cherry-picking approach and supercilious tone.





new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join