Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (42793)	10/4/2000 11:38:50 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Well, this is what I find on the official web site: Social Security Governor Bush believes Social Security is a defining American promise that must be kept. He will not change benefits in any way for current retirees or those near retirement. But to save Social Security for the next generation, he will lead a bipartisan effort to reform it by giving individuals the option of voluntarily investing a portion of their Social Security payroll taxes in personal retirement accounts. These accounts will earn higher rates of return and generate wealth that can be owned and passed on from parents to their children. Governor Bush's Approach -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Commitment: Governor Bush will honor and strengthen Social Security. He will protect all benefits for today’s seniors and ensure that Social Security is available for their grandchildren. The Need to Save Social Security: The Clinton-Gore Administration has done nothing to save Social Security, even though the massive Baby-Boom generation will begin drawing benefits eight years from now. When Social Security first started, there were 42 workers to support each retiree; in a few decades there will be only 2 workers per retiree. As a result, Social Security benefits will exceed contributions beginning in 2015 and the system will go bankrupt in 2037. Fresh Ideas: Without reform, Social Security benefits will have to be cut by 30 percent or Social Security taxes will have to be increased by 50 percent. The only alternative is to increase the rate of return workers receive on their payroll taxes. Workers already pay 12.4 percent of their income into Social Security. The real return people get on this investment is less than 2 percent a year. Over the long term, sound investments in a balanced portfolio of stocks and bonds yield about a 6 percent return after inflation. Even the safest government bonds yield 4 percent. Thanks to the magic of compound interest, investing that difference over a lifetime can show dramatic results. Bipartisan Leadership: Governor Bush will reach across party lines to save Social Security. Numerous reform-minded Democrats have joined Republicans in an effort to save Social Security. These include Senators Moynihan (D-NY), Kerrey (D-NE), and Breaux (D-LA) and Congressman Stenholm (D-TX). Governor Bush's Reform Proposal -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Governor Bush will build a bipartisan consensus to save Social Security based on the following principles: Absolutely no change in existing benefits for retirees or near-retirees. The Social Security surplus must be locked away only for Social Security. Social Security payroll taxes must not be increased. The government itself must not invest Social Security funds in the market. Modernization must preserve the disability and survivors components. Modernization must include individually controlled, voluntary personal retirement accounts, which will augment the Social Security safety net. These accounts will earn higher rates of return, have parameters of safety and soundness, and help workers build wealth that can be passed on to their children. Advantages of Governor Bush’s Personal Accounts -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Unlike Vice President Gore’s retirement proposal, Governor Bush’s personal accounts are part of Social Security and strengthen the overall system. As a result: Social Security contributions will earn a higher rate of return, allowing the system to survive without a massive tax hike. Personal accounts will allow everyone to build assets and independence. If a young worker earning $20,000 a year invested just one-sixth of her payroll taxes in a balanced fund of stocks and bonds, she would likely retire with over $100,000 after inflation. She would own these assets and could use them to supplement her retirement and pass them on to her children. georgewbush.com I am still not sure of my recollection of the precise claim in the debate, but I will root around some more.......

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (42793)	10/5/2000 12:04:59 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769667

I have not found mention of this point on any of the roundups I have bookmarked. One reason I think you must be mistaken is that all along, Bush has said he would set aside 2% of the Social Security contribution for privatization, and that does not amount, even after ten years, to a trillion dollars.......

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (42793)	10/5/2000 1:53:26 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769667

I am sorry, I meant to say 20%, and even that is inaccurate, it is 16.66%. Also, I suppose that it can add up to a trillion in 10 years, I got confused with another set of figures I recently looked at. Anyway, I finally found the transcript of the debate with the relevant claim: "And you bet we want to allow younger workers to take some of their own money. See that's a difference of opinion. The vice president thinks it's the government's money. The payroll taxes are your money. You ought to put it in prudent, safe investments, so that $1 trillion, over the next 10 years, grows to be $3 trillion. The money stays within the Social Security system. It's a part of the -- it's a part of the Social Security system." Assuming, as you do, that there is only ten years to grow, at 10%, in the first 7 years, it would double. Then, in the next 3plus years, it would gain another 50%. Thus, at the end of about 10 years, it would be at $3 trillion, supposing the initial accumulation of $1 trillion. I am sorry that I had to clear my head to get that your assumption was wrong, and that he was making a simplified- model statement, assuming the 10 years of equity growth followed the initial accumulation of $1 trillion. Since the middling age of the work force is about 45, it is reasonable to project 20 years until retirement, and therefore it gives a rough picture of what could be accomplished........