Sign the Grassroots Petition: No Thanks, AARP!

NoThanksAARP ^ | Jan. 23, 2005

[Middle-O-Road]

First, borrowing money to pay these costs would be ill advised. I have never suggested such a thing.

The White House IS suggesting it. That's part of my objection.

View this here:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/01/20050114-7.html

Specifically, he states:

"Second, we must not increase payroll taxes, because taxes are already high enough on America's workers, and higher taxes would slow job growth, and our entire economy. And third, we should give younger workers the option to save some of their payroll taxes in a personal account, a nest egg they own and control and can pass on to their children, which the government cannot take away. Let me emphasize here, this would be an option, it would be voluntary. Workers who prefer to continue with the current system should and will be allowed to do so.

Setting up personal accounts as part of a reform package is needed to modernize the system. Workers should have the option of investing more of their own retirement money and earning a reasonable rate of return, rather than the less than 2 percent real return they can expect with the current system.

And so what would it take to introduce personal accounts? Setting up these accounts is likely to require transition financing. I said "transition financing", and not "transition costs", because we are financing the transition to a stronger pension system. We are not creating new costs. By allowing people to keep some of their payroll taxes in personal accounts, we would be pre-funding benefits that would otherwise have to be paid in the future - from the payroll taxes of workers not yet born.

Some opponents of fixing the system have suggested that transition financing would hurt our economy. They're wrong. It is true that the Treasury would have to borrow funds to pay for current retirees as young worker payroll taxes stay in their own accounts. But because of the new saving that would occur in these new accounts, the economy would see no net loss in saving."

We're being sold a bill of goods with this proposal and it could cost us our shirts.

Yes, if the proposal were - let's raise taxes to fix this problem, and create private accounts so you have control over your own money - that might be a good plan and a good fix. That's not being suggested. Only the private accounts with no new taxes. If your suggestion were on the table, I might support it, depending on how the taxes were raised and whether or not the pol crooks were padding the bill with pork.

I forget which Senator suggested to tax certain import goods - if this were done wisely, it might prevent the EU from going to the WTO to say we're protectionist in subsidizing American business - steel, for example (it's not the best example, tho it does have political mileage, but it will do to illustrate what might be done) - especially since they themselves are doing it. Since we don't do that here, THEIR products are 'subsidized' by us not taxing them! That's pretty anti-competitive for American companies. The plan could potentially be used to improve competitivity for US companies, since the US market is largest in the world by far and improving competitiveness here would be most helpful. This would have to be carefully done so as not to negatively impact the economy. I'm not sure I trust Congress to do it ... :p

It's something I would be willing to look at, depending on the particulars.

[Rakkasan1]

if the gubmint would let me opt out now, I'd say keep all
you've stolen from me, just don't steal any more and leave
me the f*** alone.

SOSH 'SECURITY'-you can rearrange the deck chairs, but you're still gonna sink.

[NJ_gent]

"Asking the government to reform Social Security is a bit like asking the Corleones to reform their numbers racket. It's a Ponzi scheme, there is no trust fund, there is no money, they spent it all."

Worth repeating - bolder and brighter.

[fight_truth_decay]

BTT

[ReleaseTheHounds]

Thanks, FTD!

[vivabushchick]

More than happy to sign!

[RockAgainsttheLeft04]

Sorry, bud, you can have my sympathy but not my signiture. Won't sign strictly because I have a personal "no-boycott" policy. You're more than welcome to take a crack at it though-- Lord knows if anyone deserves it it's the greedy "me, mine, and after me the deluge" losers who work the boards at the AARP.

If we all give Pres. Bush the support he needs to push his SS reform bill through Congress, with a little luck Social Security just might be around long enough for all the young workers of America to actually collect some of the money they put into the system. Keeping social security solvent for future generations (like your our children) and allowing the American worker to invest some of his own money into his retirement plans-- now THAT's a concept who's time has come, and one that the AARP doesn't seem to understand, or even care about.

[TASMANIANRED]

If the Gen xr opens up his account and there is no money in it then the whole country has gone down the toilet.

Private enterprise makes the products, pays the salary's and pays the taxes.

The government takes the money and spends it. Any time government handles your money you loose any where from 30-50% in administrative costs or through theft.

If the stock market has gone to 0 then the entire country is in a Depression that makes the 1930's look like chump change.

The government will have no money to pay any benefits either.

A single company may go belly up but investing in a well diversified group of companies will not.

Over all including the years of the depression. Any rolling 10 year period no matter which year you pick, even if it is 1929 to 1939 the market is up 8-12%.

Social Security as it currently stands is worse than stuffing money in a mattress.

[TASMANIANRED]

Baby boomers officially end in 1960.

[Coleus]

My sentiments about republicans who are members of AARP are on my homepage.   Don't let anyone fool you,  many republicans or so-called republicans are members of this group and like it. How do I know. I know people from my very own republican club who go to their meetings and buy their insurance!  

 

 

AARP? Not For Me! From bogus surveys designed to promote a hidden liberal agenda to actively promoting liberal causes like gay marriage, the AARP has become one of America's most active liberal lobbies -- at the expense of seniors and their families. As a result, more and more Americans are standing up to the AARP and saying "enough is enough!" Join the growing grassroots movement and voice your opinion on the AARP! Click here to voice your opinion today!

 

Did you know that the AARP has received over $1 BILLION in taxpayer dollars over the past 20 years? 

	Stop Government Funding of AARP

[Coleus]

1964

[Coleus]

I hope you will agree. >>

I agree, it's just too bad so many republicans are part of the organization and buy their insurance

[Coleus]

SSFMK

what's this mean?