Texas in the 80's where state employees were able to opt out of the SS system and go private. These people are now recieving 2 to 3 times monthly check than regular SS recepient, should we not emulate polocies that suceed . I would like to hear response from mostly democrats a LOGICAL reason why this is a bad idea
2006-10-27 04:19:39 · 7 answers · asked by Ynot! 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
for those who like facts go to this wesite
http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba/ba514/
2006-10-27 05:04:23 · update #1
Neither party will go for it because then they won't have that pot to raid anymore.
2006-10-27 04:30:24 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't know about all state employees in Illinois, but when my wife worked for the U of I they took out no SS, they took out for the University employee's retirement fund. I would have prefered that all the money they (the SS) took from me had went into a savings account or some such fund. I would be rich now, my kids would have something when I passed on and I would feel a lot more secure. Once any government agency gets your money you are screwed and you have to live under their guidelines, even though they can not handle the system theirself.
2006-10-27 04:33:12 · answer #2 · answered by Thomas S 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The reason they don't want to privatize is because they will no longer control the money. Some politicians are all about controlling money and power. If you take that away they lose influence and power. They like you to depend on government, if you can do things for your self, what power do they have. There is actually a lot of misinformation about SS but don't have time to get into all that now. For one thing there is no money actually put aside. The money is used right away and many times not even for SS payments. The money we put in now is used just like any other dollar you pay the government in taxes. They don't want to give that up.
2006-10-27 04:26:50 · answer #3 · answered by scorpio 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
You would then have the exact same situation that triggered the creation of SS in the first place. You would then have investment smart people in CA, TX, NY, etc. making money and those in uneducated state making nothing. You'll see elder people eating cat and dog food again. I guess that's what you're advocating. So you would like to see your mom warming up canned dog food? Nice.
2006-10-27 04:30:01 · answer #4 · answered by JuJitsu_Fan 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
If the democrats passed a bill that creates LESS future victims, then where would they be?
You're too logical in your approach to public policy, knock it off!! /:
2006-10-27 04:29:52 · answer #5 · answered by Curt 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is not logical to take such a small sample and deem it a success. Also you lack links to this and in that I don't see its success as anything but your personal opinion.
2006-10-27 04:26:59 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
LMAO!!! Logical and Democrat!! Does not compute.
2006-10-27 04:24:51 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋