On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 12:31:21 -0500, DSK wrote:

John H wrote:
Here's some good thinking:


Oh yeah.

FACT: Analysis of the plan so far does not prove the [personal] accounts would
be a better deal for anyone not working on Wall Street. Workers who opt for the
private accounts would recover forfeited benefits through their accounts only
“if their investments realized a return equal to or greater than the 3 percent
earned by Treasury bonds currently held by the Social Security system.”

Of course, analysis doesn't prove it would be a worse deal either. History shows
it would likely be a better deal than the 3% earned by bonds. Is there risk?
Sure.


And you don't see any problem with introducing RISK into a program
titled "Social Security"? Maybe you'd like to see the Homeland Security
Dept embrace the policy putting your life & your family at risk?

No more so than putting RISK into the thrift savings plan, 403b plans, 401K
plans, Traditional IRAs, Roth IRAs! If it's my choice, it's my risk. Your
Homeland Security analogy was somewhat ridiculous, so I won't comment thereon.


But, people can always stop putting their money into risky accounts. In fact,
they can stop participation at any time.


AFAIK paying into Social Security is not "voluntary."

No, but putting any of it into a personal savings account would be.

I still can't understand how a bunch of 'pro-choice' folks can be so
'anti-choice'!


Personally, I'm not anti-choice at all. However I am very definitely
against the diversion of Social Security funds to politically favored
Wall St brokerages, so that a portion can be returned as campaign
contributions (an accurate term would be "kickbacks").

Do you think all the Congressmen putting their money into the Thrift Savings
Plan are doing so just to fatten the wallets in Wall Street. You're reiterating
the panic crap espoused by some of the more notable Bush-haters.

Do we assume people have the responsibility to make baby-killing decisions but
not monthly investment decisions?

There is no reason whatever you can't invest your own money as you like.
You are obviously trying to dodge the issue that this is a case of the
gov't taking your money and giving it to private enterprise, on the
gamble that you might get some of it back later.

Do you know *anything* about the Thrift Savings Plan used by government workers,
to include Senators and Representatives?

Lastly, the government wouldn't be *taking* anything. The program would be
voluntary, as has been stated continuously. Again, do we assume people have the
responsibility to make baby-killing decisions but not monthly investment
decisions?

DSK

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes