|
Re: Liberal = Anti-American?
Quote:
Originally Posted by That Guy
mecixo chile and australia (among others) managed to do it. you do like galveston did... let people opt out, and then they can put their SS money in a private account that guarantees 4-6% return per year (sometimes they make more than the guarantee). Those accounts are divided between multiple regulated regional banks and credit unions (which basically look at it like long term CDs) - that way there's no chance of one bank failure bankrupting a retirement class (and these things can be FDIC insured).
so that takes care of everyone opting out going forward. you leave those nearing retirement on the old system and gradually reduce america's tax burden as the old guys retire (and the opt out rate will be over 90%).
probelm solved - less taxes, no one gets forced out on the street, and the younger guys get actually interest on their very safe accounts, beating inflation and making it economically feasible to keep the idea of guaranteed retirement without bankrupting the nation.
SS and medicare are EASY problems - galveston and japan already solved them 30 years ago!!. why reinvent the wheel?
|
I am missing something here...if I am 63 and two years away from retirement can I opt-out and what does opting-out mean? What if I am 50 years old? What exactly are my choices? What will happen to the money I contributed in the past ~30 years? I mean that money is long gone and all the spiffy 20-30 year olds are putting their money in private accounts. Are we perhaps going to need to bail out people of a certain age?
__________________
"The Redskins have always suffered from chronic organizational deformities under Snyder."
-Jenkins
|