>>>>I understand your point, but I am a firm believer that the role of the federal government should be reduced in our society, and that federal spending should be reduced, as well. If that were accomplished, as well, then the federal government would not be taking that money from capital markets. It is a solution that requires more than one part, and it certainly will not be easy, but I thought that was what we were debating, was the options for reform, and what those reform attempts would require. I am not suggesting that my idea is necessarily the right one, or even feasible, but it ought to be looked at, with all the others.
Jeremy,
I was not attempting to evaluate the role of Federal gov't or private markets in SS reform. I was merely pointing out that your 'idea' did not resolve the 'problem' that Greenspan pointed out to you. I thought that was what you wanted comment on. Regardless of whether the solution is gov't or private, if it requires 'more savings' then that implies 'less spending or consumption', and your 'idea' provided neither. Not saying I have any grand solution that is better than yours, just some constructive criticism about why your idea does not solve the Greenspan problem.
It is not only you that I 'criticize'. Many are stating that just shifting the money from the SS trust fund to individual accounts invested in stocks will create additional savings. As Greenspan points out, that is not the case. But many with a 'free market view' have a problem understanding or admitting that.
