FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD
Posted on 10/01/2002 6:30:14 AM PDT by SJackson
It's not difficult, but imagine this scenario. A worker pays into a system that promises to take care of him and his family after he retires or if he dies. He dies at age 66 and his heirs are told by the system that took the payments that all the money that was paid in now belongs to them except for a small lump sum or reduced payments. This scenario only happens in two instances: whole life insurance and Social Security. At least with whole life insurance, the policy can be cancelled and replaced with term insurance and a sensible investment strategy. That way, the investment and insurance are separated, and the worker or his heirs maintain control over each.
With Social Security, no such option currently exists. Money confiscated by the government for redistribution to others is lost to the worker and the return on this "investment" is a meager 2%. I can understand the argument for having a safety net for retirees, but a 2% return with no control and no expectation of having ones' heirs meaningfully benefit from the "investment" is laughable. But it's not funny. Relying on Social Security, which many intentionally do as their primary source of retirement income, can be devastating to the elderly as bodies break down and the cost for maintaining them goes up.
More fundamentally, the fairness of a system that removes much of the freedom of choice in retirement options by removing the available capital to make those choices is antithetical to the American ideal. We fight and die for the right to make our own choices and then have those rights legislated away.
In the initial scenario, Black Americans should see themselves. Since Black Americans have a lower life expectancy, they naturally should have a greater vested interest in reform of Social Security to include individual accounts. According to the U. S. Department of Health and Human Services, recently born Black Americans now have an estimated six fewer years life expectancy than White Americans do. More significantly, only Black males born after 1997 are statistically expected to reach the fully vested Social Security retirement age of 67 years. When 95% of the Black males who can read this article in September, 2002 will not recoup any of the Social Security money they have paid out, we are witnessing a slow but steady wealth transfer from young working Black Americans to elderly White Americans. There shouldn't be any question as to who's losing in this Ponzi scheme.
"A GOP interest group pulled a radio ad [on September 13] from a Kansas City station that said Social Security benefits were slavery reparations - except paid to whites by blacks," according to the Associated Press. While calling the inequity reverse "slavery reparations" was (Oh, what's the word?) dumb, the point is still valid. Why are Republicans unable to communicate the simple truth on this issue? Less marketing and more direct communication would have been helpful there.
Liberals have been dragging this country toward the socialism of Europe with as much momentum as the courts can muster. Contradicting American liberal resistance to any changes in the failing Social Security system, their role models across the Atlantic are leading the way in socialized retirement reform. The non-profit, non-partisan National Center on Policy Analysis issued a report in August, 2002 titled "Social Security Reform Around the World: Lessons from Other Countries" that analyzed these trends in reform. The report details the decline of pay-as-you-go systems like ours and the rise of reformed systems that feature privately managed individual accounts. These accounts allow workers to not only save for their own retirements, but also to leave something for their heirs after they are gone, even if they never reach retirement age. "Currently, some 80 million workers in 20 countries have access to personal retirement accounts," the report states. The United States is lagging behind the rest of the world in addressing this problem. Since 1991, 18 countries have reformed their systems while we have simply listened to lip-biting pleas to "save Social Security." We need to convert to a system that addresses our needs to live up to our promise from the past and solve the easily foreseeable problems of the future.
One would expect that through the conversion to individual accounts that some portion of the contribution would go to fund the legacy pay-as-you-go system; as President Bush said, "A promise made is a promise kept." We certainly owe it to those who have paid into the system and depend on its payments to fulfill our obligation to them. A younger worker should have the option to divert a portion of their Social Security payments into an account that has his name on it.
What we should not be doing is slavishly clinging to a system that, barring a major shift in demographic trends, has the inevitable consequences of bankruptcy and Black to White wealth transfer.
|
|
|
 |
FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794
|
|
|
|
But not too much, please. We'll need to take some from them if you are too successful.
How very true. Otherwise this article is another attempt at race-baiting. Bill Clinton increased the tax on social security to a point where the retiree, black or white, must depend on the government for other hand outs. Lift that tax, and most seniors would be able to pay for their prescription drugs and other necessities. Clinton/Gore steadily increased taxes on Senior Americans over eight years while the congress and the senate increased their salaries and retirement benefits...for life!
Reduce appreciatively, the Senior Social Security taxes, like the death taxes, it is simply Government Theft of money already earned and taxed.
Could probably make the same case to drinkers and smokers.
I would not be surprised to read about either one of these scenarios from Black "leaders" in the years to come. I do not expect to hear from these same "leaders" that Blacks should favor the privatization of SS.
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.