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: combjelly who wrote (218241)	2/9/2005 12:47:15 PM
From: RetiredNow	Respond to of 1572510

Thx for the clarification. This is where we disagree. I don't believe SS should provide an indefinite period of payouts for anyone. However, I'm not against it entireley. Maybe the best compromise is this. Currently, the SS gets 12.4%. What if we put 10% of that into personal accounts for people and use the remaining 2.4% as an insurance payment for people. The insurance payment would work like any other insurance program. If your annuity from your personal account runs out because you have lived longer than the actuaries thought, then you can continue to get an annuity from your SS insurance. The personal account balance should be used to purchase an annuity for the remainder of that person's actuarial lifespan and this annuity purchase should be mandatory. So the insurance component would have to be run like a real insurance biz. The rest would be a mandatory 401K type of personal account with very restricted investments (lifecycle funds) and withdrawal rules that mimic what we have today. This would be the best of all worlds.