Problems should be fixed as soon as they can be. No government since it's inception has been able to make meaningful beneficial changes which address the real problem until now. You propose doing it after your dead, what a wonderful way to avoid it.
No change at all merely pushes the solution down the road a year or two.
So next year is OK? Or the year after? Tell me why it would be better then.
so the issue can be debated.
The debate is starting now. When do you propose starting it? Oh yes, I remember, after you are dead. No thanks.
Please explain why this plan is the only and best plan.
Which plan? No plan has been settled on, or even formally proposed. You haven't read any of the proposals, despite what you say.
Please tell me why I should trust YOU to decide what happens with my money any more than I trust the government.
I never suggested you trust me or the government, in fact, I advise against it.
I advise you to find out what the proposals are, research them extensively, consider alternatives, make your own suggestions and debate them all. You can start right here on FreeRepublic.
Hope is not a plan. Denial is not a course of action.
This is an assumption on your part. I never said that. So next year is OK? Or the year after? Tell me why it would be better then.
Because it gives us sufficient time to think things through with no rush.
My primary objection to what has been proposed is that it merely shifts money around. It costs $2 Trillion to implement. Have you considered that the problem with the current system is that it can't handle the TEMPORARY bulge of baby boomers. SS currently costs $500 Billion a year for the ENTIRE PROGRAM. $2 Trillion would pay for the ENTIRE SS system for 4 YEARS! Is something that costs that much really the best solution? In addition, the private accounts in the proposed plan would themselves cost administrative and other fees which nothing I've seen thus far would limit - I'm not sure this is in my best interests. It also presents a possible disruption of the markets as money flows from the government (or from us, however you prefer to view it) into the private sector, much of it into the stock market.
Are you tired of the economic problems caused by the .com bubble yet? Want to create a new one? Have you considered how the inflow and outflow of retirement money in the stock market might impact the economy? We're already seeing this today, without ANY SS money in the market, and with the mass of baby boomers not yet retired. To say that giving business a chunk of money via stock valuation will automatically improve the economy is preposterous - anyone who looks at inventory backlog in an economic downturn realizes this. Not to mention Enron - remember them?
I prefer to think these things through in detail. I WILL NOT sign on to any plan NOW just because someone tells me to, including the President. Nor will I give the government the power to ram this through without much closer inspection.