The reasons why the Vice President is against the Bush social security reforms is he has no real answers and does want to be party to cutting back jobs in the social security bureaucracy. No matter what reforms are put in place some people are bound to suffer in the short term, but no politician looks in the long term. Social Security as it exists today cannot be saved unless the system is set back to what it was originally envisioned and the Congress stops stealing fund money to pay off debt and programs. The time is coming clear for a grass roots movement for major revamping of social security. I sincerely believe that wage earners be given the choice of contributing to their social security account or their own IRA-but it most be either one. If the wage earner contributes to their IRA, then they should not be taxed on this contribution. The plus is there will be more funds available for investment and growth, keeping the economy robust and possibly insuring a better retirement.
It seems rather clear to me that the only way to keep ss alive is to have a means test!
It seems rather clear to me that the only way to keep ss alive is to have a means test! It seems rather clear to me that a sure way to kill ss is to introduce a means test! That would destroy the broad consensus of support for ss. It would reveal the government as a cheat who walks away from his promises. It would reward the improvident who make inadequate provision for their retirement at the expense of the sober and prudent who planned realistically for their old age. Punishing the prudent and rewarding the spendthrifts would, of course, assure that we have fewer prudent people and more spendthrifts. Remember, please, that the official name for your social security is FICA, or Federal Insurance Contribution Act. Of course, it shows the government's verbal and moral corruption to call that tax "Contributions" when there is nothing voluntary about it for workers. Shades of Orwell! That aside, please consider the word "Insurance". Suppose some private insurance company executives decided to pay off on policies only if, in their sole judgement, the policy holder or his survivors "needed" the money. How long would the executives stay out of jail? Now IIRC, the courts have ruled that workers have no rights to their ss benefits and that the government can change the eligibility regulations any way it wants. The question is whether we intend to tolerate the government cheating its people.Chips, whose solution to the social security problem would start with looking for ways to allow the economy to grow faster without setting off inflation
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |