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.

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?

wrote in message
ups.com...
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.


The freed up cash does not go to the person to spend as they like. It
either goes to SS or to personal retirement accounts. At the present time
overall return on SS money that the people put in is -0.3%. And this is
going to get worse as lots of those collecting SS did not pay much into the
system. Only since the LBJ years when the government found that they could
get a huge increase in revenue by raising SS payments a little and SS
deposits a lot has the SS system been going down the tubes. And the SS
system was not designed to be the national retirement system in it's
formative years.

"Jim," wrote in message
...
Social Security reform chatter is everywhere, and it's likely that at
some point, you're going to be cornered by the water cooler or in the
cafeteria and asked what you think. Your conversation partner may even
be (gasp) a conservative. So be ready. This guide from Think Progress (a
project of the American Progress Action Fund) includes point-by-point
claims in the Bush administration's words, coupled with the real facts
about Social Security. Make sure you're able to explain to a
conservative why that "personal" account won't really be yours to
control, or why passing on account money to your grandchildren won't be
possible. SEE THE GUIDE

http://thinkprogress.org/index.php?p=206

I thought the plan(s) being discussed were similar to the one offered to
government workers. The plan Government workers have is much superior to
SS.

On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 05:28:06 -0500, "Jeff Rigby" wrote:


"Jim," wrote in message
...
Social Security reform chatter is everywhere, and it's likely that at
some point, you're going to be cornered by the water cooler or in the
cafeteria and asked what you think. Your conversation partner may even
be (gasp) a conservative. So be ready. This guide from Think Progress (a
project of the American Progress Action Fund) includes point-by-point
claims in the Bush administration's words, coupled with the real facts
about Social Security. Make sure you're able to explain to a
conservative why that "personal" account won't really be yours to
control, or why passing on account money to your grandchildren won't be
possible. SEE THE GUIDE

http://thinkprogress.org/index.php?p=206

I thought the plan(s) being discussed were similar to the one offered to
government workers. The plan Government workers have is much superior to
SS.


The Thrift Savings Plan, which federal workers can use, has been used as a
'model' for the types of investments which could be made with the personal part
of the social security withdrawal.

Jimcomma has found a site which touts bull****. That, in Jimcomma's eyes, makes
it worth repeating.

John H wrote:

On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 05:28:06 -0500, "Jeff Rigby" wrote:


"Jim," wrote in message
...

Social Security reform chatter is everywhere, and it's likely that at
some point, you're going to be cornered by the water cooler or in the
cafeteria and asked what you think. Your conversation partner may even
be (gasp) a conservative. So be ready. This guide from Think Progress (a
project of the American Progress Action Fund) includes point-by-point
claims in the Bush administration's words, coupled with the real facts
about Social Security. Make sure you're able to explain to a
conservative why that "personal" account won't really be yours to
control, or why passing on account money to your grandchildren won't be
possible. SEE THE GUIDE

http://thinkprogress.org/index.php?p=206

I thought the plan(s) being discussed were similar to the one offered to
government workers. The plan Government workers have is much superior to
SS.



The Thrift Savings Plan, which federal workers can use, has been used as a
'model' for the types of investments which could be made with the personal part
of the social security withdrawal.

Jimcomma has found a site which touts bull****. That, in Jimcomma's eyes, makes
it worth repeating.


And the shoot from the hip Bull**** espoused here should be taken as Gospel?

"John H" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 05:28:06 -0500, "Jeff Rigby" wrote:


"Jim," wrote in message
...
Social Security reform chatter is everywhere, and it's likely that at
some point, you're going to be cornered by the water cooler or in the
cafeteria and asked what you think. Your conversation partner may even
be (gasp) a conservative. So be ready. This guide from Think Progress (a
project of the American Progress Action Fund) includes point-by-point
claims in the Bush administration's words, coupled with the real facts
about Social Security. Make sure you're able to explain to a
conservative why that "personal" account won't really be yours to
control, or why passing on account money to your grandchildren won't be
possible. SEE THE GUIDE

http://thinkprogress.org/index.php?p=206

I thought the plan(s) being discussed were similar to the one offered to
government workers. The plan Government workers have is much superior to
SS.


The Thrift Savings Plan, which federal workers can use, has been used as a
'model' for the types of investments which could be made with the personal
part
of the social security withdrawal.

Jimcomma has found a site which touts bull****. That, in Jimcomma's eyes,
makes
it worth repeating.

No kidding, it is amazing how there has been all this analysis of a 'plan'
that doesn't exist. To bad hillary's health care plan didn't get this
much scrutiny......then the whole country would have seen how bad it really
was.

P.Fritz wrote:
No kidding, it is amazing how there has been all this analysis of a 'plan'
that doesn't exist. To bad hillary's health care plan didn't get this
much scrutiny......then the whole country would have seen how bad it really
was.


Hey stupid, let me remind you that Hillary's health care plan was never
enacted... kinda like Newt Gengrich's 'Contract With America' of which
not single point was ever legislated into existence.

You must have a tiny little memory.

BTW don't let the other Bush-Cheney cheerleaders see you comparing
Bush's SS plan to anything by Hillary... they'll kick you out of the club...

DSK

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 12:46:24 -0500, DSK wrote:


Hey stupid, let me remind you that Hillary's health care plan was never
enacted... kinda like Newt Gengrich's 'Contract With America' of which
not single point was ever legislated into existence.

You must have a tiny little memory.

BTW don't let the other Bush-Cheney cheerleaders see you comparing
Bush's SS plan to anything by Hillary... they'll kick you out of the club...

DSK

"Hey stupid...."

That's right up there with the basskisser mentality.

John H