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 : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (19560)	7/27/2001 2:47:26 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

I actually have some of the same questions and opinions that you do on this matter. I would like to see more details about how it would work and I also would prefer "to scrap SS retirement altogether, pay off everyone based on their vested interest, and get Uncle Sam out of the retirement business." At my age I would even be willing to give up my pay off based on my past contributions (but I can understand while a 60 year old would feel differently). I think Bush's plan is flawed in that it isn't enough to solve the problems with SS. I can't say that I see a flaw specifically with his program but then I may be missing something and in any case not being adequate to totally solve the problem could itself be seen as a flaw. (But if it makes things a bit better then its still worthwhile). Bush's program would allow a small part of the money I pay SS to be under my control (and the investments to really be mine) and I like that idea, but it doesn't do anything about the unfunded liability of the SS program. If it has a flaw it is IMO that it is a band-aid rather then a complete redesign or elimination of the program. But elimination of the program is probably not politically possible and Bush's plan has at the very least started serious discussion about SS and shown that it isn't completely the third rail of politics. Tim