The Battle for Social Security: As you know, the fight to protect Social Security for young people has been a big focus for us this year. If you are interested in the topic, we have a book for you, "The Battle for Social Security," by Nancy Altman.
Its packed with good history but its a lively read. It also includes a set of policy changes at the end that would fix Social Security in a much better way than some of the so-called privatization plans that have been floating around Washington, DC.
You can read the first chapter online, too...
Its packed with good history but its a lively read. It also includes a set of policy changes at the end that would fix Social Security in a much better way than some of the so-called privatization plans that have been floating around Washington, DC.You can read the first chapter online, too...
posted by Hans Riemer at 12:37 PM
21 Comments:
President Bush's plan is by no means free of flaws but you are missing the pillars of his initiative. What he is trying to accomplish is to bring a better rate of return, ownership or your money that allows you to pass it on and create wealth for your family & have the Government take their hands off our money.
Why is RTV not opposed to Congress's form of social security, since they voted themselves out of the current program and created a different one just for them where they are allowed to invest in the market? Why does RTV support the mantra that we are too stupid to handle our own money from a Govt who routinely spends more then they make?
All I want is a choice, if you want piss poor returns and a Government that is able to alter your benefit based on their whim you can have it, but why not allow other Americans to choose between the Govt. plan and a competing plan? After all, free enterprise is what America is all about.
Where are the outcries concerning that sample chapter? Using 9-11 to save Social Security, oh the horror!
I wonder why the author never told us how much Social Security gave back to those families, but I love the deceptive tactic where it points to an anonymous husband whom lost his wife in the attack and was going to sell their home because he couldn't care for his child but then Social Security called and saved their home. That non-doclumented (it could very well have been fabricated we are given no evidence, names or sources) event makes it seem like Social Security handed out tens of thousands to each of the families, when in fact many people are lucky to gain enough money from Social Security from their loved ones to pay for their funeral.
I'm not going to read a book about social security that deals with slight of hand and provides no sources or names for stories to back their flawed argument.
One more comment, I love how the author makes a big deal out of how these poor government workers work 15-hour days... oh the horror (and once again not backed up with any numbers, stats or sources)! I guess 15 hours seems like a lot to someone counting on Social Security to be there to retire on in old age, but in the real world 15 hours a day is a good start for someone who strives to be successful.
I want my money to be mine, and when I die I want it to go to my wife or my newborn daughter not to fatten the government's pork laden budget so they can give it away for some inane bridge to nowhere or the rock and roll museum.
Sean,
If the money were yours how would the Govt. finance all of its pet projects? Priorities here Sean, really!
The key is to keep it nice and safe and out of our hands. Trust your Govt., they know what's best for you and should make those kinds of important decisions without your input.
Just remember, your too stupid to handle your own money, the Govt is actually doing you a favor by "holding" it for you. You should be thankfull.
Don't worry, Ben, it will be a success, if it is properly shelved next to other works of fiction.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
To whomever posted the online novels:
posts lose their effectiveness when they are more the 2 pages long. If you are going to cut and paste from your socialist website, please just link the site.
Hey! I just bought this book as an Xmas gift for my parents. I know they will love it. I'm signing this anonymous, so they don't find out about their present (tho they never read blogs, I don't think...)
I'll give RTV credit for chutzpah, if nothing else. As it is currently structured, Social Security is a structurally flawed, socialist, ponzi-scheme. RTV sez they want to "protect" Social Security for Americans under 30, but their version of protection is a massive tax hike that expands the intergeneration rip-off.
While President Bush's ideas about Modernizing Social Security to include Productive Assets aren't perfect, they're a big step in the right direction.
At its core, this debate is about values: capitalism vs. socialism. What do we value as Americans? Do we value economic freedom or do we value governement dependency? Do we value self-reliance, or do we crawl to the the government like some cowardly Frenchman? Do we value choice and opportunity, or do we value one-size-fits-all central planning?
Joe Shipler,
I read your link, thank you for posting the information (if only the author took the time to document her sources the book might not look like a hack job), but I could not find any information in that testimony where specific dollar amounts were given. Here is the quote from the testimony:
"In September, a husband in New York City whose wife had been killed at the World Trade Center was ready to sell his home, because he, as a stay at home father, could not afford to keep it. He was able to take it off the market after a Social Security representative contacted him to let him know that he and his family were eligible for survivor benefits. All of SSA mourns with this man and with the rest of the country. We remain fully committed to doing whatever we can to help the families of the victims' recover from this heinous act of terror."
Now, there is no name given, no amount told to allow for any sort of intelligent follow-up. Also, I hope these "survivor benefits" Mr. Massanari is referring to isn't part of the million dollar payout the government authorized for 9-11 families, for Ms. Altman's sake. If this was a part of the normal payout from the SSA I'd like to see some numbers because this is the first I've heard where the SSA gave back enough money to help save a New York home from foreclosure.
Yeah, most people don't know about the survivor benefits unless they got them as kids. These are not related to any special 9/11 payments. According to the Social Security Administration, they are more valuable than most people's private life insurance. I think for an average worker with a nonworking spouse and 2 young children, the benefits have a present value of around $350,000 or more. If people don't believe me, google social security survivors benefits and read it for yourself.
Adam,
You hit the nail right on the head. This is a fight for capitalism. Anyone with a financial calculator could tell you why the SS system is inherently flawed.
But, a quick check to CBO.gov will tell you why the Govt. is so reluctant to change it. Fact: if not for the Govt treating SS tax as revenue (Not actually revenue but should be treated as a both an asset and a liability and amortized down)they would have run a deficit in all but 2 years since 1962.
Just some food for thought as to why the Govt doesn't want us to have our money back. But I am sure it in our best interest the Govt keep that money or my personal favorite, for "The Greater Good".
Sean, I'm glad you checked the web link. Jeff's posting really makes the point about the value of survivor benefits. I think it would be eye-opening if people against Social Security asked friends if any of them got survivor benefits and what they think of the program. As for Adam and "anonymous," Social Security and other social insurance helps capitalism work. It's not all that differenct from mandatory car insurance. Do you want to get your money back from that too, so you can invest it? I prefer that there are no uninsured drivers on the road, myself...
This is from an article (http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=10799) about California politics, but it applies to this debate as well:
"There really are only two cohesive political philosophies available to anyone running for office. One is the collectivist theory (upon which socialism, fascism, and communism is based) and the other is the individualist theory (of freedom, free enterprise, and representative republics like ours). Each has a set of principles that cannot be violated, and there is no middle ground between the two. There is no 'moderate' socialism, and no 'moderate' freedom."
I so appreciate Hans Riemer's posting about this book. I bought the book, and I'm halfway through it. It's wonderfully written (unlike most of the wonkish stuff on Social Security), and it brings Social Security to life through a number of very engaging characters. (Who knew that a fiesty female law professor from Berkeley was instrumental in giving birth to this program?) As for all the comments about choice and capitalism, the commenters are missing the point -- Social Security, by insuring all workers against disability and loss of inc ome in old age, provides a public good, like national defense or highways. Try building a highway or a guided missile out of your private account!
"...the sovereign has only three duties to attend to; three duties of great importance, indeed, but plain and intelligible to common understandings: first, the duty of protecting the society from the violence and invasion of other independent societies; secondly, the duty of protecting, as far as possible, every member of the society from the injustice or oppression of every other member of it, or the duty of establishing an exact administration of justice; and, thirdly, the duty of erecting and maintaining certain public works and public institutions, which it can never be for the interest of any individual, or small number of individuals, to erect and maintain..."
Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations, 1776
"Adam Smith's third duty raises the most troublesome issues. He himself regarded it as having a narrow application. IT HAS SINCE BEEN USED TO JUSTIFY AN EXTREMELY WIDE RANGE OF GOVENMENT ACTIVITIES. In our view it describes a valid duty of a government directed to preserving and strenghening a free society; BUT IT CAN ALSO BE INTERPRETED TO JUSTIFY UNLIMITED EXTENSIONS OF GOVERNMENT POWER."
Miton Friedman, Free to Choose: A Personal Statement, 1979
[My Caps]
How does redistribution of income ever consititute a public good?
Futhermore, how does redistibution of income from the (on average) poorest members of society to the wealthiest members of society specifically constitute a public good?
"Adam Smith's third duty raises the most troublesome issues. He himself regarded it as having a narrow application. IT HAS SINCE BEEN USED TO JUSTIFY AN EXTREMELY WIDE RANGE OF GOVENMENT ACTIVITIES. In our view it describes a valid duty of a government directed to preserving and strenghening a free society; BUT IT CAN ALSO BE INTERPRETED TO JUSTIFY UNLIMITED EXTENSIONS OF GOVERNMENT POWER."
Miton Friedman, Free to Choose: A Personal Statement, 1979
[My Caps]
QUOTE:
At its core, this debate is about values: capitalism vs. socialism. What do we value as Americans? Do we value economic freedom or do we value governement dependency? Do we value self-reliance, or do we crawl to the the government like some cowardly Frenchman? Do we value choice and opportunity, or do we value one-size-fits-all central planning?
/QUOTE:
No the current debate in Washington is simply whether Socialist Insecurity's one-size-fits-all central planning will be allowed to include governmental control of a large portion of our equity markets. So the only proposals really being considered are an expansion of government power or the status quo. I apologize if I don't wet myself with excitement,
Hans- You should encourage people to read the real story on Altman's book, it can be found here: http://www.affbrainwash.com/archives/020644.php
Post a Comment
<< Home