We'll see it get really messy, rhetoric-wise, right here, as well. Will be interesting to read the threads once the political players start sending up trial baloons.
Me? I'm for saving this creaky old ponzie-scheming, socialist income redistribution plan. The trick is how?
You're absolutely right.
I fear that this issue could even divide Freepers into rich v. poor, young v. middle age v. old... And this is normally a very hard thing to do.
I'm NOT looking forward to reading the threads. I least hope we can ALL agree that the program is so screwed up that we shouldn't have to be having this debate in the first place.
I think Pres. Bush is on the right track, though it will take a long time. I think what's really needed is to officially turn it into what everyone mistakenly thinks it is now, a retirement savings plan, rather than what it was designed to be, a worst case safety net.
A real plan would mean everyone contributes 100% of social security money to personally owned retirement accounts, which could be invested in conservative stock, bond, and CD options. This has been a great success in Chile.
The problem is, proposing mandatory 100% private retirement accounts would inspire the Democrats (including their media wing) to new heights of virulent propaganda, and their lies would scare seniors to death. It couldn't pass.
If we get 2% going to private accounts, though, year after year people will watch their accounts go up, and the pressure will build for 5%, 50% and eventually 100%. Especially when people notice that the government is cutting their guaranteed benefits to offset the extra income they're making in the private accounts.
Why?