Privatized Social Security

[Caldric]

What do you guys think of this? I have read the talking heads and listened to a few and some of it makes really good sense but not sure.

Now I do not pay to Social Security I pay into an individual account so it does nothing for me. But honestly as my little experience in the system it is very good and I do not want to go back. Of course there are downsides. Like a huge economic downfall may ruin me for good and I will be on your corners come retirement with my tin can, but then hell would I not be there under SS anyway?

In my account I can invest in several different but limited bonds, stocks etc. Sp500, US Bonds, Alaska Bonds and a few others that sound really dangerous to me.

Personally I still have faith in the individual and think it should be up to them maybe a multi-tier system that will allow opt-in opt-out choices. Also it would give employers a trump card to stop 401k type accounts I think. Where they pay part of your saving, this of course would be limited to greedy bastards but many would still do it to as soon as they wanted the profits to look better, however many would keep it to get good people working for them I believe.

Whatever happens I think there needs to be a great deal of long term thinking with all the unknowns that can happen in a persons life.

There has been 20 nations do this I think the number was including Australia and the UK. Perhaps our British friends could give us some advice on it?

[penumbral_shadow]

i think all of the talking heads do agree that something needs to be done with social security , it needs help... they just dont agree on what to do.

part of the problem has always been that social security has been the governments piggy bank ( from both sides of the isle ) if people had learned to keep their hands out of the cookie jar this might have been adverted .... or there would have been enough cash to start everyone off who isnt of a certain age and economic bracket into the private accounts.

i am not adverse to the private accounts , but what insurances do you have that you will have income come retirement? who will do the investing? will you be able to diversify your portfolio as to minimize loss in an economic downturn? and will the governmnet no longer be able to utilise the funds in there ( therefore adding some safety there )

if they do go to the private system , employers should be required to pay if they drop a 401k plan that was previously paid in to. quite honestly the country was a little better when people for the most part had retirement pension benifits....

it all boils down to how much , your options , who will control the money and the management of it ( as it shouldnt just be left to the individual who will likely loose more then make) , and the safeguards put in place to protect your accounts.

imagine if you owe money , and because it is a account a collection agency could get a judgement against it and sieze part of the money? and how about health care? they still need that when they retire.... and good insurance is not cheap by any means.. heck even not so good insurance isnt cheap.

and what about the disabled? they still need the benifits provided by social security. you cant depend on charitiable orginizations for that...

the one thing i think about all of this is that bush really wants the money in the economy to help strengthen it ( imagine what all of that social security money in the economy would do! ) but to put it in the market without serious safe guards against things like enron scandles and companies that cook the books... economic downturns would be like buying junk bonds.... pay and pray.


so i agree whatever is done it requires alot of studying and restudying , because this is that important.

yeah i agree they definatly need to look to our alies and see how they are doing it for their people....

[Caldric]

I agree it would be a huge influx of money into the private sector and no doubt would kick off a huge economy for a few years anyway.

[penumbral_shadow]

yeha i agree , short term ...the market would have a huge correction eventually and boom.

[Caldric]

Originally Posted by penumbral_shadow

yeha i agree , short term ...the market would have a huge correction eventually and boom.

Yes just like the correction we are going through now because of the boom of the 90's and technology. That is all good if you are gone from office then.

Politicians seem to think only in short term never long term. That is the reason I am worried over it. 300 million people it would be an unheard of change.

[BrianK]

Since I'm not going to be part of the system paying into Soc. Sec. my view would be slanted towards privitization. The reason I lean towards that is because the talk has been about bond funds and not general stock investing. Bond funds for the most part don't pay a lot unless they are junk bonds, and that type isn't part of the gov. plan as far as I know. But as an investment do give a better return than money put into a what amounts to your Soc. Sec. account.

I don't think diversity is going to be an option or at least not in the sense of having a variety of choices. Even 401k's don't offer much in the way of diversity. Depending on how a 401k is set up for withdrawl to gain diversity it would be, in most instances better to convert from a 401k to a self directed IRA before drawing on it. But back to Soc. Sec. It is my understanding the portion that would have personal account status would not be accessible for politicians to waste.

The feel good way is to do nothing now but be ready to implement, increasing taxable income level, increase the age to begin drawing Soc. Sec. benefits & really disgusting INCREASE the tax on wages for Soc. Sec. No matter how you slice it, it's less take home for the wage earner!!! Or with privitization taxing could be remain at the current level and a portion of the wage be put to work in our economy in the form of bonds.

Soc. Sec. was never meant to be a retirement income but a supplement to what people had done on a personal level to live well in their later years. Privitization means that people would have to get back to being concerned with where their money was going to come from. That boils down to responsibility and as we are seeing in our daily lives accepting responsibility isn't a favored activity.

[scott.voigt]

Privatizing Social security underminds the thought behind it. It was established to keep peoples heads above water when they loose their jobs and such... The social security system was never intended to be a means of retirement. I would like to see social security remain under the federal goverment in some manner, but revisions should definately be made. Don't ask me what needs to be done though.. My exp. in such matters are rather limited