On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 16:05:23 -0600, Gary Denton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Those "pieces of paper" as you call them were Greenspan's and Reagan's
> solution as to how the SS system would be nearly permanently solvent.
> Which it is.
> 
> As long as you can trust the government to meet its obligations.
> 
> Bush faces four economic problems - the general fund deficit, the
> Medicare/Medicaid gap, the trade gap, and the current
> housing/stock/debt bubble.  He has made the first three worse and
> ignored the last and now wants to destroy a system that works to avoid
> paying for obligations promised and make his biggest problem - the
> general fund budget deficit, worse..
> 
> At the time of the SS fix many people warned it was simply a
> lower-income tax increase to avoid raising taxes on the rich and we
> couldn't count on a future GOP government to meet the obligations.
> How true.
> 
> Gary Denton
> http://elemming2.blogspot.com
> oddd - yesterday I went back to number one on google for liberal news
> but back down again today.
A Better Way

President Bush has a Social Security scheme which costs $2 trillion
and would entail massive cuts in promised benefits. There is a better
way to improve retirement security in America. In today's New York
Times, American Progress's Gene Sperling suggests "a new universal
401(k) that offers all Americans a private retirement account in
addition to Social Security, and uses government funds to match
contributions made by moderate and lower-income workers." Unlike the
president's plan, this would not reduce Social Security benefits.
Sperling's plan would include a "dollar-for-dollar match by the
government for initial contributions by moderate-income workers and
even more for the working poor." The new accounts could be paid for by
reclaiming a small fraction of the massive tax giveaways for the rich
that Bush pushed through in his first term. (Those tax cuts cost the
federal government $100 billion-a-year.) Sperling suggests "a
3-percent surcharge on all income over $200,000 â whether from
earnings, dividends or capital gains." Unlike privatization plans â
which just shift money around and add risk â the new accounts would
actually increase national savings.

perm NYTimes
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/05/opinion/05sperling.html?ex=1262667600&en=ae27d110d6d93307&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland\
http://tinyurl.com/3qtup

Gary D.
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to