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: michael97123 who wrote (396937)	7/8/2008 10:55:34 AM
From: i-node	Respond to of 1577020

I think SS needs more than a slight fix as proportion of workers to retirees flip flops as the boomers retire. This is correct -- but the problem is an actuarial one that started on day one of the SS enabling legislation. Professional actuaries need to sit down and solve the problem, and Congress needs to agree up front to rubber stamp it. Either this is going to happen, or we're going to wait until there is nothing to do but allow the program to collapse. The first thing that needs to happen is to change the accounting, otherwise, you end up with all the JF's of the world not understanding the problem or what it takes to fix it. When you have Congress going around claiming there is a "surplus" while in fact there is a huge deficit, it is impossible to reach any consensus. Partial-privatization was the last shot at fixing it within the confines of normal political processes. When you're talking about pensions, you simply CANNOT think in terms of a 50-year planning horizon -- since those paying into the system won't even start to realize benefits for 50 years. You have to think in much longer terms, and when you do that, privatization makes total sense.