Quote:
Originally Posted by joeydb
So you are objecting to a facet of the argument, as you see it, that wasn't stated or even hinted at?
Note: I said "phase out" Social Security, not cut it off.
How about something like this:
For those close to retirement (pick a number - 10 years, 15 years - whatever) : no change - you participate in the program and receive your "benefits".
For those who haven't had a gun put in their back yet to pay in: we're not taking your money. Suggest that you invest a similar portion of what would have been taken out of your pay (10.4%) into something that will actually bear interest so when you retire, you'll have PLENTY of cash to do whatever you want.
For those of us in the middle, we get the equivalent amount to what we have already had confiscated from us in the form of tax reduction going forward. No income tax for as many years as it takes to have that balance repaid to us, and the smart people will do as above and invest the extra money into something that will yield interest in accordance with their tolerance for risk.
Why you'll likely never see an approach like this is that the government is, as always, averse to getting out of your life and returning more freedom to you.
|
So it basically comes down to this.
I agree with your no income tax until the balance is repaid. The self directed thing is not a good idea as SS should be a safety net and not someones sole retrirement. The self directed stuff most of us already do.
If SS was self directed we both know Wall Street will find a way to pick everyones pocket. The consequences would be devestating.