A simple question(Hopefully) about *'s SS plan.

[LiberalVoice]

If *'s SS plan were to come into effect, wouldn't the american people be even more screwed since our market is crumbling?

I mean maybe i'm misunderstanding SS(which is completely possible)but if they let the american people put there SS money into their own special accounts for them to invest wouldn't that mean they have the potential to lose it all with the fall of the US economy?

[fertilizeonarbusto]

1. Simple answer

YES.
If this gets through, develop a taste for cat food.
BTW, read Paul Krugman's column in the NYT today. Lays out the idiocy and mendacity of this scheme with blinding clarity.

[LiberalVoice]

3. will do...

thanks.

[Skarbrowe]

5. Hey. Have you seen the price of cat food?

We're doomed!

Seriously, * better get shot down on this plan or..we're doomed.

I don't know.

Taking my Anatomy of Fascism book and heading out to the doctor.

[bryant69]

2. Yeah Krugman mentions this today

And I've mentioned it on my site too. If you follow the economic predictions which show Social Security running out of money and collapsing, than money in the stock market won't be enough to make up the difference. On the other hand if you follow the economic predictions which show private accounts making tons of money for American citizens, than Social Security really isn't in all htat much trouble, and can probably continue for decades longer than 2042.

Kind of a konundrum, eh?

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[LiberalVoice]

6. Yeah I just read it...

If a 21 yr old whos never been to college who doesn't know a damn thing about numbers could figure out that dumping your money into a failing economy is bad news then why can't economists do it?

I do have another question though...If all this new money was put into the economy wouldn't it give it a boost? Just wondering.

[SmokingJacket]

13. The money would give the stock market a boost, for a while.

That's what's making the Bushbots drool so heavily. It would be, at least for a little while, the late 90's all over again. Do you think they're for privatization for the good of the elderly? HA! It's to fatten their stock portfolios.

But the boost wouldn't last forever -- and I doubt it would do much for the economy in general, except to widen the gap between the rich and the poor.

[Lerkfish]

4. your first mistake: not realizing that the murikan people are irrelevant.

the whole point of privatization is to feed large sums of taxpayer money directly into the pockets of corporate bosses (the Ken Lays of the world) and tidy "fees" for brokerage firms. Follow the money.

[chelsea0011]

7. Oh, that SS

[dweller]

8. i keep putting this link out here and there

http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0127/p09s01-coop.htm

b/c it's simple explanation of the coming 'crisis'...just not what *moron is telling everyone.

2018-the timetable for the 'crisis', check it out.

dp

[chelsea0011]

9. Paul Krugman from the Boston Globe explained it simply

a couple of weeks ago.

Someone on a private account retires in 2000. Someone with the exact account holdings retires in 2003. The person who retired in 2003 has 50% less retirement funds than the person in 2000. Case closed. And retiree 2003 needs ther money now. They can't keep holding until their accounts come back. They are withdrawing not saving.

[chelsea0011]

12. I mean Robert Kuttner

I get those two mixed up all the time

[Poppyseedman]

10. You can't lose it all

unless you invest it all.

Since the Bush plan only puts a small portion of your SS in the stock market, you potential to lose all of your SS is not going to happen.

But you can lose the portion you put in the stock market.

Overall, if the stock market crashes and burns, we'll all be in the same boat together. The Titanic.

SS will be the least of our problems.

[A Simple Game]

11. To many people SS is their retirement.

Many have no pension to speak of, and SS is their only income when they can no longer work.

The attempt to privatize is only the opening of the door. This privatization is not the end that the Republicans seek, only the beginning. They want SS eliminated totally.

SS is like insurance, it's a pain to pay for it. But who wants to be without it? Not me, I plan to retire in less than ten years but without SS I can't.

[ElaineinIN]

15. The $64,000 question

of course, whether Bushco's plan is to also drop benefits, the idea being that your private account money plus the guaranteed benefit equals current benefits. Therefore, if your account underperforms, no only do you lose that portion, but you lose that portion of the guaranteed benefit that was reduced because you were supposed to make up for it.

But, of course, we don't know that, because chickenshit hasn't actually released a plan with details... he's still convincing us there is a crisis, so we'll readily swallow his bullshit when he's ready to dump it on su

[fob]

14. Can I add a follow-up question, please?

Let's say the bush* Destroy SS plan happens and as you say OUR economy sucks so instead of investing in a crappy market, everyone puts there money where the economy is hot like say, China. Then what happens? A HUUGGEEE chunk of the US economy/budget/funds gets outsourced to China.

Anyone?

[ElaineinIN]

16. Pre-approved investments

The problem is that most plans I've heard about from think tanks and such try to address the problem of un-educated investors by saying that private accounts could only be invested in pre-approved mutual funds or some such. While that would prevent all of our retirement money from being moved to China, it raises a whole other host of questions like, who gets to pick the mutual funds? what makes them so special? Now, we have polticial types making investment decisions not based on market forces but on who Dick CHeney golfs with. Undermines the whole capitalist system, if you ask me, but I'd love the hear what a real economist thinks... anyone out there?

[fob]

17. If you're interested I posted this same question to DU's own

ProfessorGAC here...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=3038756&mesg_id=3039157

Nothing yet.


As for your info, if that's the case then why bother? So they're making this big push for "private accounts" but wil limit YOUR choice to THEIR choices? Somehow I'm thinking that's not gonna really benefit ME.

Also as I understand it SS and T-bills are not necessarily opposite choices for investing but complementary. As in when one is down invest in the other or one is risky so offset with the more stable investment as you near retirement.

If this is the case, in whole or in part, won't that weaken the ENTIRE financial dynamic? The US will have to sell billions upon billions in T-bills to fund the transition of money from t-bills to stocks? Is it really as stupid as it sounds?

[ElaineinIN]

18. Exactly! Or at least I think so,...

I'm not an economist or a financial person, but I did sleep at a Holiday Inn last night!

Of course its not going to benefit you, silly... as if social security reform as about you, a taxpayer and eventual retire person, phffff. :P

[fob]

19. Nor am I, although I play one on the internets!