Social Security thread.

[techs]

A big issue this election is Social Security.
Bush wants to privatize it.
Kerry wants to keep it basically the same.

What do you think?

[craigmodius]

Oh Yeah, for sure privatize it.

Those companies like Enron do such a better job managing things :rolleyes:

[techs]

Oh Yeah, for sure privatize it.

Those companies like Enron do such a better job managing things :rolleyes:

I still don't understand what "privatizing" means. No one has put out a specific plan so I can't decide.

[Cleetus]

Defeats the purpose by letting people do it as it no longer becomes social or is it necesarrily secure.

[amyb]

Social Security is a joke. Get rid of it all together. Saving your money what a concept!

[pmetal]

Instead of the Government taking my money for a program that doesn't work, and never will, I would like to keep my hard-earned cash and invest it how I see fit.

That way, I can retire earlier to a nice big yacht, as opposed to much later to a nice big "double-wide".

Get rid of it. It's one more thing for the politicians to keep people relying on Government to support and make decisions for them.

[Ya_know]

No matter which way you slice it...leaving it alone isn't going to cut it. Reform is mandatory...or we will all suffer some day from the giant vacuum waiting for us at the other end!

[hudsonsmith]

The whole privatization argument is nonsense, as it presumes that the government is taking the money deducted from your salary and "saving" it somewhere until you retire. In actuality, social security is a "pay as you go" system. The money you pay in goes to fund the benefits for current retirees. Your benefits will come from people paying in at the time you retire.

The issue with the solvency of the system has to do with demographics and the baby boom - if you have too many retirees and not enough workers, the system runs a deficit. This is expected to happen sometime in the next 20-40 years. Presently the system is in surplus, as most of the baby boomers are working. The government is supposed to be banking that surplus until the baby boomers retire, but instead it is "borrowing" that money to cover the deficit in the overall budget.

In order to "privatize" the system, money currently being used to pay benefits would have to be diverted so that it could be put into some investment. But the benefits for current retirees would still have to be paid. From where? Bush hasn't said that I'm aware of.

[Zil]

I say everyone under 30 should be able to opt out of it. They messed it up back in the 60s when they took money out of the Trust Fund, and now I just work to keep Grandma's SS check coming. Fix it, do something, because I probably won't see it.

[Cleetus]

I say everyone under 30 should be able to opt out of it. They messed it up back in the 60s when they took money out of the Trust Fund, and now I just work to keep Grandma's SS check coming. Fix it, do something, because I probably won't see it.
I've never understood the thinking that the funds are just going to dissappear and the government is going to tell everyone that their money is gone, and further that the poeple will just sit back and obey????

[paraflyer]

I've never understood the thinking that the funds are just going to dissappear and the government is going to tell everyone that their money is gone, and further that the poeple will just sit back and obey????

The government will simply print out more money, or float another junk bond.

[Ya_know]

In order to "privatize" the system, money currently being used to pay benefits would have to be diverted so that it could be put into some investment. But the benefits for current retirees would still have to be paid. From where? Bush hasn't said that I'm aware of.

Agreed, this is the most precarious point of the whole argument. Something has to be done, but it isn't obvious in any way just exactly how something of this nature can be accomplished.