Bush Criticized Over Social Security Plan

Discussion in 'Lawn Mowing' started by mtdman, Dec 21, 2004.

  1. mtdman

    mtdman LawnSite Gold Member
    Posts: 3,137

    Bush Criticized Over Social Security Plan

    So, what does everyone think about this? Personally, I want to see how he is going to continue to fund SS for those drawing now while allowing those paying in now to keep their money. Those drawing now are paid for by those paying in now. Fuzzy math, if you ask me.

    But personally, I support privatizing ss. As we all know from being self employed, self employment taxes can add up and put a hurting on your pocket. If I could keep that money and add it to the $$ I put away in IRAs already, I would have a nice amount of dough when it comes time for me to retire.

    The problem I see with allowing people to self invest is people aren't real smart about that kind of stuff in general. Including myself. With the Enrons and stock market crashes of the world, you take large risks with your future. Not everyone understands that or has what it takes to invest on their own.
     
  2. mtdman

    mtdman LawnSite Gold Member
    Posts: 3,137

    BTW, this isn't a political thing. I'm curious to learn what business people think about this and how they feel about investing their own money for their future vs relying on uncle sam for retirement. I don't care who is President or what party you support. Keep it to business and finance, no politicing.
     
  3. nitrotim

    nitrotim LawnSite Senior Member
    from nj
    Posts: 525

    The bottom line is that in 2028 SS will start to be in trouble because it will only be 73% funded and after I think it is 2042 it be as low as 48% funded. I think the logic here is that it will cost more to fix later than what is being projected to fix now. I am retired from the federal govt and the TSP savings plan which is similar to what the Pres is suggesting was a great program. I put the max amount I was allowed for 20 yrs and had a nice size nestegg in addition to my retirement. I am not SS age yet but if I didn't have this I would not have been able to retire as early.
     
  4. Grassmechanic

    Grassmechanic LawnSite Silver Member
    Posts: 2,697

    The way SS is set up, it is nothing more than a pyramid scheme. It makes promises to those that it will not be able to keep. By allowing younger workers the opportunity to set aside a portion of their contributions in an account that they manage is a good idea (simple long term CD's pay more interest than what is now earned on SS funds). The politicians that oppose this idea are those that have long used the SS surplus as their "slush fund" to help fund their pet projects, balance budgets, etc. SS should have trillions of dollars in it right now, but thanks to the politicians, it contains only IOU's. Yeah, it may be a little painful now to start this, but by waiting 10, 20, 30 years, it will only get worse.
     
  5. PAXLSI

    PAXLSI LawnSite Member
    Posts: 22

    One of the guide lines for the privation of SS is that the brokers that would be doing the investments, would be limited in what they invest in. NO junk bonds. These same brokers if I heard correctly would only be able to deal with the SS people.
     
  6. out4now

    out4now LawnSite Bronze Member
    from AZ
    Posts: 1,796

    Against privatizing. I have a 401 well diverisfied and still lost a huge chunk with bad markets. The avg. individual has too much to lose. There has to be a better way. Last thing we need is a bunch of broke baby boomers to support in the future. What I want to see is how he'll miraculously cut the deficit without raising taxes, what a pipe dream that is. And lastly where is Osama? How hard is he trying to catch him? I seem to remember bumper stickers saying we will never forget and it's turned into Osama who?
     
  7. bermuda joe

    bermuda joe Banned
    from nevada
    Posts: 1

    Edited: Every time you span the board like this, you will be banned.Jodi
     
  8. mtdman

    mtdman LawnSite Gold Member
    Posts: 3,137


    First, as I said, this isn't a political thread. If you want to bash Bush go do it in the dungeon.

    Secondly, if the average person has so much to lose in investing their SS $$, maybe they would be more careful and not invest in the frivolous and risky. I'd rather have the choice.
     
  9. DLS1

    DLS1 LawnSite Bronze Member
    Posts: 1,619

    I have not read anything about it yet but I would hope they would have plenty of restrictions on what you can invest in.
    I would think you get maybe 10% max return per year on conservative options such as bonds,etc.

    Hopefully only get to invest in things like government insured bonds and other insured investments and real conservative investment options. Taxpayers do not need to pick up the tab at retirement time for those that didn't invest wisely.
     
  10. AEW

    AEW LawnSite Member
    Posts: 161

    Grass mechanic is right....SS would be fine right now if it werent for the politicians that kept taking money out to use elsewhere. SS has been a huge success with reducing old age poverty...why get rid of it. The US spends less than 6% of the GDP on it while European countries...with full health plans etc. for all persons...spend over 10% of their GDP. I dont think the SS program...like most programs ran by the federal government...has been ran correctly. If all prgrams were ran responsibly then there would be plenty of funds out there to support all programs...and of course this deficit could be taken care of as well.

    By the way...the movie Napoleon Dynamite came out today...if you havent seen it yet...get it and watch it. It is the funniest movie out right now.
     

Share This Page