"The devil will, as you say, be in the details."
Indeed. I'm not sure there is cause to tempt the devil. Again, my main objection is that this is a MIGHTY big risk for little or no gain, given the actual state of SS.
"The ideal private-investment reform for me would be:"
The problem is, Tom, is that your system practically assured that 1-5% of retirees will have invested in dumb stuff and will be foisted back on the taxpayer to pay for. Plus, it assures an inflation of the Government to regulate risk behavior and monitor investing practices, diversity etc- even for just the 'low bar' you set for government involvement. 'Traditional' SS son't go away, because as you say, its voluntary.
So we have all the cost of managing the traditional SS, plus the 1-5% of people who are going to come begging, plus the extra beaurocracy(can't spell it, don't want to learn how, don't bother pointing it out). Thats going to add up to a LOT OF MONEY.
All for something that isn't really a problem.
And then if we go the 'Hyper Government' route, the US Gov't becomes the single largest stock-holder in the history of the world at worst, and at best merely imposes politically-vulnerable and possibly corrupt judgements about what we can and can't invest in. Which means also more beaurocracy, more laws, more gov't involvement in the economy and in individual lives and again:
It fixes a problem that doesn't exist outside political speaches and partisan fantasies.
"People can make jokes about the T-Bills that the fund is now invested in, but that's probably the only safe place to put the money. Even if private investments create greater returns, it would again be a recipe for certain corruption and de-facto nationalization of some private entities if the government bought enough of some things."
So your argument is we should privatize so that private citizens can do exactly what the government is doing (T-Bills) for the same return? That doesn't exactly leave me excited.
Davin L.
Current Events » in reply to What Ed said.
re: What Ed said.
The whole thread (75 posts)
- Serious Insecurities concerning Social Security 'Reform'
- My plan to reform Social Security
- Thats actually a pretty good idea, IMO
- If it "over-funds" the system, just cut the tax rate. Simple. (n/t)
- The system is currently overfunded as it is
- Not if it is to become a VESTED system with assets backing liabilities.
- re: The system is currently overfunded as it is
- I could live with that.
- Thats actually a pretty good idea, IMO
- Not to mention the dark secret that people are only just realizing..
- The only true fix for SS
- More to the point
- re: No big secret.
- Tom hit the BS buzzer
- So the fix is to simply confiscate more and more money?
- Further, they always claim that it must get worse and worse
- Bartleby the Scrivener
- Does anyone else see the political weirdness here?
- Not my problem, Tom, that you have a propensity for strawman arguments and distorting positions you disagree with
- More on the Amazing Vanishing Social Security Crisis
- The DNC choice to take the position that after all the years of claiming there was a crisis, now there isn't one, will not hold up. (n/t)
- again
- correction, misread something Tom said
- More on the Amazing Vanishing Social Security Crisis
- Not my problem, Tom, that you have a propensity for strawman arguments and distorting positions you disagree with
- Tom hit the BS buzzer
- What Ed said.
- Very good points
- My plan to reform Social Security
