I'm For Personal SS Accounts: Here's Why.
- Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 13:04:48 -0400 (EDT)
- From: ridgeway <riridgew@nyx.net>
- Subject: I'm For Personal SS Accounts: Here's Why.
Here is a very interesting and relevant article on the subject
of this public policy debate:
Jewish World Review Feb. 22, 1999
Thomas Sowell
"Saving" social security
Here are some excerpts of the above article...see the
article in full at the URL:
-------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell022299.asp
--------------------start--------------------------------------
Nothing seems so insecure as Social Security. However, before
we start "saving" Social Security, we need to stop and think
about why it needs saving in the first place. Then maybe we
can avoid making the same mistakes all over again...[snip]
Social Security's problems go much deeper than the size of
the generation that is going to be retiring. In fact, Social
Security's problems go all the way back to the beginning
--- to the way it was set up, to the lies that politicians
told about it and to the misconceptions and political
irresponsibility that have now come home to roost.
Private insurance companies aren't panicked about the
annuities they are going to have to pay to baby boomers
because insurance companies operate in an entirely different
way from Social Security. Insurance companies take their
customers' premiums and invest them to create real wealth.
Later, the earnings from that wealth can be used to pay
annuities or life insurance benefits whenever they become
due....[snip]
The reason it matters under Social Security is that there
has never been any real wealth created. The government
has simply been robbing Peter to pay Paul. This worked
great when the baby boomers were paying into the system
and their money was being used to pay benefits to a much
smaller generation that was retired.
Now it has become obvious to everyone that this game will
not work any more when the huge baby boomer generation
itself retires...[snip]
The biggest lie about Social Security is that it is some
kind of "insurance." But, unlike insurance premiums,
Social Security taxes create no wealth. They are spent
when they get to Washington, just like other taxes.
Paper transactions create the illusion of a Social
Security "fund," but there is no corresponding real
wealth created --- no factories, farms or railroads.
The basic principle of Social Security is the same as
that behind illegal pyramid schemes run by con men.
The first people to put their money into pyramid schemes
get repaid handsomely from the money received from
others who join later. That is what attracts still
more suckers and enables the con men to rip them off.
Since the first people to join the Social Security
system were from the relatively small generation of
the 1930s, their later retirement benefits were easily
paid with the money received from the much larger baby
boom generation. So long as the pyramid keeps expanding,
things are great, but eventually the pyramid stops
expanding and those who joined last get left holding
the bag....[snip]
It was the deceptions and irresponsibility of politicians
that got us into this mess. If you think the way to get
out of it is to let politicians continue to guide Social
Security in the future, then you have missed the point
completely.
Investing the public's retirement money in the creation
of real wealth is an essential part of any permanent fix.
But, if that means letting politicians throw their weight
around in the stock market, then this is truly putting
the fox in charge of the hen house.
There are all sorts of sound financial institutions
through which ordinary Americans can put their retirement
money into the creation of real wealth, without having
to pick individual stocks themselves. The time is long
overdue to let them do it. The whole history of Social
Security shows how important it is to keep
politicians' hands off that money.
-----------------------------end------------------------------
I agree with the above article. I'm also in general agreement
with Ms. Weaver's statements. Moreover, even if it
were just a zero sum game of investing vs the current
SS system, I would support individual accounts for
several fundamental reasons:
1. Freedom --- Freedom to Choose. The money you
earn is yours! The government taking money
from you *for you* with the promise to return
it to you later when you retire is foolish!
2. Letting the government directly control
(i.e. collective ownsership) such funds leads
to socialist redistribution of income schemes
that the politicans use to bribe the electorate
for their election and re-election to
public office (didn't FDR say something
like with SS "we will spend and spend and
elect and elect"?).
3. I think it was some old Greek long ago that
suggested that Democracy would fall due
to loose fiscal policy when the mass of
voters would vote themselves gifts from
the Treasury --- thus, one again we
see the need to keep money out of the
hands of the politicans, it's our duty and
responsibility to see that democracy
not fail due to our own foolish self-dealing.
4. Fidelity, Vangaurd, etc..., and do it cheaper
than the Feds. The reported cost i've heard of puts
the cost for SSA "administration" of funds is about 1
percent of assets (I doubt if this is the true full cost,
for example I doubt if the cost of the Treasury
resources used to collect the funds is included,
I doubt that the cost of the building space
SS office use is included, I doubt if other
overhead items are included...). However,
my Vanguard fees are a MAX of 0.50 percent
--- one-half of one percent. My Fidelity
Puritan fund has total cost of about
0.84 percent. And even though Fidelity
Puritan is a conservative plain jane mutual
fund its returns are a lot better than the
returns SS will yield!
These are but a few reasons to convert SS into
a system of privately owned individual accounts.
What do you think???? Let's do it! ASAP!!!!
================================================