If Social Security is privatized....

[Catchawave]

...were does the money come from for the disabled and other non-retirement benefits SS applies to?

[TomClash]

1. They plan to borrow it in the short run

[The Backlash Cometh]

3. Soo....the people who will be paying for it in the long run are the very

young who are going to be forced to gamble away some of their own Social Security money?

[TomClash]

6. That's about right . . . it's a con job

The goal is to scuttle the New Deal, the Fair Deal, the New Frontier and the Great Society.

Who wins? Wall Street - if they can bundle the funds.

Here's an unanswered question: does the employer payroll tax payment go down?

[RUMPLEMINTZ]

2. The way I read it

the program will be voluntary and only a small percentage can be privatized. The part that is not privatized will be the safety net for those who are disabled.

[The Backlash Cometh]

4. That sounds like a Trojan horse.

First they move this far, and then before you know it, some obscure aid has snuck in one line in the bill that changes everything.

[blondeatlast]

14. "Starve the beast." That's the program.

Grover Norquist is behind this up to his sleezee little beady eyballs.

[NickofTime]

5. Privatization will Gut Program!

[cornermouse]

7. They're already working on that at the state level.

Privatizing apparently means that they go through their case file and declare people miraculously healed of their disability and therefore ineligible.

[Catchawave]

8. My adult son is disabled....

and lives with us. He receives SS benefits which covers his living expenses. The additional income of about 9600/yr is very helpful in meeting his needs and keeping him home with family. It wouldn't be a great hardship to lose those benefits at our income level, but we'd definitely have to bite the bullet!

Most people with disabled family members make much less money and the alternative might be putting them in state facilities, which costs the taxpayers about 85K a year per resident.

I'm just not sure those who support privatization may not realize, sh*t happens, and what happens to them if they become disabled and unable to work?

I'm trying to put hard questions together to bug my Republican Senators (Warner and Allen)with :D I just don't understand HOW Bush's plan can ever work for the average income citizens?

[cornermouse]

10. The disconnect that I don't understand.

If you talk to republicans, a lot of them are well-meaning people who would be horrified with the end result of a lot of these policies.

And actually, I'm not sure what state facilities they'd put them in because in this state, they've been closing those facilities and I guess putting people out on the street. In which case, the only alternative would be prison, maybe?

[The Zanti Regent]

12. They are NOT well meaning people

Those Ayn Randite Nazis who are hell bent on dismantling Social Security do not care one bit about those less unfortunate. In their Randite Darwin-centered worldview, it's looking out for #1 and survivial of the fittest that counts.

[Avis]

9. Return on investment

They keep saying that people will get a higher return on their investment, but how can this be? One person said that people get back about 4 times what they pay in on average, another said people only pay for about the first 7 years of their retirement and after that it just comes out of the system. They now talk about this investment people will have that will allow them to leave something to their children. I'm not a financial wizard,but none of this adds up to me? Medicare for sure isn't really paid for by the person paying in - will that be a health savings account and no more health care after you exhaust what you have actually paid for? I don't think the public realizes that they really are getting more than just what they themselves have put in? Why couldn't the wealthy forgo all of this as they don't need to be on a social program. They get back only what they pay in, not deplete the system for what they don't really need?

[against all enemies]

13. Krugman has stated that the long term average for market gain is 4%.

Treasury bonds make 3%. So if they market pays 4%, then you have to pay the investment companies their 1% fee, which leaves you at the same 3% profit, EXCEPT the 4% market increase is not guaranteed, so you are risking all the money so that the investment firms will get their 1% profit. Sweet deal for the investment firms. Better to take the 3% treasury bonds and no risk. The Republican party - Privatize the profit, place the risk on the public, works for them.

[RUMPLEMINTZ]

15. In case your wondering

here is the bond/note rate as of Friday

http://www.bloomberg.com/markets/rates/index.html

[The Zanti Regent]

11. Welcome to Chile, where you buy disability and survivor policies.

Grover Norquist will look you in the face and say that it is YOUR duty to buy private disability insurance and lots more life insurance. Of course, since Prudential and Met Life are among the biggest contributors to dismantling Social Secuirty, just ignore all of that money (WHICH THEY STOLE FROM YOU) in Grover's pocket.

Yes, we will be like Chile, once we paid 7.65% of our income for old age, survivor, disability and Medicare. Now, you will buy these poilicies in the free market, and the average CHilean winds out paying 25% of their income for private insureance ON TOP OF those private accounts that get John Stoessel so excited he pitches a tent in his tropic of capricorn. Now, WHO is going to make the big windfall from this, just look at those who finance the Nazi Party and you'll get a clue!

and then, if you are truly needy, why the churches will help you...suuuuuurrrrrreeeeee they will...