Thoughts on 'Social Security Reform'

[bobbydj]

Great thread everyone.
_________________


Bobby D. Jones
Producer/Engineer
(The Crudballs, Tyrone P. Spink, The Fuxx, Shitters, The Geighs...)

[Tim Casey]

There was a good report on Marketplace (NPR) the other night regarding SS privatization. Every other country that has done this with their versions of Social Security have done terribly. One of the worst things is the administrative fees that private for-profit agencies charge your account. Then there's also the ups and downs of the stock market.

A prudent investor would diversify - have a 401/IRA account in stocks and bonds AND a government guaranteed pension. Putting all your eggs in one basket has NEVER been a good idea.

I'd start fixing social security by removing the cap. Once a person earns something like $68,000 in a year (Bill Gates probably earns this by January 2nd), they no longer have to contribute to the system. This should be trashed. Then the payouts should be needs-based. If you don't need it, you shouldn't get any payments.

This would be fiscally unfair to wealthy people, but it would put their society on solid footing. They should be willing to make sure that the neediest people in the society that has given them so much are taken care of in their old age.

(Personally, I think Bush is just trying to pump billions of dollars into Wall Street to make his handling of the economy look better and to feed his blood-thirsty friends....)

[MASSIVE Mastering]

Yeah, it'd be terrible to spur the economy like that...
_________________
John Scrip - MASSIVE Mastering

[foley]

Yes, let's "spur" the economy by dismantling social security. The conservative agenda in a nutshell.

btw - nice job spurring the economy with those tax cuts. I personally have seen quite a benefit from that $300 check I received two years ago - my property taxes are up again!

God Bless the Conservatives! It's all they have going for them.

[bassface]

Foley speaks for me.

Thanks, Foley.

Nice dog btw.
_________________
It's nice to be nice to the nice.

--Major Frank Burns

[eeldip]

also, how is letting retired folks live in comfort, rather than in poverty, hurting the economy?

the current privitization plans on the table will cut benefits EVEN INCLUDING private accounts by about 40%.

it will "spur" the economy of the owners of the annuities, and the people they invest in. and it will severly hurt the economy of the 10s of millions of retired folks and the people that depend on their money. like dennys! and makers of topol tooth polish.

those SS checks dont disappear! they go in the private economy. its just that they go the way that the seniors want them to go. by taking that money away from them, and handing it out to the private account managers the govt can reward its friends instead of just spurring the economy by throwing that money in the market.

in other words: private accounts = controlled economy. current SS = free market. well, not entirely true... but still.
_________________
http://creot.com/index.php

[MASSIVE Mastering]

[Soulfull]

I would start SS reform with the addition of 2 numbers to those reports they send out telling you what your benefit would be. The first number is how much you and your employer have paid in. The second is the return rate that generates your supposed benefit. I suspect the large size or the first one and the small size of the second one would help a lot of people see what a bad deal SS is for most people.
_________________
Jack Bulkley
SoulFull Recording
Apex, NC

[apropos of nothing]

[Mr PC]

Well, tax revenues don't always go down (over time) when tax rates get cut. It is not a static economy. Tax cuts have stimulative effects on the economy and can increase revenues. After the Reagan cuts, the economy heated up and revenues increased, but spending went up a lot more.

There was a recession. Revenues go down in recessions, and the tax cuts help us get out of a recession.

PC

[apropos of nothing]

[apropos of nothing]

[Mr PC]

That's nonsense. Only a certain amount the economy can grow? It has always been growing. So what is this outer limit on economic growth and how does it work? Once an economy has grown, it is bigger and produces more tax revenue.

How much would the economy grow if income was taxed at 90%? Not so much. It would grow a lot if the rate was 1%, but that would not provide enough money for the government to do it's thing. Somewhere in there is the right balance.

I see it as money being in private hands vs. government hands. I think it is more productive in private hands.

PC

[apropos of nothing]

[swingdoc]