like social security? so we should end social security? millions of eldery women live on nothing but social security. what should happen to them
No, we need to reform social security. I'm personally for getting rid of it starting for anyone under 25 and locking in anyone over 45. The people between 25 and 45 we should offer a payout of their current benefits and let them control the money in a private account. Why do I want them to control it? Because the government will just spend the money today and borrow against it. The government can't spend what they don't have. I think it's fair solution. The elderly will get what they were promised, the people in the middle will get what they currently are owed and anyone new out of school will start fresh with their own equity. You see something wrong with this?
sure plenty. unless you are willing to force the young people to save under the threat of law most will not do it and you will end up eventually with pictures of old people dying in the streets and the government will be forced to help them anyhow. it is much more sensible to have a plan like social security in place ahead of time to head off what you know is the human nature of people not to plan for their future until its too late.
Well, they wouldn't be able to spend the money. It would be much like an IRA or 401k is. We have lots of evidence with the existing system that very few people actually dip into their retirement accounts until an emergency. They would own the account but would not be free to withdraw the funds anyway they see fit. Could some people out there still screw that up? Sure, but Vhehn at some point we have to let natural selection take it's course. People need to be free to fail and suffer. You can't put a perpetual band aid on everything. And if these young kids still find a way to blow it, again, I have no issues with funding shelters or food pantries. So they won't die on the street. At some point man we have to start holding Americans accountable.
You know after Katrina we had a very interesting experiment. Bush decided it would be a wonderful idea to hand out pre-paid debit cards to all the victims. What they didn't know was we set them up so we could track where they were spending the money. And where did those "poor" people spend the money. On their rent, their medical, food? Nope, they spent it at the bar, strip clubs, cigarettes, alcohol and junk. There is a bigger problem Vhehn we have to address. Maybe the problem is we need to give them more money right? I mean that is the problem right? More money? This BS Mav, I've worked disasters for over 12 years, most people don't abuse the system. Does it happen yes, all over the country by all races. I like to see the report you got from the government. JDConner
1 - It's insurance, not a retirement plan. 2 - It works very well because the pool is huge. 3 - Its success is the envy of the rest of the world: Why Privatizing Social Security Is a Terrible Idea
http://www.snopes.com/katrina/charity/debitcard.asp http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11326973/ I am not saying "everyone" abused the system, but simply if you write blank checks, you ask for this shit. I'm all for food and shelter. I think most Americans would support that. But not giving someone cash and letting them do whatever they want. This is the real issue in america that no one on the right or the left wants to address. How to actually educate these people not to waste money. Look, these people were devastated. They lost everything. Their homes, their pets, their belongings, everything. You would think they would have had some desire to protect this money and not throw it away. This is the real problem that needs to be addressed. And btw, I never brought race into it. Poor people from all walks of life abuse the system.
We are going to have to agree to disagree. The issue is not whether it's insurance or a retirement plan, the issue is we are broke. The government is like a crack addict that keeps promising to make it better then the second they get a few dollars from you they go buy more crack. I actually would not have a problem with social security the way it is if the government could not borrow against it. But that will never happen. We don't live in utopia and it's not fair to use utopia as some sort of goal. The government will always spend the money and monetize that debt. When you get the money back in retirement it's only worth a fraction of what you put in because of inflation. In other words, the government you could say is acting like a broker that charges the citizen an enormous vig through in inflation to hold the money. That is outright theft. BTW, this is why no one can actually live off of social security when they get it, because it's not worth anything. So what's the point? Again, I would rather support a system that provides free housing, food and basic medical care to anyone over 75. You pay no social security taxes in this system and you get nothing back. If you save anything on your own, good for you. If you don't, you live in government retired housing. Just anything to get the governments hands off our money. Enough already.
have you noticed how much of a fuss people are kicking up because the government is trying to mandate that young people buy health insurance? in theory a system could be set up for forced savings into an index fund or something similar. the problem i see there is you then put the money into the hands of the greatest skimming operation known to man. wall street. the wall street mutual fund industry has devised a system where they get to skim 2% no matter their performance. it is much better to keep what we have. social security has been one of the greatest success stories of our generation. it has allowed millions to live their elder years with minimal poverty. the only problem with it is it should be considered an insurance program. then you means test it. there is no reason wealthy people should be recieving social security.
Well that is another thing I would change, I agree the rich should not be getting the benefits but they shouldn't paying in either otherwise you are just taking their money and giving it to the poor. I think they should be able to opt out if their income exceeds a certain amount. When their income drops again, they have to pay back in.