Personal Accounts Tank in Polls, GOP Says (social security reform)

Yahoo News/AP ^ | March 8, 2005 | DAVID ESPO

[winner3000]

So much for the greatest generation. Even though they won't be affected, the old geezers will still prevent reform to the system until it is totally bankrupt for us younger folks.

[al_again]

Not only that - the Rx program is a much bigger and more immediate threat than social security. Social security will have a real funding problem in about 15 to 20 years (requires borrowing or new taxes to sustain current benefits). The Rx program is in trouble within the next 3 years! Massive new borrowing or new taxes - neither option is good for America!

[Fee]

Read the book called "Coming Generational Storm". It is recently published and still available. Excellent reference book. It has a section that talks about if no reforms are implemented and what the individual needs to do financially to prepare for and survive the collapse of Social Security. I look at Social Security like being forced to live in a town with a bad public school system. In order to save the future of my children, I must make the lifestyle changes to I can pay my property taxes and still have enough money for my childrens' safer private school education. We still have time to prepare for a financial life boat for our old age. If my fellow citizens want to rely on Social Security, then let them live in poverty.

[Soul Seeker]

Nah, let's put blame where it belongs. On the Senate and House Republicans. If this doesn't go through, as judges have not gone through, burden lies squarely on their shoulders.

They will reap the consequences of inaction if they keep this up. I'm not too reactive but I have a limit. I will not reward consetive terms of status quo politicians when we are promised change.

[econ_grad]

Which proposal are you talking about?

[umgud]

Yup, it's the demographics for sure.....

Started out with 40+ workers for every retiree. Soon we'll be at 2 workers for every retiree. But worse is the fact that those 2 workers may be low wage earners. Look at our current crop of school kids. Here in CA, a large percentage of our future workers drop out or graduate with degrees they really didn't deserve.

We need more people, but not just third world immigrants. I'd like to think there would be a couple of rocket scientists or engineers supporting me when I retire but, I'll probably end up with a fast food worker and a gardner supporting me in retirement.

[Torie]

The Bush proposal, such as it is.

[econ_grad]

I am still not sure what the actual Bush proposition is, but I am a big proponent of personal accounts. Long term investing has always earned a higher rate of return than social security and the prospect of a pot of gold at the end will make people more risk-averse that would make people follow a less risky life-style. What I would really like to see is the end of social security, but that is not on the table. Short of that, this is the best proposition, in my opinion.

[Torie]

The Bush plan really does nothing to address the actuarial deficit. It merely allows folks under 50 to borrow from their standard SS benefits at 3% over the inflation rate, and buy stocks. I would never do that - ever.

[M. Thatcher]

Bush cannot really make the case, and will not make the case.

Yeah, and he can't bring democracy to the Middle East, either.

[Torie]

Bush has much better odds of that. Just because Bush is weak on one thing, does not mean he is weak on another. The transitive principle has its limits.

[M. Thatcher]

I was being sarcastic, ace.

[smokeman]

You may not, but many of us would. That's why it's called voluntary private accounts. If I can get a 4-5% rate of return over a 1.2% rate of return, I think the decision is obvious. As far as risk goes, I'll take my chances. It's my monet, therefore it should be my decision. Plain and simple.

[Torie]

You need to get a return of more than 3% over inflation to come out ahead vis a vis sticking with the present plan, since what you draw out into private accounts offsets what you get from standard SS. If inflation is 3%, that means a 6% return annualized, with a rather rapid accretion and erosion above and below that number.

[Torie]

IC. Maggie's humor was always really quite subtle.

[Torie]

Wouldn't it be wonderful if we all good get what pubic employees do in retirement benefits? I'm in favor of that. Let's make the French pay for it.

[M. Thatcher]

what you draw out into private accounts offsets what you get from standard SS

You have repeated this several times. You are incorrect.

[Torie]

Nope alas, I am not. I wish I were. But whatever. There is no magic panacia. It will just be blood and tears, and mere foreplay vis an vis the medical subsidy implosion.

[M. Thatcher]

Nope alas, I am not. I wish I were. But whatever.

"Whatever"? Suggest you outgrow Valley Girl mode.

Yes, you are incorrect. Go forth and research the proposal. Yours is exactly the same error the Washington Post made in its reporting for which the White House demanded — and got — a correction.