AARP opposes plan and digs in for fight over private Social Security accounts

[Turfgrass]

AARP, the nation's largest seniors organization, is coming out strongly against President Bush's plan to allow private individual accounts within Social Security.

After all, you earned the money, right? What right do you have to actually put that money into a retirement account that YOU own? What a stupid idea that is!

http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20041206/1a_bottowstrip06.art.htm

Social Security is a pyramid scheme, where the first people to pay in get money back from the second wave of people who pay in, and the second wave get money back from the third wave, etc. This is so risky that pyramid schemes are illegal -- except when the government does it.

 

[djv]

I don't think anyone has the right plan ready to go that will work. Not with out much more planing. If they come up with a mess as they have with the drug plan. I can see many more will have no faith in it. They must keep it simple. And we all know the government can't do it. Problem seems to be where do you start change over. What will that cost. If the same money or even more to make change is needed, then to keep system as is. What is gained.

 

[Turfgrass]

You do know, don't you, that there is absolutely no legal guarantee that you will receive one single penny of the money that is taken from you. No guarantee at all. The congress can vote tomorrow to end the system and keep every dollar that has been paid in Social Security taxes. There would be nothing you could do about it.

Social Security is running out of money. Depending on who you listen to, in about 15 to 18 years Social Security taxes will not be sufficient to pay the Social Security benefits to the people then receiving them. At this point the government will have only a few options.

1. Extend the retirement age in hopes that many more Americans will actually do the government the favor of dying before they can collect any or all of their benefits.

2. Deny Social Security benefits to those who worked hard and made good financial decisions in their lives, thereby insuring themselves a sufficient retirement income outside of Social Security. No ... their "contributions" will not be refunded.

3. Extend the wage base for taxes so that achievement-oriented Americans can poor even more money into this financial sewer; more money that they will never, ever get back.

And just which group of Americans is hurt the most by Social Security? Black males. If you're a black male this is the ultimate "disrespect." You're being ripped off big time.

 

[gardenweasel]

turf...if they do privatise,they`ll still have to put language in the law that prohibits people from tapping into their own accounts......

if not,i see people withdrawing the money and being left destitute and still being on the government tit....

you know it will happen....

and if it`s privatised,does the government have the right to interfere....to prohibit people from draining their own money as they wish?.....

a mess...

 

[Turfgrass]

Well, Congress established Social Security with a little-known loophole, allowing states and municipalities to exempt their public employees from Social Security. So in 1981, two years before Congress closed the loophole, three counties in Texas opted out and set up their own privatized retirement system.

The result? Since 1981, the counties' 5,000 public employees, while taxed at the same rate as Social Security, enjoyed an average return on an investment of 6.5 percent, compared to Social Security's 2.2 percent. So it's not like we don't know how to make it work.

 

[Killian]

I haven't done any research on this subject but it seems to me that the Federal Government uses our Social Security dollars for things other than what it was initially intended for. So let's follow the money trail and see where it leads us.....Another thing that bothers me is, if this is true, where is the money going to come from to replace the SSI money that will be redirected to privatation? These are just a couple of questions in mind and I wonder if I'm the only one that can't figure how a social program that grew a 2.2 precent rate of return since 1981 is going broke.

 

[djv]

They say 1 trillion is just a estimate to start change over. Put that 1 trillion in the system as it is today. We are told by the government S/S is good to 2070. Now that does mean the government has to stop taking from it.