Think Private Social Security accounts means it's YOUR money?

[radfringe]

...think again...

State of the Union: Instant Analysis
Robert G. Kaiser --Washington Post, Associate Managing Editor
Wednesday, February 2, 2005; 10:00 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A52280-2005Jan31.html

Robert G. Kaiser: Good evening. Tonight we've heard a State of the Union speech that puts a little meat on the bones of President Bush's second term agenda--but not much. I expected more specific proposals than we heard. Much of the rhetoric was familiar from the campaign and the president's public statements since his reelection.

Curiously, he again avoided spelling out how he would create private, personal accounts to augment Social Security--how he would pay for them, what effect they would have on traditional Social Security benefits, and more.

Even more curiously, a "senior administration official" who briefed reporters on the Social Security proposal earlier today disclosed details of the White House plan that I don't think will play well in Peoria. Most significantly, this official revealed that most or all of the earnings from new "personal" or privatized accounts will be paid not to the holder of the account, but to the government. The senior official called this a "benefit offset." It's one way to finance the creation of these private accounts, but it's going to cause quite a political stir, I think.

[Eric J in MN]

1. Bush is a con man. (nt)

nt

[radfringe]

2. kick