Interesting perspective on Unions and Social Security
 

Kudlow's Money Politic$


Union Hypocrisy
A few weeks ago I talked about the height of hypocrisy by public and private
labor unions. They are trying to use their muscle -- one might even call it
blackmail -- to stop President Bush's personal savings accounts.

They have threatened investment managers with a pullout of union money if those
managers support private accounts. It is blackmail. It is hypocrisy.

Public and private pension funds have roughly 60 percent of their $2 trillion of
assets invested in stocks. So, while they reap the retirement benefits of the
magic of market compounding at a near 7 percent adjusted rate, they would deny
this comfortable retirement opportunity to all the rest of us.

Here's some more hypocrisy: A recent news story reports that the pension funds
of New Jersey and New York City are investing more heavily in private equity
portfolio deals. As a free market man, I say fine. But there is even greater
risk than in stocks.

Remember, these are the folks who compare the stock market to gambling or slot
machines. Go figure. While they extend risk to feather their nest egg, they deny
the same opportunity to the rest of the population. It is the height of
hypocrisy.

Every person who sees a union ad opposing private savings accounts should
understand the hypocrisy of our nation's unions. It's more than misinformation.
It's an outrage.

from: http://www.lkmp.blogspot.com/

[Note: Spelling of 'outrage' corrected.]
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

Here are a few points to consider:

1) Union members pay into SS, just like all other workers. Union
members receive benefits from SS, just like all other workers.

2) The unions are not stating that people should not be allowed to
invest in the stock market.
The vast majority of people investing in the stock market today are not
union members. How are unions "trying to deny" the risks and potential
returns of the stock market to other Americans?

3) What the unions, and apparently the majority of Americans oppose is
taking money out of the
currently ailing SS program and sending it to be churned by Bush's
campaign contributors on Wall Street.

4) The government has, for many many years, reduced or eliminated taxes
on money saved for retirement through several different types of funds.
IRA, 401-K, etc. Bush acts like this is a brand new idea, but will only
work if SS is gutted by a corresponding amount.

5) John------ if you can't afford to save for retirement without a 2%
increase in your paycheck that would result from ripping the heart out
of SS, you're doing something really screwed up with your household
budget. Perhaps additional income would help. Ever consider joining a
union?

On 1 Apr 2005 09:23:11 -0800, wrote:


5) John------ if you can't afford to save for retirement without a 2%
increase in your paycheck that would result from ripping the heart out
of SS, you're doing something really screwed up with your household
budget. Perhaps additional income would help. Ever consider joining a
union?


Me? I'm twice retired already, Chuck!

In another year, I'll be drawing three retirement checks!

I would still have preferred the option of investing that 2% you speak of in my
own way.
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

"John H" wrote in message
...
On 1 Apr 2005 09:23:11 -0800, wrote:


5) John------ if you can't afford to save for retirement without a 2%
increase in your paycheck that would result from ripping the heart out
of SS, you're doing something really screwed up with your household
budget. Perhaps additional income would help. Ever consider joining a
union?


Me? I'm twice retired already, Chuck!

In another year, I'll be drawing three retirement checks!

I would still have preferred the option of investing that 2% you speak of
in my
own way.

I have an Uncle collecting retired O-6 pay, naval reserve, 25 year civil
service pay, and white house retirement pay. When he turned 62 his income
shot up like a rocket.