It was sold as being an investment plan, even though it was built to work like an entitlement would (the first beneficiaries didn’t chip in anything, this was not a growing investment plan).
The math was there for a while to work out in the long run as an investment plan, if a rather poor one. It worked those people as sheep by providing unearned and uninvested income to others. Demographics have hurt it badly.
Frankly the thing I don’t like about it the most is that it has elbowed away the idea of actual charity to people in such circumstances. FDR hawked it to churches along the lines of charity, and many bought in, not understanding the economics of Christian benevolence.
Can Trump be part of a refactoring of the problem to manageable proportions, moving back towards a privatization plan. I think he could.
>> Can Trump be part of a refactoring of the problem to manageable proportions, moving back towards a privatization plan. I think he could <<
Once he puts forth serious plans for reforming at least the “big three” entitlements, they will be worth a look. But so far, I think Trump is dangerously near Huckabee territory in refusing to come to grips with the issues.
He said he wouldn’t touch Social Security and Medicare. It’s good politics, but ma g be unrealistic.