DON'T EVER PRIVATIZE SOCIAL SECURITY.

[madinmaryland]

EVER! Anyone who suggests doing that is my enemy. eom

[Avalux]

1. Anyone who suggests doing it is anti-American.

We need to keep saying that, over and over and over.

[RegieRocker]

2. They are shooting themselves in the foot. Many are leaving the republican

party over this.

[Warpy]

3. It's failed spectacularly when it's been tried

Anybody who thinks it's such a great idea needs to look at Chile. For a while, it seemed to be working, especially for higher paid workers. The rest found that yearly fees, broker fees, and taxes were eating up every pittance they could "invest," which really hadn't been enough to begin with. Now Chile has a whole generation of workers who are on the dole when they could have been supported by a self sustaining government insurance program.

I think that's why they finally got the gumption to haul Pinochet into court, the beggaring of a whole generation of hard working people. The privatization scheme was his baby and Chile was being watched as its laboratory.

Well, the experiment failed and the patient died but that hasn't stopped Wall Street from wanting to get its greedy hands on social security premiums.

Anyone who is for this scheme is my deadly enemy, too.

[joshcryer]

10. Huh? Chile's system was voluntary, and a lot of people opted out.

It was a very bad idea, to allow people to opt out like they did, because those people wound up destitute, with no nest egg. Indeed in 2008 they reformed the system to make everyone pay into it. Meanwhile the generation of workers who didn't pay into it (nor invest) had nothing and the reforms allowed them to at least get a paycheck (so ironically they, irresponsibly didn't pay into the system, and still got paid).

[LiberalFighter]

4. What people are not realizing is that this doesn't just effect seniors.

Current or future. It will financially impact the children of those seniors that don't receive Social Security. Even more so as wages continue to be low making if impossible or seriously difficult for families to save for their retirement. What is the rate of health for those living near poverty with no insurance or sub-standard insurance? That will make it more difficult for children of seniors.

[jtrockville]

5. SS was instituted as a safety-net for a stock market crash.

So, if you privatize it... where would you put it? In the stock market? So your safety net against a stock market crash would be your investments in the stock market?

Yeah, that's the ticket!

/dimwits

[sabrina 1]

7. If Bush had succeeded in 2005 when he went on his 50

state campaign, using his 'political capital' to talk people into those 'savings accounts' that would have been invested in the Stock Market, imagine the disaster it would be now for those who had gone along with it. The evil thing is they knew there were problems back then. They do not care about the people. When everyone realizes that, they will find it much easier to reject their failed policies.

But Bush failed, and had to go home after just a few states. He met with such resistance, he never mentioned it again. But they do not give up. That fund is the big prize and they wont' stop until they get it. If Obama agrees to anything other than eliminating the cap on SS, he will lose the next election imho.

[jtrockville]

11. "they knew there were problems back then"

Damn straight they did. Frankly, I've always suspected that's why Bush wanted to privatize SS. It wasn't too long after he realized his plan to stuff $2 trillion of SS into the Wall Street wouldn't work, that Wall Street suddenly needed a $2 trillion bailout.

SS is considered to be the "third rail" for any politician (including Obama), and rightly so.

[JDPriestly]

6. I'm with you, madinmaryland

[WillyT]

8. Yep... K & R !!!

:kick:

[bullwinkle428]

9. Word. I don't care what letter comes after their name.

K&R.