Okay...I'm Confused!
I just got done listening to President Bush's 5th State of the Union address to a joint session of congress and millions of people watching on television.
I think that he did a fine job letting people know about his vision (never do get to specifics in a State of the Union address) for the next four years.
One of the centerpieces of his speech was his proposed reform for the Social Security system. I'm a complete believer in the establishment of personal savings accounts that will be passed on from generation to generation...and grow at a much larger rate than the current social security funds that simply pass along to the government and not a worker's family when they pass away. I'm one of those government workers that is enrolled in the "Thrift Savings Plan" where 13% of my pay (because I want to contribute that much to MY OWN RETIREMENT) goes into any of five different funds. I've been participating in it for nearly 10 years...and I've saved quite a chunk of change. This money, plus my pension, plus social security should make for quite a comfortable retirement for MajorMom and myself.
What I thought kind of disingenuous of the Democrats that moaned and groaned when President Bush explained why the problem of Social Security should be fixed now. I'm not going to add a link for you to follow to read what I'd like you to read...but I would encourage you to go to your favorite search engine...and enter the following words and press the search button.
Enter: Clinton "Social Security"
Just like that...and read about the plans and concerns that President Bush's predecessor had to say about the state of Social Security and the fact that it is/was/might be headed for a train wreck some 40 years into the future. For some reason, I would believe that the Dems would have been applauding at some of these words.
In any event...I'm interested in hearing what you might think about the issue of Social Security or any of the issues that the Democrats seem to want to hold so near and dear when they're in power and in control, but turn their backs on when the Republicans might actually make some headway in solving.
See you on the high ground...I'll be the one playing with the "time value of money" calculations...
MajorDad1984
And here is the rest of it.
posted by MajorDad @ 2/02/2005 07:22:00 PM
2 Comments:
Major,
Two points of interest:
1) Social Security is not, and never was intended to be, an investment program. It's an Insurance Program.
2) Social Security would not be in any trouble at all if Republican Presidents would quit putting the money in the General Fund and spending it.
If the Government would pay back the Millions 'borrowed' from Social Security over the decades, I believe you'd find it to be in good shape.
Okay...Senor Anonymous:
1. You say SS is not an investment program, but rather an insurance program. That's like saying since they've made such advances in treating the disease called AIDS, you should no longer practice safe sex. Safe sex is an investment program...not an insurance policy. (One is infinitely less expensive and much more prone to success than the other.)
2. I believe that Democratic presidents don't do anything any differently than Republican presidents do when it comes to funding the behemoth of the federal government. If we would simply charter the feds to provide the services outlined in the Constitution...and leave the remaining programs to the states (as our Founders undoubtedly would prefer), we'd be so much better off.
And finally, I don't believe that anyone's "stolen" anything from the SS fund. The government "borrows" from my retirement funds every year too. Check it out if you like...they do pay it back. (Perhaps financed by more and more debt...but my money provides short terms loans to the government too...and they've been repaid.)
Thanks for the participation...it might be time for you to use your name here though...
MajorDad1984
Post a Comment
<< Home