I wish this topic didn't head in the wrong direction like it did..

Well white power was right, all liberals are poor and he forgot to add that they like to have sex with trees. This is why liberals shouldn't marry, they are a mockery to marriage.

Can't believe we had a member like whitepower..

Has anyone consider the possibility that bush wants to do away with social security so he can 'appropriate' whats left when the dust settles? I noticed an alarming trend in the people who agree with bush, they all get that big tax break each year. These people should have the right to invest thier money as they see fit, but doing away with social security entirely would eventually be a huge burden on the economy. The reason being there are plenty of lower income families that would just live alittle better and not do much investing. Plus, figure in the people that would just invest unwisely. Eventually the support of these people would add up to billions, we don't, and probably will never, have. Social Security should remain in place and each individual should have the choice to invest as they see fit.

Bush's plan is to give people the option to invest in private accounts. Social Security is still going to remain in place...People will not be able to invest 12.4% of their income into a private accounts because it is going to be capped.

I have a question for ya:

If you are forced to invest your money into either the Social Security Trust Fund or your own private account, which would you choose?

Of course I would invest in the most lucrative investment I could find, but would everybody do that?
There are way too many families in this country that make very little money. 12% of a little is very little. Do you honestly think these people that barely make it now are going to take this meager amount and invest it? We both know they will pick living a little better in the present. Then what happens? Doing away with Social Security is putting a band-aid on a gunshot wound. Privatizing is not the way to go. The richer you are the bigger tax break you get and this means the poor are paying the most.
Since they have the bigger portion invested don't you think we are obligated to make sure the rich look out for the people that struggle everyday?

The average return these people will make who pay very little into Social Security is less than 1.5%. If these people put their 12.4% in CD's and bonds, they would see a greater return.

Thanks to Ridin', I recently revised my views on this subject. I feel now that if Bush did a little modifying, this idea will work.
This is a copy of an Email I made from the post that went right here before the crash:
Dear Hillary,
I am a independent who lives in Rhode Island. Please consider this idea concerning our present Social Secuity System: I think everybody should have a bank account that will only be used to put in the 12%. This way each individual will get interest on his own income and this is only fair. We should keep Social Security in place and take 2% back from each account at the end of each year and reinsert it back into SSI. I think the figures speak for themselves. The people at the bottom of the income tree will be saving 10% of their income and that is alot over a period of time. Even people making $300 a week will be putting away $30.00. That's $78,000 after 50 years, well over $100,000 with interest with a simple savings account. This is far more money than most low income people get to retire on with the present system. I think we should all have the option to invest it in CDs or other high yeild accounts through the original saving account so SSI will still be able to get the 2% back. It would not be very hard to set this up. Then the potential for a good retirement fund is even greater. We should take care of the older people that won't be able to save enough before they retire and that is what the 2% will be for plus what ever they have paid in, over thier lives. It is important to make it a law that no government official can touch this money for other purposes. I think that this is the best way to fix this social program so that it is self supportive and not under constant scrutiny. This will be good for the economy in the long run. I think we should go by age, the younger workers setting up accounts right away and the old folks we should take care of. Any older people who pass away should be able to leave what ever is left over from what they have paid in, to thier relatives.
A continually rising interest rate, as currently proposed, will be too complicated, and and this way it is cut and dry. Born before a certain date and you set up this account. Simple and usable. Some claim that this system will not need repairing for a long time. Is this not the time to attempt to alter the current proposal since simply opposing it could lead to the proposal being passed as is?
I am 45 and in a low income bracket, so this will not help me. The future of our children is my concern.
Please consider this proposal and pass it along if you see fit.

All I have to say is...BRAVO!

I hope Hillary doesn't put that in her "Trash" folder..

Isn't what you just proposed common sense?!