I think the demographic that matches with me happens to be very “serious dating” mode and is therefore more likely to be willing to respond to my message.

Haha I have considered tweeting at hinge to try to snag a free premium or something.

[deleted]

Notice the lack of recognizable banks doing normal business.

I did online dating for, like, two or three years. Everyone's expierence is different but after all that time, I came to the realization that if you're willing to go through all of *that* - the no replies, the ghosting, the first dates, the approaching multiple women and at least trying to write a personalized message for each, the failures, the hassle, etc for just the occasional "success" (which is rarely ever permannt), you're either a serial killer or literally can't live without having a partner. Online dating by its very nature is dumb and after a while, it just gave me a headache. I'll either meet a woman the old fashion way or not at all, idc.

[removed]

Why’d the gain train stop in 2016?

Surely my bank won't be on this li- dammit.

From 2000-2012, you had quite the eating problem. Glad you got it under control.

Wild that Bozeman isn’t considered “metropolitan” yet.

Source: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/20-banks-that-are-sitting-on-huge-potential-securities-lossesas-was-svb-c4bbcafa

Tool: Google Charts

“Here’s a gold watch and now, turn around”

So enough to last til my death. Well, that’s…good?

sure, but my bigger point is its not an "like an MLM marketing" scam, as the prior poster was suggesting

That’s part of the messaging meant to shake confidence. That messaging had its peak when GWB was trying to introduce private accounts, back when SS was about to dip into those reserves. Lots of rhetoric about how those reserves didn’t exist, and why we therefore urgently needed those private accounts now.

The fund is very much real; its value is backed by the most stable investment that exists. It’s empty only in the same way that your “mortgage” or “rent” account is empty, if it is paid out of an account that other expenses come out of too.

You're talking about oil/gas extraction though, whereas the article is talking about power production, two different (though related) things.

If you remove the cap and remove the max payment, then that principle is retained, though, isn’t it?

You said it yourself though: fixing SS is extremely political unpopular.

You need to either reduce benefits or increase taxes. Neither are good options.

One small detail that gets overlooked is that the fund is empty. All of the money put into it was exchanged for IOUs from Congress and then spent. It wasn't invested. It was spent.

The only way turn those IOUs back into cash are to tax current and future taxpayers to raise the money.

Pushing total tax rates to over 50% might not be a great plan if we want to have a growing economy.

Very interesting, I do enjoy the extra details in these kinds of sample sizes.

[removed]

[removed]

10 states are non-disclosure states. Sale price is not publicly available info for those states. If doing an analysis across all 50 states, list price is unfortunately the best common metric .

So back in the late 80s was Social Security just adding to the National Debt?

Means testing is tricky because people will spend down savings faster to avoid it. The scary thing about means testing is it’s a slippery slope. We already have means testing sort of. When they added taxes on ss benefits in the 80s it was never inflation indexed. so now most people have to pay income tax on their benefits. Raising the cap brings in a lot more money than means testing according to the ssa analysis. Another possibility is to fix ss by shifting the medicare payroll tax to the ss trust fund so that ss is still a pay in to get benefits design. Medicare is only half funded by payroll taxes anyway and is mostly paid for by the general fund.