Posted on 03/26/2005 2:03:50 PM PST by CorbyCard
by Amy Menefee March 25, 2005
A flurry of media coverage beginning on March 18 put Galveston, Texas, back into the Social Security spotlight. It’s one of three Texas counties that have gained attention because they opted out of Social Security in the early 1980s, when it was still legal to do so.
The New York Times, The Washington Post and ABC News warned Americans last week that the counties’ pension alternative to Social Security was a telling “laboratory” for testing President George W. Bush’s reform plan. According to these news sources, the Galveston plan produced “controversial” results that cast doubt on the wisdom of revamping what the Post called the “venerable program” of Social Security.
The Galveston plan allows people to keep the money they pay into the program – while providing returns on their investment at a much higher rate than Social Security. The media have painted the plan as “controversial” because lower-income workers are not getting paid out of the contributions of higher-income workers, as they do with Social Security. This is because it is an individual retirement savings plan, much like a 401(k). For all workers, the Galveston plan has paid, at minimum, an average return of 5 percent. That’s more than twice as much as the usual 2 percent return for most workers paying into Social Security.
(Excerpt) Read more at freemarketproject.org ...
2% return?
i'll be getting -.97% return from SSi.
i would love to get 2%.
Keep in mind:
Starvation = Euphoria.
I presume that's the solution you're thinking about.
I have a good friend who just got a raise over $90k, so part of his salary is no longer included. He told me, have of his purpose at work now is to keep ahead of "the man" who wants to raise the cap and tap into every penny he earns.
I am in my mid 40s. I would happily give up every cent that I have paid into SSI for almost 30 years now if I could just get out of having to pay into it for the next 25.
i'll see that and raise you.
i'm 32, i would give it all up AND pay a fine just to get out.
Say a broker out bids the competitors saying he can get a return of 8.5%, the investors then are guaranteed 8.5%. If the actual return is only 7.5%, the broker or brokerage firm is then mandated by law to make up the additional 1%. Say the investment returns a 10% gain, the broker gets to pocket the additional 1.5% profit. These are "pie-in-the-sky" numbers, but the concept is what's important. This is how Jim Quinn explained it on his show months ago anyways. Sounds good to me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.