2006-07-15 04:57:29 · 6 answers · asked by dee 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
No,
imagine how much commission would be taken by a private pension plan.
You figure the amount of return would not only have to cover adminstrive cost but also gain enough to match current rates for SS.
Reason #1: Today's insurance to protect workers and their families against death and disability would be threatened.
Reason #2: Creating private accounts would make Social Security's financing problem worse, not better.
Reason #3: Creating private accounts could dampen economic growth, which would further weaken Social Security's future finances.
Reason #4: Privatization has been a disappointment elsewhere.
Reason #5: The odds are against individuals investing successfully.
Reason #6: What you get will depend on whether you retire when the market is up or down.
Reason #7: Wall Street would reap windfalls from your taxes.
Reason #8: Private accounts would require a new government bureaucracy.
Reason #9: Young people would be worse off.
Reason # 10: Women stand to lose the most.
Reason #11: African Americans and Latin Americans also would become more vulnerable under privatization.
Reason #12: Retirees will not be protected against inflation.
2006-07-15 05:01:20 · answer #1 · answered by nefariousx 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
At some point, a modification to the system will probably be necessary. A good solution for the current shortfall is to fine employers of illegals three times the amount they would have paid for legal employees, with the proceeds going to the SS Administration.
Some level of personal ownership, and personal oversight concerning how your money is invested will probably be the norm in the near future.
2006-07-15 05:19:56 · answer #2 · answered by lighthouse 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Public or private, thievery could be the norm. on the commonplace public section(social protection) congress & administrations have funneled SS funds into many of their puppy initiatives or used it to stability their budgets. a hundred's of thousands and thousands have been stolen from the SS fund. Our government by no capacity brings that fact to lite. They do, whether, continually hammer on the belief of slicing SS advantages at the same time as giving themselves beneficiant pay will improve. Our own government is stealing from us(no be counted the occasion). If our government officers might have left their thieving arms off the SS fund, it would be solvent for a hundred years. on the own section, company heads, making 10's of thousands and thousands in each year income scouse borrow pension fund funds. Banks pay miniscule dividends to savinfgs debts at the same time as charging 10 situations the cost to borrow plus, effects for each little thing they are able to think of of. some effects are on their own funds! Greed is destroying this u . s . a . from the best to the backside & from the interior out. In essence, we are destroying ourselves. This government, because it extremely is at present, does not have the yank human beings's pastime at heart!!!!
2016-12-14 08:30:00 · answer #3 · answered by popek 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. There should be no type of mandatory retirement system. If you are too stupid to save for your retirement, you deserve what you get.... I'm fine with rounding up all the dumb old people that can't save and simply locking them away and throwing away the key. Sounds harsh, but i strongly feel that a person should take care of themselves....not take money from others to live.
2006-07-15 05:05:53 · answer #4 · answered by null_the_living_darkness 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No because the Nazis in the Whitehouse would find a way to screw us out of that money too.
2006-07-15 04:59:14 · answer #5 · answered by theforce51 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think that would work it sounds simple and easy after all the red tape what would be the point?
2006-07-15 05:05:45 · answer #6 · answered by Zoe 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋