Do you favor the Republican plan to hand your Social Security money to accounts with Investment Fund managers?

Question

None of the retirees I know would even consider trading benefits for a investment account.

Answer 1

I agree. Privatisation would increase risks, be more costly and would be a give away of public moneys to private investment firms. But what can you expect of Bush and the Republicans. They advocate these policies also in response to their power base.

Answer 2

NO way on earth. There is no guarantee that those funds would even survive let alone do well. It is too much of a gamble. While I do have investments in a retirement account and they are doing well I am still uncertain about the future of them. At least I can depend on Social Security for some money to keep me from living like a troll under a bridge.

Answer 3

It is really an insurance plan. And one that can pay off long before you reach retirement, should you become disabled. It is termed 'entitlement', but that really is inaccurate. Yes, you are entitled to receive payments if you qualify, but those payments are determined by Congress. It is not an investment account, since it doesn't belong to you, nor will it suddenly go to zero value. Nor are you promised a specific rate of return.

Answer 4

Investments are your only way of making decisions about your funds. The Social Security Administration wastes your money because it is added to a huge public fund. These administrators don't have to be accountable for how the money is doled out. It's wantonly given away to those who file enough paper work with the right people. As a special ed teacher, I see kids who obviously were coached on how to be eligible for spec. ed so mama can get a check. With a private investor, such funds would not be available to people who never paid a dime to earn them.

Answer 5

Of course not. Current administration fees for Social Security are 3% of contributions. Wall Street would take upwards of 12% on private accounts.

Answer 6

No. My pension was recently frozen and the company will now match up to a certain % to be invested through the 401K. To me, that is gambling with my future. I believe that SS would remain solvent if they would just leave the money in there to grow instead of robbing from it every month for the past few years.

Answer 7

If you're talking about privatizing Social Security and letting me handle my own money. Most definitely YES. Americans can do a much better job of handling their money than the government can. Look at the debt that the government is in! The Social Security money is all borrowed money. Liberals have put America into debt by making Americans dependent upon the Government. This cycle must be stopped... FDR is the reason for our current debt crisis.......

Answer 8

If done as a group and all the money is invested in stocks, I would be ok with it. Long term stocks have always outperformed bonds /t-bills. If allowed to be done as individuals, i think it's nuts. You'd have millions of idiot investors having lost all of their social security income and either homeless in the streets or looking for a national bail out.

Answer 9

The Republicans have proven themselves to be scoundrals and lawbreakers. Why would we even consider such a thing as allowing them to play with Social Security. They can't even balance the federal budget and have sold our future to China.

Answer 10

Which Party robbed the Social Security Funds in the past and put in an I.O.U. and never paid? Can we all say, Democratic Party...