WS>>"Privatization" of Social Security Poses Risks
carl william spitzer iv
cwsiv_2nd at JUNO.COM
Mon Aug 6 20:37:07 MDT 2001
If not individualized retirees will only be trading a government plan for
a politically connected NGO plan. What would be the difference unless
the group plan idea is done away with alltogether.
On Sun, 5 Aug 2001 12:40:22 +0000 Thomas Matiska <tom.matiska at ATT.NET>
>It is no step. The term "lock box" is political econo-
>babble of the worst kind. If the current surplus of SS
>revenue continues to be "invested" in govt bonds, no
>problems are solved. The only difference between the
>current "trust fund" and proposed "lock box" is they are
>spelled differently. When 70 million boomers retire and
>the bonds in the "lock box" have to be redeemed on the
>back of taxpayers, that difference in spelling won't
>The system doesn't necessarily have to be
>individualized, but the investment must be shifted to
>the non govt sector. Stocks, real estate, gold, of some
>combination thereof, but not govt bonds.
>> Its a first step. IMHO the only solution is total
>> make them all private and separate.
>> This is the Chilian system.
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
More information about the Rushtalk