It is sad to see Schumer and Reid call privatization "the end of social security." That is not rational nor based on the facts, at least based on the existing proposal.
In that proposal, only a small percentage and then gradually up to 41% could go into a private investment account only taken out later when collecting social security. The account is guaranteed against loss.
But the main effect will allow for higher returns than the artificially low one that the government selfishly limits unrealistically and harmfully. And it will relieve the burden of social security and allow people to retire earlier - without a cost to the taxpayers.
It does not 'end' social security. It instead opens social security and provides a basis for people being able to retire early, while guaranteeing against loss. Read The Private Account.
Of course, new ideas and enhancements are welcome and should be brought forth, but our representatives should be educated (Educating Our Representatives) so that they can make good decisions.
These two representatives are sincere and ardent, but they need to be informed and learn to operate for the greater good. Read Rating The Politicians, which puts forth the standards and characteristics we should look for in our representatives.
To your rational consideration,
The Rational Non-Politician
(They could object because it takes money away from government "revenue", because the government has been taking the money and spending it as if it is theirs [though added to the Trust Fund]. But it takes a good long term unselfishness to accept doing it for the better good in the long run - and the representatives will just have to deal with the unavailability of those monies in the private account, for the short term. Read Social Security to see the idea of "pay as you go", which is what has put us into this dilemma.
No comments:
Post a Comment