Is Bush's plan to privatize Social Security is a bad idea?

Answer 1

No, it is a very good idea. Contrary to popular misconception, putting people in charge of their own future helps them to learn *gasp* -PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. I would much rather have control over my own retirement finances than to rely on the government. For those who do not want/lack the ability to worry about the choices, there are several pretty conservative options, as I understand it.

A privatized version of Social Security would be little different from private businesses' plans which have been "defined contribution" for years. They are heavily regulated and many, many people have retired and utilized those plans to fund their lives.

Those opposed to this idea are most likely to utter the nine most dangerous words in the English language. "I'm from the government, and I'm here to help." Without all the FICA taxes rolling into the Treasury, the Entitlement Society people have less money to push their socialist agenda.

Answer 2

It is a scam to distract the public from what really is going on. Congress has been borrowing the money in the social security trust fund, every penny of which was paid from FICA taxes on the wages and self employment earnings of workers - and congress has no plan in place to pay it back when it is needed to pay benefits. Bush has admitted that privatizing Social Security would do nothing to improve its solvency. - All that would change with Bush's plan is that Wall Street would get some of your money to invest- They when it came time for you retire, the government would cash in your stock account, keep all the money and pay you an annuity for life, just like it does now. - If you did well in the stock market you would get a little more - and if you did poorly in the stock market you would get a little less. Meanwhile, Wall Street would collect fees from your money.

Answer 3

It's a horrible idea! Social Security was created after the Great Depression because it was painfully obvious that laissez-faire capitalism couldn't do the job. After black Friday, hundreds of millions of America's hardest workers were left with nothing for their old age.

Because America's economy still runs on borrowed money, the same thing could easily happen again. Since the government freely prints money but does not guarantee its value, and since our citizens have no choice but to use the government's money, shouldn't our citizens have some means to guarantee their own survival following a lifetime of hard work and paying taxes?

People who make their living by manipulating other people's money universally favor an inflationary economy because it allows them to pay down old debts with cheaper new money. People who work for their living hate inflation because it constantly devalues their savings. A dollar earned in 1965 is worth eight cents today. Any fool can clearly see that America's economy exists for the benefit of the rich at the expense of the poor. The Social Security system is the only protection most people have against a government that exists to benefit corporate capitalism at the expense of hard working individuals.

We can't all be Wall Street tycoons. Some of us must sweep floors and flip burgers for our living. Social Security is a citizen's only protection against a heartless government that quadrennially redefines it's economic policies for the benefit of the shamelessly wealthy.

Answer 4

If your money is invested in the stock market, yes it is a bad idea. Look what happened to the stock market 3 weeks ago when it lost 500 points. My wifes 401 took a big hit and will take another 2 years to recover unless the market takes a hit again. The SS has had a successgul run all the years. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Some pundits have said it will be broke in another 40 years, others have said it will never go broke. Anyones guess.

Answer 5

Stock Market = gambling.
Granted a lower statsitical risk then the actual lottos, but still.
It is however more likely to help you then the gov't 30-40 years from now.
If you somehow get the option, you can alway take the safer routes of CD's and Treasurey Bills.

Answer 6

It became a conservative that provided it, might have been a similar if Liberals had provided it. it isn't the techniques of government that misrepresented, it rather is way government poorly represents itself to us! I had to edit this using fact of each and every of the answerers that declare the marketplace downfall might have wiped out privatization: only no longer authentic! all of us that lost 401K earnings this downturn are almost one hundred% recovered. My source is my own 401K that I actual have not manipulated in view that 2006, and a gaggle of my co-workers.

Answer 7

Yes, it will screw those who paid into the system over the years. Privatizing it would have to take decades to implement.

Answer 8

That's just another scam, like the war and Halliburton.

Answer 9

No. If you have control over the assets yourself, you cant blame the government for your late life poverty. Though the "freedom of choice" crowd seems to shy away from choice, when it does not meet there criteria.

Answer 10

Well...Since the gov't has messed it up...How could it get worse?