Does the current financial situation spell doom for the insane idea of privatizing Social Security?

[smallhose156]

You've got that wrong.

Government involvement is what caused the problem. Regulation of the market is what forces lenders to give out loans as required by law, rather than as risks and collateral allow.

Bush wants to get the government out of social security to.

[mr p]

yes, but that's a shame because social security is the Ponzi scheme

[peppersham]

I never thought that was a good idea I lived thru the S&L mess.

[louie666pwu]

No, because the lunatics who want to privatize Social Security live in the State of Denial. Ask them. They'll tell you that the 'fundamentals of the economy are strong'.

[Cheek]

Not at all. Historically speaking Privatizing SSI has always given a better output. soon as teh government took it over, its a question as to wether or not there would be any left when we get there.

The market will bounce back. Government has NEVER done well with anything that they have touched. Public schools, the housing market, Gas just to name the most recent government accomplishments...

[caldude1010101]

Yep, McCain dropped the subject like a hot potato.

I guarantee you won't hear a peep from him about SS privatization from now until the election.

[Moose]

Let's hope so. This was another Bush fat cat giveaway. No normal person would cut holes in the security net.

[Bob]

Wrong!!!!! The Social Security system is going bust. I was looking at my statement the other day. Since 1983 I have contributed over $200,000 to this program and I don't think I am going to see a dime of it when I retire.

My 401K program has 1/2 that amount in it. That is my money, why can't I invest it where I want? I want to invest it in the same program that congress has or the state public retirement service. The Ohio PERS. See their investments at

https://www.opers.org/investments/define...otal.shtml

Social Security is bankrupt. So why can't I contribute to this program? This is what I want to be in!!!!

[Chupate esa!]

As you see people see the bubble but never the burst... They will continue doing it because if I would had put all my deductions in private investment the market would have had crashed a long time ago with my retirement.

[Tom]

The Declaration of Independence declares "all men ... are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights ...That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men ..."

The Preamble of the US Constitution shows how these rights are to be secured including "provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare".

Two clear distinctions should be made here:
Provide implies actively and financially supporting, promote implies a more passive approach.
For example, I'll promote that we put on a grand feast, but I want you to provide it!
General Welfare is not the same as individual Welfare. General Welfare would benefit the people generally; individual Welfare targets a certain segment of society to benefit, such as the poor.
Social Security is a form of individual welfare not authorized in the Constitution.
The Constitution grants no authority to the federal government to administrate a Social Security system. The Constitution Party advocates phasing out the entire Social Security program, while continuing to meet the obligations already incurred under the system. Until the current Social Security system can be responsibly phased out, we propose that:

The Social Security tax not be a "rainy day" fund which politicians can pirate, or from which they can borrow to cover their errors and pay for their excesses.
Individuals who have contributed to Social Security be allowed to withdraw those funds and transfer them into an IRA or similar investments under the control of the individual contributor.
Any sort of merger between the U.S. Social Security System and that of any foreign country be banned, so the distribution of benefits will not go to persons who have not qualified for payments under American law as legal residents.
Earning limitations on persons aged 62 and over be removed, so that they may earn any amount of additional income without placing their benefits at risk.
Those provisions of the Social Security system which penalize those born during the "notch years" between 1917 and 1926 be repealed, and that such persons be placed on the same benefit schedules as all other beneficiaries.