English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Do you believe George W. Bush when he says Social Security will soon be bankrupt? He says there will not be enough people paying into the system. He says the only way to save Social Security is by privatizing it. He says Americans should invest their Social Security funds in the stock market to prevent a tragedy in the future. I don't really understand why he says this. On the one hand, he claims the unemployment rate is extremely low, but on the other hand, he claims that there will not be enough workers in the future to prevent Social Security from becoming bankrupt. What do you think? Do you think something really needs to be done to save Social Security?

2007-09-20 12:02:32 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

22 answers

Wasn't this news in 2003 or something?

2007-09-20 12:05:45 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4 1

Social Security is going broke but a) Bush has no real intention to fix it and b) Bush isn't the first one to mention it.

Lets address some of the key issues in your question:

"Americans should invest their Social Security funds in the stock market to prevent a tragedy in the future"

This carries obvious risk, but we've also seen that the Federal Reserve is willing to create inflation to keep stock profits up. These types of currency devaluation policies would hurt the lower half of the income spectrum a lot less if they had some money in the market, too. Every worker earning less than $90 K a year is already "investing" 13% of their wage toward retirement, unfortunately our politicians are spending it faster than it comes in. After 70 years of "saving" for social security, we have a big I Owe You saved up and not one penny more. The worst that could happen? The stock market loses all value and we break even compared to the government's investment plan.


"he claims the unemployment rate is extremely low, but on the other hand, he claims that there will not be enough workers in the future to prevent Social Security from becoming bankrupt"

Believe it or not, these are both correct! Unemployment calculates the number of people who WANT a job but cannot find one. For this statistic, our current rates are low. This just means if you WANT a job, you have good odds of finding one.

On the other hand! Last year, only some 120,000,000 income tax returns were filed. More people than ever simply don't have to work because of government benefits, retirement, disability, whatever. When social security was started, there were 15 workers for every beneficiary. Today that number is closer to 2 workers for every beneficiary. Birth rates are in drastic decline and people are living longer than ever before, so this trend is going to continue.

Here are the real options:

-More Money In-
A) Private investment - try to beat the government's rate of return
B) Raise Social Security Taxes

-Cut Costs-
C) Reduce Social Security benefits
D) Raise the Age of Retirment

-Increase the working population-
E) Ban abortion and birth control so we have more population at work
F) Let virtually unlimited amounts of immigrants in
G) Cut welfare benefits etc to force more people to pay taxes

-Save for your own retirement, ignoring the 13% of your income that was supposedly for your retirement, because if you're under 40 it probably won't be there for you when you retire if no reforms are made-
H) None of the above

2007-09-20 12:20:00 · answer #2 · answered by freedom first 5 · 0 0

the Social Security system is absolutely on the road to collapse. Too many retirees and not enough new workers entering the system. On the other hand, privatizing Social Security would be a terrible mistake... I haven't heard the other options and the elderly voters will never support taking down Social Security, so look forward to a long, harsh collapse of the Social Security system

2007-09-20 12:17:03 · answer #3 · answered by MrPotatoHead 4 · 0 0

No, don't beleive it because I heard something the other day when a lady was talking about illeagal immigrants and how so many actually pay into the SS fund but never collect...In fact it is really a savings account for everyone who works unless they ask to not pay!! So the insurance like Social security is paid in and that total decides your monthly payment when and if you retire. So What the woman said in passing was that there is $185 Billion dollars being held(untouchable) for recipients who will never collect for whatever reasons...so I think there was a greed factor that no one will talk about in that whole issue...that money would have disappeared into the ???warchest? or who ever could get it first because it is a secret little fund....If the SS was dismantled then where would it go?? Now as for new duties on the backs of those few SS employees...the new duty is not legal really but yours truly, Mr Bush wants the SS number for any questionable employee to be researced out to prove that person was leagal to work in the US...The employers would be required to fire them...I have to go now...

2007-09-20 12:18:20 · answer #4 · answered by deanna b 3 · 1 1

If the 1.8 trillion dollars the federal government owes the trust fund was in place there would be no problem. Instead of cash the fund consists of nonnegotiable government bonds that are basically worthless because the government has no intention of paying it back. When I borrow money I have to pay it back. Maybe that is what we should do something about. That and keep their sticky fingers out of the fund in the future.

2007-09-20 14:05:22 · answer #5 · answered by Pop Pop 1 · 0 0

Yes, it's been broken for years & a part of the national debt. Unfortunately the issue reaches all the way back to its inception. Originally it was marketed as a a savings benefit & many of the people who bought into it mistakenly believed that all of the $ they put into it would be theirs at retirement - much like a savings acct. Part of the problems with it are allowing immigrants who are in the country & barely work for a year to retire with benefits, congress borrowing from it to fund other programs, and many people who collect it upon becoming disabled & then staying on it for decades. It needs to be majorly revamped since it is as much of a problem as ADC & welfare used to be.

2007-09-20 12:13:54 · answer #6 · answered by anna s 4 · 0 0

No.
Use common sense.
Tens of millions pay into social security every day in this country. Social security taxes are at an all time high. Plus, billions of dollars were paid into the system by illegals over the past several years. Those monies were and still are put into a special fund that Bush nor Congress ever talk about to you, the general public.
Additionally, your government has been dipping into social security funds for decades. They will never pay back what they borrowed. Hence the broken" bs.
I don't buy this 'people are living longer than they used to ;and they collect longer"--- well so what! They earned it!
If Bush wants to do something to 'fix' the system, then let him throw a piece of legislation to Congress....do like he did when he wanted those hundreds of billions for Iraq. Do the same thing for the Social Security system. Pay back every cent that was borrowed -- with interest.
Then it would be 'fixed'.

Besides I don't believe a word Bush says anymore, or perhaps I should say, a "word" others tell him to say.He is so untrustworthy that there is no reason to believe him, about this issue, or any other.
bye bye bush
Bush' only interest in fixing the ss system it to help his investor buddies on Wall Street.He can fool others but not this young woman.
DEANNA
below

'You are absolutely
categorically correct!
Illegals HAVE been paying in to social security for decades!
There was NO accounting regarding their earnings!
Yes they used others social security numbers.
humm
So all that did was to fatten the coffers of those whose social secrity numbers were used?
You forget. Social security goes by numbers NOT names.
So some of you oldsters there are actually collecting off of the benefits of that 185 billion YOUR govenrment Never told you about which was contributed by ILLEGALS who will never see a dime of it.
Stop being foolish sillies.
Check out what your government DOES NOT tell you.

2007-09-20 12:08:41 · answer #7 · answered by rare2findd 6 · 1 4

i ask your self how a lot of people who declare Bush lied and for this reason they have uncontrollable hatred in direction of him rather experience the comparable way approximately Clinton, who replaced into shown to be a liar. no person has shown that Bush lied approximately something, yet that would not supply up them from asserting he's a liar. this is psychotic habit. i'm continuously intrigued how many ignorant people have such pent up hatred that would desire to be directed at somebody. they do no longer seem to care with regard to the fact, yet they suspect the lies the media feeds them it is meant to create this hatred. it is stunning, yet quite unhappy rather. i think it is much less stressful to hate somebody once you're blind to the information.

2016-10-09 13:34:59 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I believe Bush is a puppet for the owners of the Federal Reserve just like Hillary will be when she is elected by the parrots we call voters.

Social Security is a farce for starters. It was never meant as a retirement program but since 1969 Congress has been stealing (they call it borrowing) money from the SS Trust Fund to pay for pork projects without having to constantly raise taxes (which makes it easier to get reelected) and they haven't been paying back the Trust Fund like they said they would - yes, Republicans and Democrats are responsible for bankrupting Social Security but millions of Americans are still naive enough to vote for them.

2007-09-20 12:08:11 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2 4

Yes. But I believed that long before President Bush said it.

My retirement financial planning never includes income input from Social Security. I don't believe it will be there when I'm eligible to retire.

2007-09-20 12:10:05 · answer #10 · answered by Michael M 6 · 4 1

Let me make a small point here that is not known by most people. The mathematics that dictates social security will only be able to provide 75% or so of benefits by 2039 is based upon the assumption that the average life expectancy in 2039 will be ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY. That's right, that's ONE FIVE ZERO.

Beyond laughable, huh?

2007-09-20 12:07:23 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 2 3

fedest.com, questions and answers