There is no check or balance when it comes to how much of the economy the
government wants to represent. It has slowly taken more and more every year.
And it continually is forced by its growing waistline to take more and more
private property and wealth to feed its every growing hunger for resources.When it gets bigger, it favors those who are politically connected.
That is how basically average folks like Harry Reed, Nancy Polosi, Paul Ryan and
others become multi-millionaires many times over. It is underhanded land deals,
book deals, investments made with an inside track on trends in policy and
regulation, etc.The worst thing we could do it to give government
and even larger share of an already broken and soon to be bankrupt system.
Privatization may not solve every problem, but it is the lesser of evils.
The so-called nesteggs are only viable in in a stable market. They would have
been wiped out in 2006-2007.
Romney will embrace the Ryan proposal on medicare only if he thinks he can win
votes, otherwise he will be as vague as possible.
If privatizing social security is this terrible risk, what is the plan to return
to social security the money that has been borrowed? There isn't one. I
am investing stocks to pay for my retirement. Lots of people do that and they
are able to retire. All you do is invest in stocks and gradually transfer to
bonds a few years before you retire. My stocks weren't wiped out in
2006-2007. But I know my social security account is long gone (because there
never was one) it was given to well to do retirees in the 1990's because
they were politically powerful.
They allready have us propping up Wall Street with our 401K's. It's
hard to try to keep your 401k out of it. Now they want to suck off
3% fees every year of our SS investments.