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 : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John Koligman who wrote (9377)	9/13/2009 1:08:08 AM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

Thing is, the Republican idea of 'privatization' of SS is fraught with investment risk. Look at the markets over the past decade... If you look at the markets over any given "decade", it can be up or down. But SS isn't a decade long proposition -- it is many decades -- maybe 4, 5, or 6. Over that time period the market has always outperformed treasury securities. If the markets croak for 4, 5, or 6 decades, treasury securities aren't going to be worth much, either. The partial privatization of SS is one reasonable method of dealing with the $12 Trillion in unfunded liabilities which SS faces. When compared with Medicare, the $12 Trillion seems small, but we're talking a substantial fraction of the net worth of the entire nation.

To: John Koligman who wrote (9377)	9/13/2009 9:15:03 AM
From: Lane3	Respond to of 42652

Thing is, the Republican idea of 'privatization' of SS is fraught with investment risk. Risk aversion avoids downsides. It also avoids upsides. Some people put a higher priority on safety than others. It seems to me that it should be their choice. Re shifting gears on Social Security, I disagree with the Republican privatization plan but I think SS could be if not phased out, phased down over time. Gradually reduce the tax over time and age and try to shift the youth culture so folks understand that they have to save. And also that they have to contribute to the economy, not sit around with their hands out. I think there will always have to be a safety net for those who fall through the cracks but it should be a poverty program, not a retirement program.