Quote:
Originally Posted by Americano
That's a safety net for those who don't generate enough income to plan for retirement. To give them more disposable income or the choice of investments would be throwing it to the wind and still require that the government subsidize them when they're no longer capable of producing income. SS won't go anywhere, it'll just take more from the work force that remains after baby boomer retirement.
If you want social security to remain solvent place it in trust status where government can't sweep it into the general fund to avoid looking even more stupid with their irresponsibility.
|
I agree that S.S. should be put in a fund where the government cannot get their hands on it. But, even though proposed by various politicians over the decades, that has never happened.
As far as other securities. These type of accounts could be strickly regulated, to where individuals, could not draw them out.
I am an employer. I have no problems paying a portion of an employees social security deposit, into a safe financial instrument that they cannot get into, until their of age. I would not agree to hand it over to employees based on the premise that they would deposit it into a safe financial instrument. It has to be regulated. Financial institutions can regulate that portion, not the government.