Agreed. But this still doesn't address people who don't invest wisely, or don't have the money to significantly diversify meaningfully, or save up just enough for retirement on their low income job and can't survive a 15 or 20% dip in the market, even if it only hits part of their investment.
People who gamble absolutely should take responsibility for what happens to their money. That's what the stock market is, gambling. There is no guaranteed return on your investment. That is why it should not be the system everyone is forced to participate in and take their chances at wiping out or being impoverished at retirement age. And why this is not a good system to propose for everyone on the national level and just hope that all the people on the street "taking personal responsibility" for their mistakes or bad luck doesn't translate into a crime wave, the return of all kinds of squalor condition diseases, or rioting.So people should not take any responsiblity at all for where they invest their money and savings? Now my postion is that people need to take responsibility for what they had control of and could of done something about.
This claim is a complete invention on your part.So are you advocating that people take no responsiblity for their lives? If so that is an extremely weak positon.
So the solution is to force everyone to have no option but to put their money in the private market, where a lot of private interests were robbing and defrauding the cookie jar?If you think Social Security is all that - it was once, but as we all know the government has been robbing from this cookie jar.
There were no homeless problems or crime and disease problems from impoverished populations in the U.S. except in the 1920's? All those people should have just taken personal responsibility and died quietly in a gutter somewhere.And why did this happen? Was it because of a world wide economic collaspe in the 1920's that no country was actually prepared for?
Bookmarks