10/27/2004

Privatize Social Security Before it’s to Late.

The legislative branch knows the Social Security (SS) system sucks. If it SS was a good thing would not our representatives be on it with us. The truth is SS system is no good and they know it so they legislate themselves a new retirement system. How fair is this, they not only get a better retirement, but it is funded by the US taxpayer. That right there makes me want to run for congress. The truth is the government knows the SS system is going to fail, they (meaning all politicians) are afraid of the AARP (American Association of Retired Persons), because they are the ones that vote and cause the biggest stink on capital hill. The truth is those of us under the age of 50 would be better off to vote for representatives that would do away with SS and privatize it. (I’m sorry but this may cause some of the stupid people to go hungry and cold, but remember we can’t always help the stupid people, those that won’t save for the future)

6 comments:

Bryce Larkin said...

It is about time someone else is thinking this way. Social Security is one of the biggest problems that will be coming up in the near future. Social Security is a hard topic for congress because of all the votes that they get but sometimes the easies thing to do is hardest, stop social security and find a better way.

Bryce Larkin said...

I really like the part about stupid people. Sometimes we really can't help them. They are too far out of reach.

Rufio said...

If we are getting rid of social security why don't we just get rid of welfare, and any other goverment subsidized program that benefits those that are poor. I'm sorry, but that is just not feasible or very fair. I know what your thinking. You think that anyone under 50 years of age that pays social security and doesn't reiceive any is being treated unfairly. To tell you the truth I feel the same way, but I don't think that just getting rid of social security is the answer. We need to find some other way to help those that are under 50 years of age. Does this mean introduce a new program? I'm not sure, but there must be a better way to approach this problem than to just trash social security altogether.

John West said...

Student 01 would be wise to alter his attitude before any attempt at getting into congress is made. Anyways, with baby-boomers close to retirement age, there is no question that Social Security is in desperate need of restructering. Just saying that we should privatize it, doesn't say anything about what needs to be done or why it even should be privatized. What is privatization going to do? Explain yourselves.

Maudi said...

Privatizing Social Security is a great idea; however, there is one problem those who have already paid in and paid for their parents are going to want to get their share that they paid in. The baby boomer generation is one of those generations that is much bigger than most generations. Therefore it is going to be quite difficult to convince them that there should be privatized social security accounts. They have already paid their dues and it will be hard to change their minds.

Dr. Tufte said...

The real issue with social security is that it lacks binding committments about how it will be funded. Specifically, they need to have a rule that says that the age at which you can receive benefits will increase to keep the ratio or receivers to payers constant. That will solve all the problems (as long as the rule is written in stone).

Rufio is more correct than he guesses: Medicare works just like social security, and looks to be a bigger problem in our lifetimes.