who's fixing social security?

[outbaksean]

of the candidates for president, r or d, do any plan on fixing social security and if so who.
All I want is a name please.

[Ross S]

There is no fixn for awhile the baby boomers is causing a real problem.

[xuserx2000]

SS was never broken, until Bush started taking money out of it for the Iraq war. Part of the surplus Bush inheirited, was set aside for SS by Bill Clinton... Bush reappropriated the money right after 9/11.

So the question is not whose fixing it, but who broke it to begin with....

---added----

You can give me as many thumbs down as you want...but you KNOW I'M F*CKIN RIGHT !!!!!!

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?tit...rust_Funds

[shjOlds_442]

One of the problems with SS is, The Senate and the House have been given IOUs to SS for going on 30 years now and have yet to put any of the money back into it.

But none of the money is being use for the war.

As for a name, right now, none of the above. Or, should I say that I haven't heard of any.

[iamct01]

There is not a problem just a bump in the snake from baby boomers. When I retire SS will just pay for for-profit health care.

[Willis Jeffords]

I think it's a generational problem. No politician on either side will properly address the problem. People from the Hillary/Rudy generation just don't get it.

[vinsa1981]

Don't know of one on hand, but I think that it does need to be re-addressed.

The issues that concern me most seem to be dropping of the radar lately . . . we'll have to see how it goes . . .

[zombi86]

Ron Paul.

[jessicaisbeautiful]

Ron Paul

His plan:
"We’ve all heard proposals for “privatizing” the Social Security system. The best private solution, of course, is simply to allow the American people to keep more of their paychecks and invest for retirement as they see fit. But putting Social Security funds into government-approved investments could have dangerous consequences. Private companies would become a partner of sorts with the government. Individuals still would not truly own their invested Social Security funds. Payroll taxes likely would be raised to cover payments to current beneficiaries, as the President alluded to when warning us that fixing Social Security would be “costly.”

Furthermore, who would decide what stocks, bonds, mutual funds, or other investment vehicles deserve government approval? Which politicians would you trust to build an investment portfolio with billions of your Social Security dollars? The federal government has proven itself incapable of good money management, and permitting politicians and bureaucrats to make investment decisions would result in unscrupulous lobbying for venture capital. Large campaign contributors and private interests of every conceivable type would seek to have their favored investments approved by the government. In a free market, an underperforming or troubled company suffers a decrease in its stock price, forcing it either to improve or lose value. Wary investors hesitate to buy its stock after the price falls. If a company successfully lobbied Congress, however, it would enjoy a large investment of your tax dollars. This investment would cause an artificial increase in its stock price, deceiving private investors and unfairly harming the company's honest competition. Government-managed investment of tax dollars in the private market is a recipe for corruption and fiscal irresponsibility.

The Social Security crisis is a spending crisis. The program could be saved tomorrow if Congress simply would stop spending so much money, apply even 10% of the bloated federal budget to a real trust fund, and begin saving your contributions to earn simple interest. That this simple approach seems impossible speaks volumes about the inability of Congress to cut spending no matter what the circumstances."

source:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul215.html

Thank you for the question!

[Rooster]

Ron Paul