The issue is not the performance of the individual accounts it is that the individual accounts do not solve the issie of how Social Security can pay the promised benefitrs to the babby boomers who are too old for individual accounts. The problem Bush is telling America about is the inability of Social Security to pay 100% of the benefits after 2042. The individual accounts not only do not solve that issue but cause the date that SS will not be able to pay 100% of the benefits before 2042 because of the Trillions of dollars that would be diverted from the Trust Fund to the individual accounts.

The issue is not the performance of the individual accounts

That may be YOUR argument, but it's NOT the argument of the DNC. Frankly, I propose a "graduated" system that would put 1% of an employee's earnings into the private plan, and gradually increase as the burden shifts from paying the previous generation to paying the current generation.

That may be YOUR argument, but it's NOT the argument of the DNC. Frankly, I propose a "graduated" system that would put 1% of an employee's earnings into the private plan, and gradually increase as the burden shifts from paying the previous generation to paying the current generation

It is only the democrats in DC who say that, as most of the state legislators long ago put the state pension money in the stock market.  That is where mine is.  And while it did not do too well in the early 21st century, it has been doing pretty good since then.

Bush is the one telling Americans that SS is in financial trouble because it can not pay the promised benefits after 2042. Then he turns to individual accounts that do not solve the problem he just identified and tells us must be solved. Individual accounts deals with the generation AFTER the Baby Boomers. The issue at hand is how to pay the benefits to the boomers?

And Bush has answered that, Col. You and other's won't listen.

And it's MY retirement you're spending for your own political agenda. THAT pisses me off!

No, Bush has not answered the issue of how to pay the benefits to the Baby Boomers. The White House as well as the Social Security Administration have stated the individual accounts DO NOT INSURE the benefits can be paid to the boomers.

How is your retirement being spent? Are you a Boomer? I am only interested in making sure that the SS benefits can be paid as promised.

col,

No, I am a generation X'er who has contributed to Social Security for ALL of my working years, only to see its promise being eroded away by your party, who hide their heads in the sand and pretend a problem does not exist.

If it's NOT my money, then stop pulling it from my wages under the pretense that it is.

The fact is, Social Security is a flawed pyramid scheme that's only now being "found out". If we're not going to give the promise of a return to all workers who've paid into the system, we need to stop taking their money under that pretense. Period.

The fact is, Social Security is a flawed pyramid scheme that's only now being "found out".

Actaully, this is not new.  It has been known since the early 80s that it is a ponzi scheme and doomed to failure.  At that time, the fix was higher taxes.  But tha tcan only last so long, and they knew it at the time.  SO of course the answer is once again higher taxes (Democrats) or an overhaul.  Bush is going the overhaul route.

The problem with Social Security is the abnormally large number of people born after the second world war. Last year 2004 with approximately 3 people working for every person retired Social Security had $156 billion surplus. The problem is the baby boomer bubble however when that bubble is past there is every reason to believe that Social Security will be similar to what it is today when it can pay the benefits promised.

If we are to convert SS into a partially privatize configuration there needs to the two financial issues resolved. First, we have to pay full benefits people too old to convert to individual accounts. Second, we have had to fund the new structure. What Bush is proposing to take the money needed to pay the benefits of people to old to convert to create the individual accounts and that simply will not fly. This can not be done unless we are willing to come up with the additional money to both fixed Social Security for the older Americans and provide the funding for the transition to a partially privatized system. George Bush hasn't come up with five cents toward paying ANY of this cost.

If we are to convert SS into a partially privatize configuration there needs to the two financial issues resolved. First, we have to pay full benefits people too old to convert to individual accounts. Second, we have had to fund the new structure. What Bush is proposing to take the money needed to pay the benefits of people to old to convert to create the individual accounts and that simply will not fly. This can not be done unless we are willing to come up with the additional money to both fixed Social Security for the older Americans and provide the funding for the transition to a partially privatized system. George Bush hasn't come up with five cents toward paying ANY of this cost.

Why only GW? The president is NOT the only one that can field answers. Nobody else has the brains? If they don't want to come up with an answer then they should get OFF his back! Can't the dems come up with something? All I hear is whine, whine, whine from the dems but nothing concrete.

drmiler..


Wexler has come forward with a plan to help SS pay the retirement benefits promised. It is time to look for some answers because the suggestions so far ARE NOT SOLUTIONS!

drmiler.. Wexler has come forward with a plan to help SS pay the retirement benefits promised. It is time to look for some answers because the suggestions so far ARE NOT SOLUTIONS!

And how long did it take to come up with it? Also the man is in the doghouse with the rest of the dems. What does that say to you? Just an FYI.... you NEED a suggestion BEFORE you can have a solution. Now lets see what happens.

And how long did it take to come up with it? Also the man is in the doghouse with the rest of the dems. What does that say to you? Just an FYI.... you NEED a suggestion BEFORE you can have a solution. Now lets see what happens.

Regardless of how long it took him, it exposes how the democrats really think.  Wexler's plan would merely increase taxes on high income earners, with no resultant increase in benefits.  Thus robbing SS of the veneer of beinga true savings plan and revealing it for what it always was.  A government cesspool of squandered money.

Bush on the other hand, takes some of the control (note the some) out of the hands of the government and puts it back into the hands of the worker.  Eventually, it would result in less money to retirees from the government side, but that should be more than made up by the fact that the money they get to invest will far outstrip any return (if any) that they would get by letting it sit in a vault in the government.

drmiler

The Dems need to step us as do moderate Republicans. We need to make sure SS can pay the retirement promised but the plan Bush has suggested will NOT DO THAT. Bush deserves credit for bringing attention to the problem but not for what he wants to do with SS.

drmiler The Dems need to step us as do moderate Republicans. We need to make sure SS can pay the retirement promised but the plan Bush has suggested will NOT DO THAT. Bush deserves credit for bringing attention to the problem but not for what he wants to do with SS.

This was not my point. My point is how long did it take dems to come up with "any" type of plan? And even then he's taking crap from the dems cause they don't like what their own came up with. "Everyone" is screaming that GW's plan won't help yet "all" you see is one lousy plan that nobody likes as a replacement for GW's plan.