 |
 |
May 26th, 2005Shout out!
May 26th 02:52:12 PM
Hey guys, I definitely support having my own personal account and when I bring up the subject with my friends, they totally get it. The more questions they ask - the more it makes sense...
- better returns
- ownership
- security for all generations
it's a win - win - win situation!
so don't be afraid to introduce the issue to your friends, and school them up on SS if they're not sure of the facts. young people are way smarter than 'rock the vote' and 'aarp' wants to give us credit for!
- Ursula Williams
Posted by Jonathan Swanson| Comments (0)
Burden off the working man's back
May 26th 02:50:58 PM
I am feeling soo inspired about knowing that poorer people (like myself) would have the same financial plan, in ss personal accounts, that is normally only accessible to wealthier, well established people.
I can't afford to open a 401(k), I still have to pay back my student loans!
- Ursula williams
Posted by Jonathan Swanson| Comments (0)
Personal Accounts solve solvency
May 26th 02:48:34 PM
This personal account plan from the Cato Institute received great praise for the Social Security Administration:
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=3741
"According to SSA's actuaries, the 6.2 Percent Solution would eliminate Social Security's long-range actuarial deficit and restore the system to permanent "sustainable solvency." The legislation compares very favorably to other Social Security reform plans. In terms of giving workers more control and ownership of their retirement funds, the 6.2 Percent Solution clearly provides the most "bang for the buck." By 2046, the system would begin running surpluses, allowing any short-term debt to be repaid. Indeed, by the end of the 75-year actuarial window, the system would be running surpluses in excess of $1.8 trillion (in constant $2005)."
That's the boring summary. And the interesting summary: the bigger the personal account, the more money we retire with!
-Andrew Ward
Posted by Jonathan Swanson| Comments (0)
Ugly Lies within Glamour
May 26th 02:46:46 PM
Everybody likes a good chick-fight but this is ridiculous!
With a bad case of schadenfreude, the shrews, er uh, ladies (respect our elders) at Glamour are sabotaging the economic well-being for the rest of us girls. In a new June issue editorial titled, "Will You Die Broke?", the mag, rather than championing personal accounts - which provide total gender/econ equality - these June Cleavers instead want to keep younger women stuck in the economic dark ages.
Fear. They're afraid of independence and progress, it's more sad than anything else. No, what's most sad is that, rather than simply presenting an argument to help us make informed decisions, the editors need to lie, misrepresent, distort the facts, and deceive more drama than a cheesy soap opera.
Truth is, women have everything to gain with personal accounts and nothing to lose. Personal accounts would simply allow younger women to invest some of our Social Security taxes, using a similar structure as a 401(k), the kind of privileged financial planning usually accessible only to older, well established people. So, while younger working women are graduating, just entering the workforce, and trying to pay back our student loans, the government would merely be setting up a retirement account for us not cutting us off at the economic knees as raising taxes on your paycheck would.
The gals at Scamour, err Glamour (dang, I did it again) magazine just don't "get it". They honestly can't see past their closed-minded mono-thought partisanship to grasp the incredible empowering opportunity personal accounts are for women of all ages. What's baffling is that, since PAs are totally VOLUNTARY, those who are opposed are denying us even a right to choose! Umm, hypocritical much? So pathetic.
- Ursula Williams
Posted by Jonathan Swanson| Comments (0)
Jobs and SS reform connection
May 26th 02:45:12 PM
I get it now;
Raising taxes on our paychecks decreases job opportunities because bosses have to pay for half of the 12.6% that goes towards social security.
It's harder to keep us employed if our employer can't afford the higher tax rate, so they end up having fewer workers to make-up the cost - typically, the part-time, short-term, entry-level positions, US!
So, raising the payroll tax to cover SS benefits ruins our standard of living and makes it that much harder to even find a job.
Personal accounts NOW!!
-Ursula Williams
Posted by Jonathan Swanson| Comments (0)
January 01st, 2005Test entry
January 01st 09:59:30 AM
test entry
Posted by Jeremy Tunnell| Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
