Reply #3: That article is providing us with AMMO against the plan [View All]

[Selatius]

Here:

A starting point is a plan proposed by a presidential commission in 2001 that would divert 2 percent of workers' payroll taxes into private accounts. The remaining 4.2 percent — and the Social Security taxes employers pay — would go into the system, helping fund benefits for current retirees. That leaves a shortfall of at least $2 trillion to continue funding benefits for those current retirees.

And here:

For future retirees, base benefits would be cut by tying them to inflation instead of wage growth, with stock market gains assumed to make up any shortfall. The concept gained support in the stock market boom of the late 1990s.

Bush has not said how the $2 trillion transition costs would be funded, nor did his commission. Record deficits, Bush's desire to make his five rounds of tax cuts permanent and the rising cost of war in Iraq (news - web sites) and Afghanistan (news - web sites) are major obstacles.

Also check this out:

He said the yearly price tag of $80 billion to $100 billion could be funded by closing tax loopholes, cutting pork barrel spending, borrowing money or temporarily raising the payroll tax cap on earnings.

I doubt that'll happen. The corporatists don't want to pay more taxes, and they most certainly don't want the tax loopholes closed. This is a setup. When the corporations/special interests put their foot down, the end result is these structural reforms won't happen, and the system will be even worse than what it could be under present situations. Then they could claim the answer to the crisis is to let the private sector run the system, since the government is so radically inefficient at running it.