It was early in the Clinton administration, around 1993, I believe. At that time it was estimated that the first American would retire on Social Security with the probability of NOT recovering his entire "investment". This is a function, of course, of the amount of "investment" (i.e., taxes) paid in over the course of a life time, versus the amount of cash flow received before death. Prior to that, and going back to the beginning, the "average person" got their tax back plus some return, at progressively increasing levels, all the way back to the first person to receive benefits (in the 30's), who basically got the illusive "something for nothing".
The reason that Social Security is no longer the "third rail" is because the proportion of the electorate that will get shafted by the pyramid has been exponentially increasing, while the proportion of those scoring on the upper levels has been fading away. The electorate's attitude gradually changes, because such financial reality can no longer be hidden by the politician/con artists whose predecessors designed the pyramid.
The relevant question that Democrats are still allowed to AVOID without scrutiny from the "free" media is, "Is this the optimal retirement investment?". Instead, Washington is still obsessed with the irrelevant question of whether Social Security will be "funded" in future years. The generations that are currently coming on-line as taxpayers and interested voters have no illusions at all about the pyramid. They see their money being carted away by a socialist government, with no recovery of capital, much less a ROI, being possible. When these generations begin to determine who will and who will not be in office, the presentations on Social Security reform by the Democratic party will be significantly changed.
The Bush administration is already miles ahead on this mega-trend, but capitalizing on it at the moment is still a limited prospect. I expect that the Bush team will go into 2002 having been able to do nothing other than reinforce their position on privatization, but may have a very good chance of establishing a 1% toehold in the 2003/2004 time frame. If Puff and "Little Dick" continue to stifle them with demagoguery about "lockboxes", "trust funds", and "protecting" the oh-so-wonderful current pyramid, the pressure to run them out of Washington will become overwhelming... |
