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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (101042)	2/18/2005 4:06:02 PM
From: carranza2	Respond to of 793996

I look upon this move as with private pensions as the end game. I think the Republicans and the Democrats both realize this, but nobody wants to talk about it. It's the Democrat's health care "salami game" turned back on them. Get a small percentage over to private, and increase it every couple of years when the results look good. 50 to 60 years, and it's done. Perhaps that is what's happening, I don't know. The SS problem is not only demographic, as I've ranted about, but it's also administrative. If the SSA were a private trustee, it would be sued for breaching a fiduciary duty. The returns on the cash have been that abysmal. From a mathematical standpoint, there is no doubt that the demographic difficulty can be cured by better returns on the money. This is a big reason why I'm behind some sort of reform--it won't take much to get more bang out of SS bucks than the SSA gets to get a good ways towards a reasonable fix. But the demographic problem affects not only SS. It affects al kinds of things, from our standining in the world to our ability to raise an army to our technological creativity to...well, you get my point. And this is why I'm ranting on the issue today. vbg