Doubling the size of Congress isn't a big change?If you want more independents.. that's not going to happen without some big changes to the system
Doubling the size of Congress isn't a big change?If you want more independents.. that's not going to happen without some big changes to the system
Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
No thanks. Let's worry about fixing Social Security.
No thanks, social security is in pretty good shape.
Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
I cannot beleive they are actually getting people to beleive that.No thanks, social security is in pretty good shape
Who's they?Originally Posted by MuEconRedLeg
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...11.html?sub=AR
And England tried privatization too, back when nutty Margeret Thatcher was in power. How'd that work out?In fact, Social Security is on a sounder footing now than it has been for most of its 70-year history. Without altering any of its particulars, its trustees say, it can pay full benefits straight through 2042. Over the next 75 years its shortfall will amount to just 0.7 percent of national income, according to the trustees, or 0.4 percent, according to the Congressional Budget Office. That still amounts to a real chunk of change, but it pales alongside the 75-year cost of Bush's Medicare drug benefit, which is more than twice its size, or Bush's tax cuts if permanently extended, which would be nearly four times its size.
In short, Social Security is not facing a financial crisis at all. It is facing a need for some distinctly sub-cataclysmic adjustments over the next few decades that would increase its revenue and diminish its benefits.
http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?...articleId=8997
If you work in the finance industry I can see how Bush's plan would appeal to you. Otherwise it's a pretty raw deal.Britain’s experiment with substituting private savings accounts for a portion of state benefits has been a failure. A shorthand explanation for what has gone wrong is that the costs and risks of running private investment accounts outweigh the value of the returns they are likely to earn. On average, fees and charges can reduce pension lump sums by up to 30 percent on retirement. The nation’s savings industry, which sells those private accounts, has already acknowledged this. Which brings us to irony No. 2: Just as the United States prepares to funnel untold billions to its private sector for the management of private accounts, back in 2002, many U.K. insurance companies, mindful of tough new rules against giving bad advice, began to write to their customers urging them to consider abandoning their private savings and returning to the state pension system -- something hundreds of thousands of Britons have done already.
Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
tell that to my grandparents and they just might try to shoot you.
the store for all your blade, costuming (in any regard), leather (also in any regard), and steel craft needs.www.facebook.com/tdhshop
yes, this really is how we make our living.
If it works, then don't mess with it. It works IMO... so leave it be.
The large number of Lefties that are pushing a conservative arguement on SS in all types of media outlets.Who's they?
Yes, SS will not have to make a move on its own. But, what they do not tell you is that the obligation lies in the trust fund which is made up of bond obligations of the general revenue. SS might not have to tax more, but considering we are in a deficit now where will the general revenue money come from?In fact, Social Security is on a sounder footing now than it has been for most of its 70-year history. Without altering any of its particulars, its trustees say, it can pay full benefits straight through 2042. Over the next 75 years its shortfall will amount to just 0.7 percent of national income, according to the trustees, or 0.4 percent, according to the Congressional Budget Office. That still amounts to a real chunk of change, but it pales alongside the 75-year cost of Bush's Medicare drug benefit, which is more than twice its size, or Bush's tax cuts if permanently extended, which would be nearly four times its size.
The President's Plan might be a bad idea. Yet, to say there is not a problem is misleading and could be costly. I would love to hear oppinions other that "its fine", but nobody is offering them.If you work in the finance industry I can see how Bush's plan would appeal to you. Otherwise it's a pretty raw deal.
here's my idea on SS...the basic system works the same way, but you can control up to 2/5 of it in a privatized way. this way, there is a larger next egg, and SS can do what it's original purpose be; a supplemental income. not the primary one.
the store for all your blade, costuming (in any regard), leather (also in any regard), and steel craft needs.www.facebook.com/tdhshop
yes, this really is how we make our living.
The independents would have the same disadvantages that they do today. The Repubs and Democrats put up all the road blocks to keep them off the ballots, they get only a fraction of the money and TV time that the Repubs and Democrats get, etc.
Doubling congress might bring in 2-3 more independents, but not a whole lot.
We have too many useless people in government. Doubling the size of congress would just create more government waste.
Then it sounds like the government really screwed up by chosing the managers of these accounts.. A 30% fee?A shorthand explanation for what has gone wrong is that the costs and risks of running private investment accounts outweigh the value of the returns they are likely to earn. On average, fees and charges can reduce pension lump sums by up to 30 percent on retirement.
The privatation I would like would be to have a portion (or all) of your SS go into a huge index fund.. Like the S+P 500, but bigger. Like maybe the top 3000 coorporations in the world. They could also maybe mix some bonds in.. But the key is that it would be UNMANAGED, just like an index fund, so you don't have managers constantly turning it over to generate exorbitant fees. You could have the fund run entirely by computers.
Hey, I got a spam the other day for Congress enlargement...it seemed quite affordable and sounded like they could get it done pretty quickly. Let me see... where'd I put that... OOPS!! I'm sorry, that wasn't Congress enlargement...
"This field, this game, is a part of our past. It reminds us of all that once was good, and what could be again." -- Terence Mann
"Social Security is in pretty good shape". I don't ever recall anyone saying that or writing that before. Wow.
The Washington Post said that in the article I quoted. So that makes twice in one thread!
Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
So you and some guy at the Washington Post think Social Security is in good shape. Anyone else on this forum think it's in good shape?
Posting Permissions
|
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |
Reply With Quote
