If Bush had been successful privatizing Social Security would we be bailing it out right now?

[wyldfyr]

My investments have lost 40%. Thank God Social Security wasn't invested by these incompetent and corrupt crooks.

[JMB]

Thank G-d the intelligent among us prevailed.

[whip]

depends where you invested it.if you purchased bonds you would have been fine.and probably would be making more on them now than a ira.the whole purpose was to do what you want with your own money.if you lost 40% that is a lot less than most.so even you can't trust your own decisions.there are long term investments you can bank on with out someone else running your portfolio.

[truthistrue8]

Look at it this way if they would have invested it & lost 40% then there would be 60% left right? Instead they have spent it ALL and there is NOTHING. There is not a trust fund its GONE.

[Jw B]

It would help the wall street ppl. you and I would have been left out.thay want bail our ass out.

[The Breeze]

Good question.

How about it, Republicans? Where would we be if Bush had been allowed to privatize "sosul sakurity" (as he pronounces it) and let it be invested in the stock market?

Funny, I don't hear a lot of Republicans touting this bonehead plan any more....

[Mephistopheles]

All investments have lost that much - you do know that there's no trust fund, right? Just a piece of paper that says they're obligated to give you X dollars. They'll just print those dollars and they'll be worth shit.

[Zaza]

Consider this.........You and your spouse retire at 65 and draw your first paycheck from Social Security. You (or your wife) die. ALL the money you have paid into this over the last 50 years now belongs to the government.

I was (am) all for privatizing social security.

[Patrick B]

Given the brilliance of our politicians, they would have probably invested in Madoff's ponzi scheme.

[crunch]

A successful Social Security program would have at lest been partially privatized when the market was at 400 in 1932.


If there was ever an opportunity to make it a successful program again, it is while the market is low, floating consistently between 8,000 and 9,000.

What is the gain as measured against 400 and 8,000 represent over some 70 years? Think it would have kept the system solvent through the downturn?

I'd prefer being poor and free rather than being a comfortable slave.


Social Security has been in the hands of "incompetent and corrupt crooks" since the 1930's.

If my Social Security is going to wind up in the market, as it did in the recent "bailout" I would prefer to have the ability to choose the "crook" I voluntarily trust as opposed to having no choice at all.