In the mode of Jonathan Swift, I have a modest proposal--end Social Security.
What do we really need it for anyway? Here's what we could do...
Get some smart actuarial minds in a room together to figure out the right age, and then make a deal with the American people--end Social Security as of a date and age-certain.
Let's call it 1970. Everyone born on 1/1/70 or later would have to continue to pay into the Social Security coffers at a rate of, say, 4% until the age of 65. With an employer match, the individual burden would be 8%. That's 4.4% less than people pay now. What a great deal right?
Actually, what would happen is that these people would get NOTHING as a result of their payments. The money would go directly to...
Anyone born before 1/1/70. For these people, the payroll tax would remain at 12.4% (6.2% employee, 6.2% employer), and they would continue to receive Social Security benefits for the remainder of their lives. After all, these are the same people who have voted for politicians who have been so fiscally prudent for all of these past 30 years or so.
Both old folks and the young get a victory, right? The under-38 crowd just got a 2.2% tax cut, and preferential treatment in the workplace for the next 10 years (after all, what employer wouldn't prefer to hire someone they had to pay 2.2% less in taxes on?). The over-38 crowd would get Social Security firmed up for them in their hour of need, by releasing all that pesky liability burden that has been building up on all those under-38 whipper-snappers.
But there's more...
We could even let people invest their money in the stock market, so they could get an even better return on their funds! Wouldn't that be great? I haven't checked lately, but this year, for example, people would have returned, what, 25% on their money? Right? The market always goes up at least 10% a year. Sounds like a deal to me. Maybe someone can get back to me with that actual return on the stock market this year. I'll bet it's been fantastic.
And for the poor under 40, well, there are a lot of bootstraps for you to pull yourselves up with. If your spouse has died, and you can't afford to work immediately, and take care of children at the same time, or perhaps you need some assistance to make that work? It would be selfish for you to lean on Social Security. That's not American. After all, if you thought raising the top tax rate 3.6% was socialism, this would represent down right Communism at its worst. What are we running here, a charity?
Let's face it folks, the mark of a well functioning society is one where people don't need Social Security. And for those who may need it--well there are a number of faith-based organizations to help out. Why should I waste my hard-earned money bailing out some people who need some help, when all those fat-cat old folks took so much from the coffers all these years. After all, what did they ever do to make this country great, anyway? What about all those welfare queens, taking tons of money from the government, so they could live in that swanky 2 room apartment downtown, with 6 kids, in the "lap-of-luxury" 300 square foot apartment with no heat? This whole situation is their fault, right?
Since people are living about 10-20 years longer than they did during the 1920's and 30's, we can look forward to the 2030's as a time when people once again are living out on the streets, with no money, and looking for work (with chronic back aches, illness, diabetes, etc). It's nice to see that we can achieve consistency in the US if we REALLY work at it.
If it will keep my taxes low, I am all for it. Quite frankly, I am getting a little tired of all these old folks who just want to ride the government gravy train right into their 90's. They are the ones making it harder for the rest of us...
in the words of David Spade..."I hope you recognize (the sarcasm) because I am laying it on pretty thick, here..."
Friday, November 21, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
7 comments:
I take it that you're kidding here. Old people in the streets....
I think there's some merit here, however. However, how do you intend on solving medicare?
Have you been reading the newspapers? Listening to the radio? Watching the evening news?
If this plan had been in place, retirement savings would have been tanked.
Where's you 401K? About 1/3 the value it had 6 months ago. Nope, privatizing the SS System is DOA.
How about some "personal responsibility"? Do away with SS and MEDI. Make people responsible for their own future. If they don't want to save for their own retirement then they will have to work until they are dead right? The good news is that octogenarians are more likely to drop dead at work then live for decades in their subsidized housing AND THE QUALITY of life that they would have as productive citizens would be EXPONENTIALLY better.
Those of us who have fiscal discipline will continue to save and invest and work and take care of ourselves by eating right and exercise so that we can retire when we want be it 65 or 45 or even less. The problem becomes one where the GOVERNMENT looses tax revenue on those of us who decide we can live comfortably not chasing 5000 sq foot homes in BMWs/Cadi etc.
I think the Brits have coined the term YAWNs (Young and Wealthy but Normal). We just want to be left alone to enjoy our lives and not be wage slaves to people who have pissed away their wealth and lives.
"What about all those welfare queens, taking tons of money from the government, so they could live in that swanky 2 room apartment downtown, with 6 kids, in the "lap-of-luxury" 300 square foot apartment with no heat? This whole situation is their fault, right?"
AH YES it is their fault and with six kids in 300 sq feet they would not need heat.
As for stock market performance...NON ISSUE there are thousands of other places to invest ranging from bank accounts to bonds to real estate. And before some JACK A$$ complains about that market there would be NO BUBBLE if people had to have 20% DP in the first place because the market could not churn fast enough to create the foam pop. This countries problems are all fixable but the people will have to realize that spending their wealth of crap (cell phones for preteens? ipods that cost more than a kid makes in 3 years of mowing grass (if you can find a kid that will mow your grass))
The issue is that we are spoiled. I said it. Too bad no politician ever would. The problemd with democratically elected leaders is that they have to be elected. Obviously we can't do without... but if you required the budget to be balanced as a LAW... tough decisions would have to be made. All that happens in this country is that they buy your vote.
You are a know-nothing idiot.
Admitedly, the Pragmatic Pundit has been called worse in the past (by his wife, brother, friends, etc)! Hey, remember, he puts this out there, to bring some levity to the situation here. There's no reason for name calling.
:)
Post a Comment