Posted on 12/17/2004 1:38:01 PM PST by ddtorque
Almost 18 years ago, Chile privatized its pension system, a move that eventually led to one of its most important cultural and economic transformations of the latter part of this century. Seven other Latin American countries have followed the Chilean example to some degree, and several others are considering such a move.
(Excerpt) Read more at ncpa.org ...
I like the system we have now, I pay , you pay, and some guy who never works gets taken care of, it's really sweet
Ditto!
No Thanks.
No, It isn't supposed to be the model.
It's an experiment, and it happened to work there.
Just because it was done in a "banana republic" doesn't mean the idea doesn't have merit. To me, that's not a good enough reason to dismiss it out of hand.
If nothing else, why not see if a few tweaks could make it work here? The system we have now is a total joke. You can't say that of a successful model, no matter where it originated. The U.S. doesn't have a lock on the smartest economists.
No it didn't.
Chile is still a banana republic with a greater disparity in household income distribution, high unemployment and a larger proportion of its population living below the poverty level.
I agree 100%
But I'm also opposed to Dubya's plan to abusively utilize government's power of taxation to provide a guaranteed revenue stream to private financial institutions from which they'll extract their fees and commissions.
THAT is an abomination.
And I'm not about to listen to any gobbledegook doubletalk about whether we peons have a "choice" as to how the funds are invested as long as a goddam mandatory TAX is involved. That is pure BS that I will NOT tolerate from some butthead (meaning Dubya, not you) who claims to be a conservative.
Perhaps. But the fact remains that we're gonna get taxed anyway, so I would much rather have some choices than none at all.
It worked somewhat better than the present system because the gubmint did not steal the nest egg under the matress. Now we have a discussion of privatizing where the government will let you keep a small percentage of your hard earned wage to do with as the gubmint sees fit and then they will continue to steal the rest. How can you turn down a deal like that?
I dislike taxes same as anybody else.
But if we ARE going to be taxed, I'd prefer that the money be retained within legitimate, government operated programs (whether I agree with the specific program or not). I simply do not agree with allowing private financial institutions to tap into a tax revenue stream to siphon off their fees and commissions.
If I want to invest in the private sector for my retirement, let me keep my money upfront, and allow me TOTAL voluntary control over how much (if any) I invest and how I invest it. Maybe it'll be in stocks, bonds and mutual funds. Maybe it'll be in real property: a small business, rental homes, etc. etc. But that is NOT what Dubya is proposing, and I'm not falling for his BS.
Precisely. It's merely redirecting the cash-flow of a tax revenue stream into the coffers of politically favored financial institutions where the managers can extract their fees and commissions.
BS. Let me keep my money and let ME decide whether I want to invest with some broker on Wall Street or in some rental property on my own hometown Main Street instead. (where I'd have more personal control over my investment).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.