There was an interesting article in the WSJ, a few days ago, that said that the best way to keep SS solvent was to lower the payroll taxes by at least one third, the amount that is eroneously said to be saving for a rainy day when SS is insolvent. The economist said that by doing this, the economy would grow enough to continue funding SS for quite a while longer. I'm no economist, but I sure like the sound of this suggestion.
Yes, it sounds pretty good. Neither am I an economist and I don't understand all the complexities of investment. But I do have some common sense (I like to think!) and, in that spirit, I believe a few proposals are in order. First, I think Bush made an error by using the terms "private account", "stock portfolio", etc. This just gave ammunition to those who opposed reforming a system (all agree) is headed for bankruptcy. It inserted the elements of "gambling", "risk", and insecurity with respect to the S.S. Trust Account. In short, it scared people.
Instead, a person should have the option of investing some of his payments in GUARANTEED government funds. For example, some could be invested in Treasury bonds or guaranteed money market accounts, etc. The interest those totally safe instruments bear is FAR higher than the return given by S.S. They are guaranteed by the full faith and credit of the U.S.
Also, when FDR began the S.S. Trust in 1935 many didn't reach 65, and those who did didn't live much beyond.
With today's longevity it's not unusual for people to be active into their 80's and 90's. While people are living longer that ever, we've reduced the eligible collection age to 62!!
It's common sense to raise the eligible age. Any simple actuarial table of any insurance company would tell us that immediately! Why not run this program according to the sound business principles of a private insurance firm?
The trouble is that the pols won't touch the "third rail". At the same time they're willing to hasten its demise by expanding it to include non-citizen aliens.
It's a sad story. Rather than conduct some belt-tightening reforms in order to preserve the system - they'd rather destroy it in the long term in order to pander to the irrational fears (which they create and exploit) of people.