Social Security "Reform" Fraud
From the Washington Post:
"Under the proposal, workers could invest as much as 4 percent of their wages subject to Social Security taxation in a limited assortment of stock, bond and mixed-investment funds. But the government would keep and administer that money. Upon retirement, workers would then be given any money that exceeded inflation-adjusted gains over 3 percent."
And from the New York Times:
"The personal accounts would be administered by the government; private companies would manage the investment funds under contract with the government."
"When workers retired, most would be required to use at least part of their accounts to buy from the government lifetime annuities...." (All emphasis added.)
The key word here is government.
Oh, one more thing. This is Bush's opening position. It hasn't gone through the congressional compromise mill yet.
comments powered by Disqus
Jonathan Dresner - 2/3/2005
And how is that not raising payroll taxes? I'm not saying it's a bad idea (though the cap should be the same as the benefits cap, or something like that), but it's certainly not consistent with "the rules".
Gary McGath - 2/3/2005
Note also: "A _limited_ assortment of stock, bond and mixed-investment funds." In other words, funds meeting government criteria. This would provide a new opportunity to control funds by withholding eligibility for social security money.
Sheldon Richman - 2/3/2005
One idea that is on the table is raising or scrapping the income cap for the payroll tax. Great.
Jonathan Dresner - 2/3/2005
Who needs details? The speech itself included glaring contradictions: how you own the money, but it gets dribbled out to you in a government-set formula; how the money will come out of payroll taxes but that increasing payroll taxes is non-negotiable in the social security "reform" discussion; for that matter, how "all ideas are on the table" but private accounts are a separate proposal to be taken out of the context of other social security ideas.
Not that you're wrong, of course: quite the contrary. But why bother?
- Coming Soon, a Century Late: A Black Film Gem
- The discovery that complicated the history of sex change operations
- NYT identifies the person who exposed Gary Hart's philandering
- Decades After Trinity Nuclear Test in New Mexico, U.S. Studies Cancer Fallout
- Lawrence Of Arabia's Hand-Drawn, WWI Map Is Up for Auction
- Ken Burns is in a race to slow us down
- Ken Burns and the Myth of Theodore Roosevelt
- What Ken Burns Doesn't Understand about the Roosevelts
- A call for historians to do macro history
- Colorado school board, worried about the new AP framework, wants to make sure high school kids are taught patriotic history