[Mikey_1962]

The younger they are the more they like it!!!

[Joe Bonforte]

The younger they are the more they like it!!!

Yes, and that's one of the reasons liberals in the Democratic Party and the legacy media will pull out all the stops to defeat it. It has the potential to bind a whole generation to the GOP for their lifetimes, just as FDR bound a generation with the advent of Social Security.

[Ditto]

The younger they are the more they like it!!!

The 29% of those under 30 who say no have me worried. Are there that many stupid young people? It's a no-brainer for anyone under 45 years of age.

[Rakkasan1]

not me! I'd prefer that whopping 2% return on my confiscated money.

[jimfree]

These are great numbers for a straight up or down question. We could turn some of the no voters with some education.

[Fredgoblu]

The younger they are the more they like it!!!

Why wouldn't they!!!

Take a lifetime minimum wage employee; give them their full 12.4% social security contribution; the historic long-term stock return; and 45 years of compounding...

...and they could retire a millionaire!

[Instapost]

Regardless of name calling, when all the young folks sign up for the private accounts and they no longer contribute into the system, where will we get the money to pay benefits? In 2003, $630 billion was collected and $479 billion was paid out. http://www.ssa.gov/budget/2005bud.html. The surplus is held in a general social security trust account. Estimates differ, but probably within 20 years the payouts will exceed the taxes going in and the trust fund will have to be tapped. It will dwindle fairly quickly. The difference in what can be paid and what is available will have to come from general revenues.

If we cut out nearly half of the contributions, the system will have inadequate funds immediately. Will we cut benefits? IF not, where will we get the money to make up the difference. The young-uns won't get their money for at least thirty years. The folks on SS now are the ones who will not have funds available.