Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Tell me again why privatizing SS is a bad idea...
Quote | Reply
It has been widely reported that the average rate of return on SS "contributions" is about 2%. Compared to historical inflation rates that is actually a net negative ROI. Compare SS to the Federal Employee's Thrift Savings Plan:

(1) There are five funds from which employees can chose to invest in. The three most popular are the "G" or government securities, "F" which is basically a money market/bond fund, and the "C" which is a common stock fund. The average rates of return from 1988 through 2003 for these funds were: "G" 6.78%, "F" 8.05%, and "C" 13.64%. The "G" fund has never had a negative annual rate of return. The "F" fund has had two years of negative returns, and the "C" has had four. Pro-SS argument--What if the stock market goes down? Answer--You can see, based on the average TSP rates of return and the historical performance of the stock market that this argument is basically a bogus scare tactic.

(2) You can choose to invest all or any portion of up to 10% of your earnings in any mixture of the five funds. I contribute 50% to the "G" fund and 50% to the "C" fund. Fund balances or contributions can be moved between funds online. Pro-SS argument--People do not know hpw to invest. Answer--Given the limited options available, the TSP is basically dummy-proof. You could also set up some restrictions such as setting minimum age-based percentages that must be invested in low-risk funds.

(3) When I retire I can start drawing an immediate annuity or roll over my balance into another qualified plan. If I die before I draw out all my balance, my heirs will get the balance as opposed to SS which ends when I die.

(4) My contributions are non-taxable, and will be taxed when I start drawing an annuity, presumably at a lower marginal rate.

Why wouldn't the general populace DEMAND that the government replace SS with a plan such as this?
Quote Reply
Re: Tell me again why privatizing SS is a bad idea... [tri_bri2] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I already have a private retirement account -- it's called a Roth IRA.

Tell me why I wouldn't just want SS to STOP taking money from me, and let ME decide what to do with it, instead of FORCING me to pick from a limited selection?

Oh, and never trust rates of return -- always verify. There's some many ways to inflate the actual returns.

Also, everybody agrees that "past returns are no indication of future returns". Why then does everybody claim that the stock market will continue to rise "because it has in the past"?

There's no guarantee that it will! (that said, I DO have my ROTH money in 70% stocks).
Quote Reply
Re: Tell me again why privatizing SS is a bad idea... [tri_bri2] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"Why wouldn't the general populace DEMAND that the government replace SS with a plan such as this? "

- The general populace are too busy watching TV, receiving lousy public school educations, and eating fast food to care.

The voting populace is a different subject and I don't have the steam to analyze why some huge groups/demographics are pro-Bush but anti-privatization (and others are vice-versa).

Marty Gaal, CSCS
One Step Beyond Coaching
Triangle Open Water Swim Series | Old School Aquathon Series
Powerstroke® Freestyle Technique DVD
Quote Reply
Re: Tell me again why privatizing SS is a bad idea... [tri_bri2] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Don't take it personally tri_bri2, but you are obviously a racist, homophobic, sexist pig who beats his wife and children. Worse, you are a conservative.

Can you please sign me up for 100% in C? That is where Krugman has his money in the Princeton professor's retirement fund.

I hope this doesn't violate Dan's requirement on civil discourse. Nothing personal intended, just constructive criticism.
Quote Reply
Re: Tell me again why privatizing SS is a bad idea... [ajfranke] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Don't take it personally tri_bri2, but you are obviously a racist, homophobic, sexist pig who beats his wife and children. Worse, you are a conservative.

**** Art, you lost me on this one?

**** The cynic in me says this won't happen because it's logical. Just as nature abhors a vacuum, so does politics abhor logic. More realistically, I think the Government (whoever composes this amorphous mass ... I'm pretty sure it's not those elected but rather the bureaucrats who occupy the same position for decades) doesn't want to lose the revenue stream. And, there is a fear, likely justified, that most people, minus forced SS contributions, would not save, invest and/or otherwise plan for their future. So, when the future arrives, they have nothing and look to the government as their savior.

*****
"In case of flood climb to safety"
Quote Reply
What's Down is now Up!! [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Who would've thought that conservatives would be advocating another government program!

Ask youself: If you think the government is generally incapable of running programs effectively or effeciently, what makes you think they'll make good MONEY MANAGERS???

Let's see what happens when people in the "C" option LOSE money! There will be CRIES of "UNFAIR!" in the streets and people will DEMAND ACTION!

We must index the stock market! They will say. We must be guaranteed no losses! They will say.

Soon there will be MASSIVE regulation of the market, and MASSIVE subsidies to ensure no one loses too much money.
Quote Reply
Re: Tell me again why privatizing SS is a bad idea... [tri_bri2] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
If I die before I draw out all my balance, my heirs will get the balance as opposed to SS which ends when I die.

Social Security does have a survivor benefit for your spouse and/or children - http://www.ssa.gov/ww&os2.htm
Quote Reply
Re: Tell me again why privatizing SS is a bad idea... [j-son] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I guess the tone was not sarcastic enough. I was just kidding!
Quote Reply
Re: What's Down is now Up!! [maybourne] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The answer is that the government is not the money manager. That function is bid out to the private sector.

The Thrift Savings Plan that tri-bri2 refers to is an outstanding example of how such a program would work. The plan expenses have been approximately 0.30% per year. That is less than half what my index fund (Vanguard, the cheapest around I think) charges.
Quote Reply
Re: Tell me again why privatizing SS is a bad idea... [ajfranke] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Yup, I saw the sarcasm after I posted. The first time I read it I was feeling a little flaclumped from my morning run.

*****
"In case of flood climb to safety"
Quote Reply
Re: What's Down is now Up!! [ajfranke] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
As usual, Art is correct. Private sector fund managers are hired, through a competitive bid process, to manage the funds, within government rules of course. An independent panel with government, consultant, employee union, etc. representation does the source selection. Fund management expenses are very low because the investing is done in blocks rather than individually, and there is not a great deal of "churn" between and within funds.
Quote Reply