[salawat]

Child positive growth only serves to further the Ponzi-esque post New Deal-esque Social Security apparatus. It is no more stable/sustainable than reliance on H-1B's. Until we break the Ponzi structure, all we're doing is gaslighting the next generation.

[tzs]

It should be possible to make a sustainable SS-like system. I recently did an interesting calculation using the SS taxes on my pay over my career so far.

If the SS taxes from my pay had each month been been put in an account that invested in 1-year T-bills at whatever the current rate was at the start of that month, and when T-bills matured they were rolled over into new T-bills, the amount in that account now would be enough to cover what my monthly benefit would be if I retired now for the rest of the expected lifespan of a US person of my age and sex.

I also did a similar calculation with the Medicare taxes from my pay. That account would have enough that if put toward monthly premiums on a decent insurance plan from the ACA marketplace in my state the amount I'd have to contribute monthly is close to the amount of the current Medicare premium.

[jvanderbot]

Perhaps. Or it can be reformed. Most my retirement savings comes from averaged market growth. Kids are the future - having kids shouldn't be a burden. Most people will have only a few kids if given the chance, not 10.

[franktankbank]

Shouldn't retirements be dividends based? Why are we assuming growth all the time? Seems like a potent meme.

[jvanderbot]

Depends on your age, I guess. It's not like I manage my portfolio myself. I defer to e.g., Vanguard and they do what they do and I just watch the balance periodically. Once I get near retirement, I'll start reinvesting accordingly.