Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
No, but it means that "privatization" isn't really a reform of what we're doing now -- it's completely different, apart from the "private" aspect, in that individuals are saving for themselves instead of paying for the retirement of others.
|
Yup.
Quote:
|
It's a much bigger cost than the shortfall Social Security is expected to face down the road, although of course that depends on how much revenue is diverted.
|
Yup.
Quote:
Drum's posts suggest that they are hardy being super-conservative, so that's where we appear to differ. And that 11% figure is only for certain periods, I think. Read Drum's posts. How do you explain stock market returns over time that outpace economic growth by so much?
|
You mean, acccepting your assumption as true, how can I disagree?
And the 11% (10.4, to be precise) number is the S&P since 1926.
I am too lazy to google it right now, but what has the annual growth in GDP been over that period?
Quote:
Because the social compact we inherited, borne of the Great Depression, is that we pay for current retirees, and another generation will pay for us.
|
Because we made a mistake then, and chose the more expensive and less sustainable system means we should be continually wed to it?
In your own words, its a Ponzi scheme. Isn't that reason enough to change it?
Threaded Mode