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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (214691)	1/11/2005 8:48:13 PM
From: RetiredNow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572877

Nope. Actually, I think it's my turn to say you are listening to me. I also think Bush is fiscally irresponsible and it eats me up. That's another one of the reasons I voted for Kerry. However, I believe that you can move to a privatized system without any net long term transition costs. You see, if you are reducing my future benefits by allowing me to divert some of my funds, it is a simple thing for the actuaries to ensure that the net impact on the social security trust fund is $0. Just figure out the NPV of the amount you let me divert and reduce my future benefits by exactly that amount. Now, what I'd do is take it a step further. I'd actually reduce the benefits by even more than the NPV. This would put the SS Trust fund in an even better position. As the beneficiary, you might think that's not a good deal. But when you realize that you can take the diverted funds and then invest them at higher rates of return, you see that it becomes a win win for you and for the SS Trust fund.