Union Workers Should Support Social Security Privatization

Cato ^ | Michael Tanner

[Rakkasan1]

Union leaders have been among the most vocal opponentsof privatizing Social Security. Their opposition is some-thing of a mystery, because union workers would be amongthose who would gain the most if Social Security were trans-formed to a system of individually owned, privately investedaccounts. Because a privatized Social Security system wouldprovide a higher rate of return, union workers would receivefar greater benefits than they would under the currentSocial Security system. In contrast, traditional SocialSecurity fixes, such as raising payroll taxes, would severe-ly harm union workers.

[Rakkasan1]

something to give to your union neighbor...

[NautiNurse]

The union workers would take a vote to turn over their private funds to the union goons who can manage their money much more effectively.

:o)

[GATOR NAVY]

Union leaders have been among the most vocal opponents of privatizing Social Security. Their opposition is something of a mystery, because union workers would be among those who would gain the most if Social Security were transformed to a system of individually owned, privately invested accounts.

Seems to me it's only a mystery if you assume that union leaders really have the interests of union workers in mind. If you believe that union leaders have only their own interests in mind, and not that of the rank and file, then there is no mystery.

[ol' hoghead]

I was a union member for 37 years of my working life. It wasn't until that blithering idiot Carter ran in '76 that I ever concidered voting Rep. When Ronaldus Magnus ran in '80 I voted for him and finally saw the light and never looked back.

I invested heavily in the stock market over the years in IRAs, Roth IRA's and the co. 401(k)and mutual funds on my own. Now that I am retired (@ age 60) I can assure anyone who has ears to listen that they can and will easily accrue more money in the stock market than they will ever gain from SS, co. pension or union pension. None of the three unions in which I was a member offered any pension. The companies offered pensions to co. officers only.

My pension is in the railroad system and is better than a straight SS retirement but nowhere as good as the gov't employee retirement.

It is disheartening to see my former unions support the rat party. The last newsletter I read from the pres. of my union read like a handout from tne DNC.

[speekinout]

I wasn't eligible to contribute to 401(k)'s, IRA, and the like until the mid 80's. I did from then on, but didn't invest in the high-tech bubble stocks.
Those investments let me retire at age 52, something I never could have done with SS only. If I only could have started investing like that 10 years earlier....

The Unions want to keep their power. They don't care about the membership.

[Rakkasan1]

my dad was union RR retiree, too. he never did buy the 'rats
BS.

[Santiago de la Vega]

The problem, though, is union leadership wants nothing to do with personal accounts, because they will take away a source of power, money, and corruption for the union bosses.

Imagine a union leader without the ability to direct pension money to a favorite cause, without the ability to get his idiot son-in-law a job, and without the ability to bribe those he fears.

Expect to see a big fight over this one.

Even though it will make workers better off, the bosses don't care.

The unions will not want to lose control of their members' pensions.