Social Security retirement should be privatized?

[Supposn]

Social Security retirement should be privatized?

It’s argued that our policy of deriving SS retirement system’s “float” earnings only from U.S. Treasury financial instruments does not sufficiently increase the funds available for SS retirement benefits. It’s been further argued that privatized accounts would in aggregate increase funds available for SS retirement distributions.

When lesser income earners, [many if not most of whom do not have substantial equity in their homes], reach their age of retirement, their SS lifetime annuities are too often their most valuable asset.
Similarly a great many higher income earners that never anticipated dependency upon SS also have found themselves in such conditions.

A privatized SS account’s value upon their owners date of retirement is subject to greater risk (than an account that derives additional incomes only from U.S. Treasury’s financial instruments.
The working poor and other lesser earners have little to gain but there’s a significant risk of these segment of our population being in aggregate driven to poverty if they retire.

The two major purposes of the SS retirement program are
(1) Somewhat of financial safety nets for persons who reach retirement age.
(2) Reducing poverty among our elderly in a manner that’s net beneficial to our nation’s economy. Its estimated SS currently keeps 40% of our population age 65 or older out of poverty.

Almost all of goals of those advocating privatized SS accounts would be achieved by reducing some limitations within our existing voluntary federal tax deferred programs. ; (to begin with, greatly reducing the accounts limited purposes or cash-out times.

Most proponents of privatized SS accounts are disingenuous when they do not acknowledge their primary purpose of undermining if not eliminating SS retirement itself.

Respectfully, Supposn

 

[Supposn]

Privatized Social Security individual retirement accounts:

A “privatized" Social Security’s individual retirement accounts would be funded by the payroll taxes of employees and their employers. Employees would self-direct investments of their individual accounts. Thus, the values of the accounts upon the commencement day of an employee’s retirement will be determined by the consequences of the taxes paid into their accounts and their self-directed investment decisions of those funds. There are general alternatives as to how those individual accounts would be handled from the values of their accounts will been determined by individuals’ lifetime wages, and their self-directed investment decisions of retirement.

Monthly retirement benefits could be distributed by an insurer to pay out lifetime annuities based upon actuary calculations. If the annuity is to be a life-time annuity, it is less feasible for the fund to remain the property of the retirees’ estates and passed on to their families. If the annuity insurer is not the federal government, the insurer would pay fees similar to a quasi-government insurer similar to the manner of banks paying and being subject to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

Retaining the current Social Security retirement’s considerations for widows, ex-wives, and dependent children will be less feasible and/or of greater expensive (than they currently are).

If Federal Supplemental Insurance Income, (SSI) will be retained, it will continue to guarantee some minimum rate of monthly SS retirement benefits. Privatized SS retirement policy will then encourage employees, (particularly the lowest earning employees), to risk more, for greater retirement incomes. Due to Federal SSI, employees would still be guaranteed minimum retirement benefits. SSI is not now funded by the Social Security retirement system. SSI will be the greatest ongoing increased federal expense due to our transforming to privatized SS retirement system.

Respectfully, Supposn