Dear Mister Grassley

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

To Graham's credit, he did say that he thought the problem that needed to be addressed, and hasn't as of yet, is that everybody is concentrating on the front-end when the problem that needs to be addressed is the payout and schedule of benefits. 

 

It sounds to me like he's looking at the situation from a perspective that at least has a chance of providing a real solution.

323028[/snapback]

 

But no chance of being accepted. The biggest complaint you hear about Bush's plan (particularly from sources like the AARP - none of whose membership would be affected by Bush's plan anyway ) is that it will adversely impact the payout and schedule of benefits. People want the benefits untouched while the solvency of the system is maintained...which can ultimately only mean "Tax everyone else so I get what I want!"

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

So perhaps the Bush plan will allow you to personally invest your money in US treasuries?

322580[/snapback]

 

From his speech last night (from an AP article on it)

 

"But for Americans concerned about investing in the stock market, he also proposed a relatively safe investment option for private accounts, one invested entirely in U.S.-backed treasury bonds."

 

Good call...

[GG]

Were it up to me, I'd simply phase out the "required" Social Security payments over a period of time in favor of "voluntary" ones, with only those who contribute enrolled in the program.  Thus, if people want to forsake the potential return of a privately managed account for the safety of government-gurarnteed retirement, they can do so; or they can invest their own money into their own retirement plan and tell the government to !@#$ off.  Of course, as a practical matter, that would require a COMPLETE redesign of the entire Ponzi-scheme nature of Social Security as it stands now...but I fail to see where that's a bad thing.  And clearly, my idea's a good compromise, since it can't fail to piss everyone off... 

322844[/snapback]

 

Sounds like the carbon copy of the British system when it was introduced. The trouble, as you may guess, came when many people who opted out of the government system into the private system had returns that actually lagged the government sponsored pensions. After a lot of noise, the government is allowing the folks who chose the private route back into the system.

[ExiledInIllinois]

But no chance of being accepted.  The biggest complaint you hear about Bush's plan (particularly from sources like the AARP - none of whose membership would be affected by Bush's plan anyway  ) is that it will adversely impact the payout and schedule of benefits.  People want the benefits untouched while the solvency of the system is maintained...which can ultimately only mean "Tax everyone else so I get what I want!"

323179[/snapback]

 

I understand what you are saying... I agree.

 

For the sake of making things better, as I said in the past, somebody is gonna get whacked.

 

It is pretty cavalier to think that there are people out there that are dependent on what SS estimated sending them and still say:

 

"Well, I don't care if my benefits drop drastically... Just as long as the system and country does well."

 

It isn't gonna happen... I want the money and yesterday! Every person for themselves!

 

We just keep pumping out magnanimous people in this country... Ya right!

 

[ExiledInIllinois]

Save being naive for the "Greatest Generation."

 

Take care of yourself, pay yourself first.

 

I saw my grandfather die penniless.

 

He worked on the RR during the 1930's... Saw his wage cut from 36 dollars a week to 18.

 

Then those nice 10 dollar gold coins he was paid in? Turned 'em when the gov't scared people into doing so.

 

It is about taking care of YOURSELF first... Cut through the patriotic crap.

 

/end rant.