Seems to me a phase out of the existing Social Security programs, allowing people to invest at least a small portion of their current contributions into their retirement accounts would be a much better option than this ponzi scheme.
And what's with the 'you don't have to work to get this' crap?
2007-10-09 07:33:49 · 6 answers · asked by thegubmint 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Civic Participation
How long before this program needs additional funding before it goes bankrupt? Social Security, Medicare?
2007-10-09 07:42:08 · answer #1 · answered by Stereotypemebecauseyouknow 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sounds a lot like the ponzi scheme that Bush floated in 2005 when he talked about privitizing social security and creating individual accounts (a lot like a 401k....hmmmm).
It's no secret that the US govt. cannot afford it's upcoming liabilities with SS and medicare, so every candidate is going to have to come out with a solution to that mess.
2007-10-09 07:45:38 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Actually if you think about it. Investing $1000 of your own money and the government matching $1000 at the end of say 30 years you end up with about $100000 in your account. Thats about $2.75 per day that you need to put into your account. I don't know about you guys, but I spend way more than that just on coffee. Imagine what adding $5 or even $10 per day would do for you
2007-10-09 07:44:54 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
As you pointed out politicians have been making sucker bets for a few hundred years. Shes no exeption
2007-10-09 10:26:11 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No,
it is the same crap that McGovern tried.
2007-10-09 07:43:13 · answer #5 · answered by lundstroms2004 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
more like forty acres and a mule.
2007-10-09 07:42:48 · answer #6 · answered by BRYAN H 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋