|
|
|
|
On 15 Feb 2005 19:13:10 -0800, wrote:
John H wrote:
That last paragraph is nicely done. Of course, it has no bearing on the
voluntary investment of 3% of social security withholdings.
A lot of words, Chuck, nicely written and all, but with no bearing on
the
question.
******
Certainly it bears on the question. Why must one be allowed to reduce
the contribution to a fund that is designed to sustain, widows,
orphans, the disabled, and the indigent elderly in order to invest 3,
4, 5, 10, 15, or 20% of an income on Wall Street?
That's one of the problems. SS cannot continue to support all of those
people on the amount that it brings in. SS is primarily a retirement
fund, and as such it offers a poor return on investment. Yours and my
money would offer a much better return if placed in a managed
investment fund.
Widows would get the benefits of what was earned in an individual's
fund.
Maybe SS needs to be split into two parts. One part saving for
eventual retirement, and the other an "insurance" policy that protects
against disability.
You yourself said
that SS taxes did *not* prevent you from investing amounts beyond those
impounded by the govt. for social security.
The thing is, if there were no MANDATORY SS, there would be people
who would work their whole life, and spend 100% of what they earn, and
then when they get old, they'd have nothing to show for it.
I realize that this is a somewhat socialistic opinion, but the simple
facts are that SOME people do not have enough personal responsibility
to plan for their "retirement". That's why the mandatory SS program
was created. But if SS were reformed to slowly shift from the current
"no interest" account to one which does earn compound interest, the
potential is there for a greater return on the investment.
Remember that there is no real "guarantee" that SS will be there when
we all retire. SS could be eliminated by the stroke of a pen, so the
argument that SS is "guaranteed" is naive.
I recall that you, yourself, offered up a very similar plan to slowly
migrate SS over to personal interest bearing accounts some time back.
I agreed that this was the best chance of reforming the system. Are
you no longer a believer in that plan?
Dave
|