More SSN info....privatization info

[Fmr jarhead]

I have seen the words "younger workers" used frequently when "explaining" the jist of the new program, but had not seen an actual date for these "young workers," until today. Those eligible to chose would need to be born after 1 Jan 1950.

http://www.cato.org/pubs/ssps/ssp-32es.html

Has a good presentation for the facts associated with one of the plans for this 6.2% option.

What do you think?

Executive Summary

For the past several years there has been a growing consensus about the need to reform Social Security. Now, however, the debate has advanced to the point where it becomes important to move beyond generalities and provide specific proposals for transforming Social Security to a system of individual accounts. The Cato Project on Social Security Choice, therefore, has developed a proposal to give workers ownership of and control over their retirement funds.

Under this proposal:

* Individuals would be allowed to divert their half (6.2 percentage points) of the payroll tax to individually owned, privately invested accounts. Those who chose to do so would agree to forgo all future accrual of retirement benefits under the traditional Social Security system.
* The remaining 6.2 percentage points of payroll taxes would be used to pay transition costs and to fund disability and survivors' benefits.
* Workers who chose the individual account option would receive a "recognition bond" based on the accrued value of their lifetimeto- date benefits. Those bonds, redeemable at the worker's retirement, would be fully tradable in secondary markets.
* Those who wished to remain in the traditional Social Security system would be free to do so, accepting a level of benefits payable with the current level of revenue.

We expect this plan to restore Social Security to long-term and sustainable solvency and to do so at a cost that is less than the cost of simply propping up the existing program. And it would do far more than that.

Younger workers who chose the individual account option would receive benefits substantially higher than those that could be paid under traditional Social Security. At the same time, the plan would treat women and minorities more fairly and allow low-income workers to accumulate real wealth.

Most important, this proposal would reduce Americans' reliance on government and give individuals greater ownership of wealth, as well as responsibility for and control over their own lives. It would be a profound and significant increase in individual liberty.

 

[Mr. P]

A Proposal for Individual
Current workers should be given a choice.
Beginning January 1, 2005, workers born on or
after January 1, 1950, would have two options:
Those who wish to remain in the traditional
Although they would forgo future benefits
under traditional Social Security, workers who
chose the individual account option would
receive a bond in recognition of their past con-tributions
to Social Security. That bond would
be a zero-coupon bond calculated to provide a
benefit based on accrued benefits under the cur-rent
Social Security system as of the date that
the individual chose an individual account.20
The bonds would be fully tradable on second-ary
markets, but all proceeds would have to be
fully redeposited in the worker’s individual
account until the worker became eligible to
make withdrawals.

I'd go for that... But the following is BS!

The recognition bonds may be valued at something less than the full present value of
accrued benefits because we believe that work-ers
will attach a value to receiving a tangible
asset, making them willing to accept a discount
in the face value of the bond.

We'll give you the money we have forced you to send in all your life, only if you agree to let us keep some.
And how much is some?
JUST GIVE ME MY MONEY!! DAMNIT!
And where the hell did they come up with young being born in 1950? Dillo's gonna kill em!

 

[Fmr jarhead]

I agree, but I also feel obligated to help the system that is in place, because I know that newly invested money will outpace the current system, and it will oblige us to take care of those that are still in the "broke" system.

I don't like it either, but I think it is important to take care of those that had no choice (if I understand the proposed system)

 

[Working Man]

I met some people over the summer of 2004 who went camping(like hobos) almost daily, even though they "owned"/own a home. THe big deal is that they partied until the wee hours of the morning in their little campsites, and then rode around town on expensive mountain bikes the rest of the day.. They are under 45 years old and are all on SSI..

No, I never got the reason why, but I can tell you it that it is probably a drug-use related disability. That is, illegal drug use has caused a medical condition that would make working for a living a risky move, therefore they are on SSI. What ever that means.


I knew a guy who did heroin for years. Did his time in the pokey when he got caught dealing, then got on SSI because of damage to his heart. He wasn't a bad person. He just messed up in life and got in with the wrong people. Anyhow, he didn't work above the table, so he sold jewelry and cologne from the back of his car. He didn't sell drugs, at least I honestly don't think so. But, the little business kept him busy and with extra cash until the former years of abuse had caught up with him and he died. He was basicaly retired and collecting SSI until his death at age 45. RIP.
He was a neighbor, and a friend. But,, it did bother me that he was tapped into SSI, when I know older folks who are in the "notch years", and/or had put their time in at work only to get short changed at retirement.

Here is one more.. I know a guy who married a younger woman. She is 47, now, and he is in his 60's.. It wasn't love on her part. But,, they had two kids who are now grown. Because he is retired, from a good public service job, and over 65???, the kids are getting SSI because they are taking classes in school. I don't believe the kids need the assistance, but the law is the law and they have a good teacher who has shown them all the ropes. Their gandmother, on her side, has all of the angles figured out about collecting SSI. Her own daughter, the kid's aunt, has never really worked in her life. She started collecting SSI around 21, or 22, because she was deemed " too stressed out" to work... A nervous condition that would preclude the normal 40hr job.,.. She has been on trips to England, Hawaii, etc with her mom.... But work???

And again, one has only to think of the people they know who have paid their dues and worked for years only to get short changed from the system.... Go figure.

 

[no1tovote4]

SSI or Supplemental Security Income as opposed to SSDI or Supplemental Security Disability Insurance (that is an Insurance program) is a separate program run by the Social Security Administration. It is direct welfare and not part of the Social Security program it is paid directly from the General Fund.

http://www.ssa.gov/notices/supplemental-security-income/ (SSI information)

http://www.workworld.org/wwwebhelp/diget.htm (SSDI infomation)

Are you sure these guys weren't on SSDI? It is an easy mistake to make.

 

[Fmr jarhead]

Working Man, I appreciate your stories, but how do they pertain to Social Security privatization (as the thread topic indicates?)

Maybe you should start a thread to tell your stories elswhere, and let this thread be used for privatization information.

Thanks for your understanding, and civility.

 

[Working Man]

SSI or Supplemental Security Income as opposed to SSDI or Supplemental Security Disability Insurance (that is an Insurance program) is a separate program run by the Social Security Administration. It is direct welfare and not part of the Social Security program it is paid directly from the General Fund.

http://www.ssa.gov/notices/supplemental-security-income/ (SSI information)

http://www.workworld.org/wwwebhelp/diget.htm (SSDI infomation)

Are you sure these guys weren't on SSDI? It is an easy mistake to make.

Good point. I would have to guess it was SSDI. But is that to say it comes from the left pocket and not the right one? Or another way to look at it, the folks enjoying their fully suspended mountain bikes with dual disc brakes still are not contributing to the SSI fund. To be honest, I don't hang with anyone on SSDI, so I didn't realize there was a difference. Thanks for the info.

 

[Working Man]

Working Man, I appreciate your stories, but how do they pertain to Social Security privatization (as the thread topic indicates?)

Maybe you should start a thread to tell your stories elswhere, and let this thread be used for privatization information.

Thanks for your understanding, and civility.

The bottom line is that we have people who can take money out of the system and not put it in. Or, there are less good jobs around in order to make a wage and pay in.

You want to discuss the privatization of SSI, why? You feel it needs to be "fixed" I assume. So, why not fix some of the leaks???

Privatize? I used to think it was a great idea. This way I would have something to use in my retirement planning. I too hoped that I would have more than the typical working man's retirement check. Then I got involved with an alternate retirement account. Made $50k, on paper, in a year with a very small investment. The fund manager was "highly respected". When the tech sector tanked in the late nineties I lost all of that $50k+ in nearly as short a period, plus time that can not be regained.

I don't know. I figured if the money manager said it was a good investment, i would run with it. I lost. I wasn't planning on becoming an investment specialist in order to know where to move the money in order to stop worrying about my retirement.

 

[Working Man]

Working Man, I appreciate your stories, but how do they pertain to Social Security privatization (as the thread topic indicates?)

Maybe you should start a thread to tell your stories elswhere, and let this thread be used for privatization information.

Thanks for your understanding, and civility.

WHo is watching and directing the possible changes to the SSI system? Do we have anyone like the guy from Vanguard Mutual Funds, Bogel?,, watching, or giving input?? Is there going to be an oversite committee to explore the privatization?

Just like I learned, if you take part of your retirement money, and invest it with the best intentions, you can still wind up being broke if you don't pick the best investment vehicle.. I am no expert, I know a little, but am now gunshy about leaving it up to myself to invest. But, on the same token, the team who has been running the SSI has now saw fit to make me wait 1.75 years longer to collect what I have been sending in for all these years. (problem is my family has no men who have lived past 65 due to heart disease) Do I trust government employees to do the right thing?? Arghhh!!!!

 

[007]

Invest? I'd like to invest my money alright... is a SACK... under my MATRESS!

The government has had their fingers in my money for over forty years, and now the story is, well, we fucked your money away, and now, you're only going to get a portion of it back... sorry.

It seems the biggest fuckin's you get in life always have something to do with the government.

 

[archangel]

Invest? I'd like to invest my money alright... is a SACK... under my MATRESS!

The government has had their fingers in my money for over forty years, and now the story is, well, we fucked your money away, and now, you're only going to get a portion of it back... sorry.

It seems the biggest fuckin's you get in life always have something to do with the government.

:clap1: I could not agree more with you-I am retired and receiving SSA now-I have the option to go back to work to supplement this safe egg nest..Everything I own is paid for and I budget well..If I want extra money well I will enter the work force and supplement SSA with minimum wage job-well after I figure out a way to beat off the illegal immigration workers...lol