http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=513&ncid=703&e=1&u=/ap/20050105/ap_o
n_go_ot/social_security
Essentially, Bush wants to put up to 4% of payroll taxes in the stock market, capped at $1,300 dollars.
I personally would vote for a 1.2% diversion (no more than $400 total annually)---but 4% is way too much.
This is a far cry from the "over and above" system that Bush proposed during the election.
Beyond talk of diverting funds for social security reform, I have two proposals:
- Means-testing: Wealthy seniors should not receive Social Security checks. SS should only belong to the lower and middle classes. Sure, they make up a tiny minority, but every cent counts.
- Rather than diverting funds into private accounts, here is something a bit more concrete.
A percentage (perhaps 2.5%) of social security funds are placed in hundreds of mutual funds by the Government itself.
The money grows at a steady rate. It isn't removed at the first sign of a bear market. It boosts the economy. It boosts all sectors of the economy (because mutual fund money is spread throughout a variety of stocks).
There is also a major bonus here----social security money that is tied up in the market can't be used for deficit spending. The money simply isn't there to plunder.
If there is a major downturn in the market, we still have plenty of money to pay the currently retired.
What do y'all think?