2007-05-30 06:12:05 · 10 answers · asked by psycho 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
It wouldn't let the government use the trust as a piggy bank anymore. Oops, that's a positive effect....
It would provide a better return on the money extorted from workers in order to "pay for their retirement". Oops, that's good too.
I'm not sure, but I'm sure a few of this site's Socialists will let you know what they think.
2007-05-30 06:19:36 · answer #1 · answered by Time to Shrug, Atlas 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Privatize Social Security?!!! What are you thinking!!?? If we do that, how will congress find money to fund their pork projects or their private jets or their limousines? For crying out loud what do you expect congress to do in those situations. Take chartered flights and drive sensible cars!? And that is to say nothing about giving themselves a hefty pay raise every year. We all know that $100,000 is hard to live on.
2007-05-30 06:20:58 · answer #2 · answered by crazysnk18 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
a private voluntary SS and/or Medicare portfolio is what I want. Voluntary is the version. There does no longer be a clarification for mandatory purchase. If the government can rigidity me to purchase some thing no rely what, this is a slippery slope for paying for something in any respect.
2016-11-23 18:18:15 · answer #3 · answered by alexine 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bush . People need what a little Social Security they get, the Stock Market would crash and all these poor children, elderly and disabled would be starving to death, I think that is the reason Bush tried so hard to get this but as usual he failed . I wish he would fail to show back up at the White house today and everyday , pick Laura up and out the door they would go . Skipping , Bush would have his Cheerleader uniform on and Laura would have her back of weed for sale like she had in College. When she and her boyfriend was drunk or had smoked some of her dope, she had a wreck and the boy was killed. Poor soul.
2007-05-30 06:25:38 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
Social Security would still exist.
2007-05-30 06:15:26 · answer #5 · answered by B.Kevorkian 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It would be negative in the fact that if the investments that were made with money turned out to be bad then people would be left without income that at this time is already barely enough to live on.
2007-05-30 06:58:45 · answer #6 · answered by Lori B 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
poor people don't understand money or investing so the people who need social security the most would wind up with nothing, and it would just be extra icing on the cake for the rich.
2007-05-30 06:23:15 · answer #7 · answered by Jmanfan 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
None really, with perhaps the point the answerer above me stated.
2007-05-30 06:16:56 · answer #8 · answered by rmagedon 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Your health care system should convey the consequences of that happening.
2007-05-30 06:16:24 · answer #9 · answered by ??? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
none. next question.
2007-05-30 06:17:24 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋