|
|
|
|
On 1 Mar 2005 09:26:56 -0800, wrote:
This may be news to you, but Bush wants to reinvent the wheel and take
credit for anything that rolls.
Flash: We *already have* a number of federally recognized retirement
schemes, (IRA's, 401K, etc) doing what Bush is propsing to do with
social security.
People should save for their own retirement and assemble some wealth
beyond social security.
Difference is that the current programs do not withdraw money from a
social security system that is tottering as it is.
If a worker is so strapped that he or she cannot afford to put any
money in the bank unless social security impounds are cut by half, that
worker is probably so strapped that the freed up cash will go into a
higher car payment or an extra credit card balance instead of a
long-range strategy like retirement.
Won't be freed up. The collection will be made, but can then be routed elsewhere
(if it follows the TSP model in any way). The difference in the schemes you
address and the proposal has to do with mandatory withdrawals. Withdrawals for
the SS would still be mandatory. Folks would determine how the personal savings
portion gets distributed. Many lower income folks use none of the schemes you
mention, because they're not mandatory withdrawals.
Are you admitting the system is 'tottering'? That's a breakthrough. Harry Reid
said the same thing a while back, but now says there's no problem.
Why the fighting about it? It would be *voluntary*. If a person didn't want to
participate, then *all* the withdrawal would go to the Treasury. What about that
is difficult to understand?
|