|
This was writen by a friend of mine, he is a very intelligent man and we have talked about SS lately. He sent me this and it is a great consensus on SS. He did write it, it is not a bogus RW like email.
Subject: Social Security
A close relative, a graduate from a very prestigious engineering school, retired for a quarter of a century, has been a vehement critic of Social Security since it's inception. This person during his fine career conservatively invested for retirement in stocks and bonds that would provide a high standard of living during retirement (without any need for Social Security, thankyou). Then corporations cut back on dividends in favor of capital growth which directly affected income of the retired. There were a few market downturns, especially the 2001 bust. Now this couple relies on Social Security to keep their house and pay medical bills. (Corporate insurance was also eroded away during those years from a once comprehensive protection to the current HMO where, in crisis, the doctor is different at every visit, and often, as well, is the diagnosis. Coverage is incomplete and very complicated.) Private brokers will become wealthy from the commissions no matter what the market does. Don't misunderstand, I support 401K-type retirement accounts, but they should be monies that you can afford to loose without becoming homeless or indigent when you become aged and the market drops. The scenario, assuming funds are diverted from Social Security, will likely be: Enormous cash will enter the market for many years thus inflating the market as we saw in the late '90's. Everyone will be quite happy with their personal results. Then mass retrevals will begin at mid-century resulting in market stagnation, and a prolonged bear market. Those needing the income will find that they only have a half-to-a-tenth of what they planned for and the Social Security cushion will not be there for them. My own tax-sheltered account (I recently retired) is only about a quarter of what it was projected to be when I initiated it a third-of-a-century ago. A letter to the editor in our paper says it better than I can: DON'T GALBLE ON WALL STREET WITH OUR NEST EGG In 1939, two-thirds of America's senior citizens lived in their "golden years" in cold, hard poverty. Just a decade later, that percentage was down to half. By 1959, it was only one-third. Today, the number is less than 10 percent. That's progress. What's progressive about it is that this decline in poverty is the result of the New Deal's passage of our nation's landmark Social Security program. Yes, the very same program now under attack by Wall Street wolves and congressional oportunists of both parties who insist that Social Security is doomed to failure and facing an imminent financial crisis. Horsedooties. First, this is a program that actually works, providing the modicum of income so our gray-haired citizens have a basic level of decent living when their earning years are over. Second, Social Security is a model of efficiency, requiring only a single percent in administrative costs. Compare that to the insurance corporations that suck out one-third of our health-care dollars to pay for their corporate bureaucracies, executive salaries, marble palaces and advertising. Without changin anything, Social Security is financially sound for the next 40 years. Yet, the Bushites -- on behalf of Wall Street finaglers -- seek to privatize this public treasure, pushing people to put their Social Security nest egg into the stock market. These are the same investment geniuses who only three years ago would have advised you to invest in Enron -- a stock that fell from $97 a share to 57 cents in only one year. --T N, DsM Reg., 1/15/05 Any retirement modification by congress should be limited to improvements in the 401K and other tax-sheltered accounts currently available to anyone who wishes to save in that manner. I hope you will become vocal and pro-active in an effort to thwart any attempt to privatize any aspect of Social Security, and please urge congress to make necessary adjustments now, to insure the health of the program for the remainder of the century.
|