AllDeaf.com - View Single Post

Vance · 01-13-2005, 03:52 AM

Here's 6 conservative reasons not to follow Bush's radical neo-con plan.

1. If Social Security is in trouble (and the disinterested experts, that is, those not funded by people interested in cashing in on the plan say that it is not), it is because the government has been taking all monies out of it beyond what is needed for benefits in the current year. This "borrowing" has been added to the national debt, itself mostly created by the radical policies of Reagan and the two Bushes. Bush II wants you to think that if Social Security is privatized, we (meaning we the people) won't have to pay back this debt to Social Security, however

2. The privatization plan won't apply to nor will it cover current recipients of Social Security. So Bush wants to borrow another $2 trillion to institute this plan, on top of all the money that has been "borrowed" already.

3. The government will have to expand and create a vast new bureaucracy to manage the 300,000,000 individual accounts. These radicals in power now claim certain traditional conservative values. Two of them are smaller government and the idea that government is inefficient. The Bush plan flies in the face of both of these.

4. The stock market is risky. Period. The money pouring in from the Bush plan will a) fuel a new stock bubble and b) will be speculative. I know that the Bush is trying to sell the idea that the people will be trading from their private accounts. Wrong, for two reasons. First, what they will be doing is choosing one of a small number of funds in which they can participate. (But which funds? Who gets the nod for the guaranteed megabucks from Uncle Sam). Second, unlike real traders and investors, people "investing" in this scam will be unable to withdraw their money if the market changes.

5. Some promoters of this scam like to say that the average returns on the stock market taken over years out performed bonds, blah blah blah. Yes. Does it follow that people don't lose huge amounts of money in stocks? We have recovered from stock market crashes, but if you reach retirement age when a crash or even a bear market happens, you yourself could lose your money, even if the rest of us who aren't retiring can stay in and recover. The average rate of growth argument is like the average longevity argument. On average, people live until their late '70's. But lots of people die younger. Care to gamble your social security on it?

6. Another thing that real investors can do is diversifying into foreign equities and bonds. I have seen nothing in the Bush scheme that says that a US fund will be able to do this. There are two things about this. First, foreign investment by a government-controlled fund will be susceptible to political issues. If Germany or Japan does something we don't like, do you really think that the government is going to allow the Social Security system to invest billions there? Second, do we want to help other countries by sending our money to support their economies? The point is this. If there is no free investment, there is no free market.

This privatization scheme is a scam. What it is really meant to do is to divert monies that we are supposedly putting aside to cover our retirement risks into stock speculation. You don't see Bush proposing that all government monies now in bank accounts or bonds be flushed into the stock market to garner speculative returns do you?

The real Social Security problem is the current level of the national debt. The interest on the national debt takes 20 percent of our tax dollars now. If these radicals that have stolen the Republican Party since 1980 had not been borrowing money for their useless imperial schemes, we would not be talking about a "Social Security crisis" today.

--------------------------------------------------

I am Magatsu and I approved this messages.

01-13-2005, 03:52 AM	#2 (permalink)
Vance Registered User Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 4,280	Here's 6 conservative reasons not to follow Bush's radical neo-con plan. 1. If Social Security is in trouble (and the disinterested experts, that is, those not funded by people interested in cashing in on the plan say that it is not), it is because the government has been taking all monies out of it beyond what is needed for benefits in the current year. This "borrowing" has been added to the national debt, itself mostly created by the radical policies of Reagan and the two Bushes. Bush II wants you to think that if Social Security is privatized, we (meaning we the people) won't have to pay back this debt to Social Security, however 2. The privatization plan won't apply to nor will it cover current recipients of Social Security. So Bush wants to borrow another $2 trillion to institute this plan, on top of all the money that has been "borrowed" already. 3. The government will have to expand and create a vast new bureaucracy to manage the 300,000,000 individual accounts. These radicals in power now claim certain traditional conservative values. Two of them are smaller government and the idea that government is inefficient. The Bush plan flies in the face of both of these. 4. The stock market is risky. Period. The money pouring in from the Bush plan will a) fuel a new stock bubble and b) will be speculative. I know that the Bush is trying to sell the idea that the people will be trading from their private accounts. Wrong, for two reasons. First, what they will be doing is choosing one of a small number of funds in which they can participate. (But which funds? Who gets the nod for the guaranteed megabucks from Uncle Sam). Second, unlike real traders and investors, people "investing" in this scam will be unable to withdraw their money if the market changes. 5. Some promoters of this scam like to say that the average returns on the stock market taken over years out performed bonds, blah blah blah. Yes. Does it follow that people don't lose huge amounts of money in stocks? We have recovered from stock market crashes, but if you reach retirement age when a crash or even a bear market happens, you yourself could lose your money, even if the rest of us who aren't retiring can stay in and recover. The average rate of growth argument is like the average longevity argument. On average, people live until their late '70's. But lots of people die younger. Care to gamble your social security on it? 6. Another thing that real investors can do is diversifying into foreign equities and bonds. I have seen nothing in the Bush scheme that says that a US fund will be able to do this. There are two things about this. First, foreign investment by a government-controlled fund will be susceptible to political issues. If Germany or Japan does something we don't like, do you really think that the government is going to allow the Social Security system to invest billions there? Second, do we want to help other countries by sending our money to support their economies? The point is this. If there is no free investment, there is no free market. This privatization scheme is a scam. What it is really meant to do is to divert monies that we are supposedly putting aside to cover our retirement risks into stock speculation. You don't see Bush proposing that all government monies now in bank accounts or bonds be flushed into the stock market to garner speculative returns do you? The real Social Security problem is the current level of the national debt. The interest on the national debt takes 20 percent of our tax dollars now. If these radicals that have stolen the Republican Party since 1980 had not been borrowing money for their useless imperial schemes, we would not be talking about a "Social Security crisis" today. -------------------------------------------------- I am Magatsu and I approved this messages.