 |
 |
September 20th, 2005How do you know when reform has a chance?
September 20th 12:06:37 AM
When Senators like George Voinovich start calling for reform.
According to Dow Jones:
"Republican Sen. George Voinovich on Monday
unveiled legislation to create a 'lockbox' that would forbid the federal government from using Social Security revenues for any purpose other than paying benefits.
The Ohio lawmaker's proposed 'Truth in Budgeting Act' would also prevent the government from raiding any trust fund to spend money on other programs."
"Voinovich's plan would require the Treasury Department to establish an Office of Trust Fund Administration. The agency would then invest the surplus funds in a range of debt instruments, including municipal bonds, corporate bonds, bond funds and mortgage-backed securities. The agency would be barred from investing in stocks or federal debt instruments."
Posted by Chris Schrimpf| Comments (6)
September 19th, 2005Getting Published
September 19th 11:58:01 PM
S4's had some good Op-Eds published lately. One in the Cincinnati Enquirer urges Congress to move forward on a reform agenda. Chris Liakos also got an Op-Ed published recently. His appeared in the Atlanta Journal Constitution (registration required). You can read on to read all of Chris's editorial.
In a Sept. 8 speech to the Alliance of Retired Americans, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) politicized Hurricane Katrina to undermine President Bush's plan for personal retirement accounts.
In reference to a future disaster, "People would say, 'What am I going to do? Can I count on Social Security?' " Clinton said. "And the answer would be, well, we'll have to check on the stock market."
What Clinton either fails to notice (or fails to disclose) is that with personal retirement accounts, unlike the current system, the people who died in the hurricane would have had something to pass on to their children and grandchildren.
Everyone knows that politicians rob the so-called Social Security "trust fund" to pay for their own pet projects. Opposition to personal retirement accounts does not stem from a true fear of retirees losing their money. Such a fear is irrational.
The stock market has had a long history of growth. In truth, the opposition to retirement accounts comes from politicians who will no longer have access to your "trust fund."
When Social Security was started in 1935, 16 workers supported every retiree. Today, those numbers have shrunk to three workers per retiree. And it gets worse. In 2017 — just 12 years from now — Social Security will pay out more than it takes in. This difference will have to be made up by dipping into other government spending, raising taxes or cutting benefits.
Private accounts would give all workers access to stock market growth. Creating a nest egg would also give workers something to pass on to their families when they die.
Students today look at the current system and cringe. Why shouldn't they? They need to act, and quickly, if they want to see benefits in the future.
Posted by Chris Schrimpf| Comments (0)
September 18th, 2005Attention Congressman Reynolds!!!
September 18th 11:40:57 PM
Congressman Reynolds should take the time to note that the average rate of return on Social Security for his district is 1.07% for a married white couple for a single black male the return for his district is -1.38%. Maybe it's time that your constituents invest their own retirement money.
Posted by Chris Schrimpf| Comments (5)
They Would Know
September 18th 11:24:39 PM
If anyone would know the retirement prospects for Americans it would have to be Financial Planners. So when 92% say Social Security needs to be reformed, maybe Congress and anti-reformers should sit up and listen.
Posted by Chris Schrimpf| Comments (6)
September 17th, 2005Google, AARP, and Corruption!!!
September 17th 09:45:44 PM
God Bless the Internet. It reveals so much about those who oppose us...
I did a quick Google Search using the phrase "AARP Corruption." Here are some of the highlights:
Ralph Bristol reports
LIKE MANY GOOD THINGS THAT OUTLIVE THIER PURPOSE
AND BECOME PARIAH TO SOCIETY AND TO THOSE THEY SUPPOSEDLY SERVE:
AARP corruption unequaled - Ralph Bristol
The AARP is either genuinely evil or stubbornly ignorant. I suspect the former.
The AARP is gearing up to spend $5 million of its members' dues to dramatically increase the financial burden on the members' children and grandchildren without providing even one dollar of benefit or protection to the members themselves. I can't fathom what, other than pure evil or colossal ignorance, would motivate such action.
I also can't fathom what would cause people of good faith to continue to pay dues to such an organization. The AARP has always lobbied for the transfer of earnings from the general population to those in the upper age brackets. That is no different than many other special interest organizations that look out for their own at the expense of others. But the AARP is lobbying to place a heavier burden on today's and tomorrow's working people and tomorrow's retired population with no benefit whatsoever to today's retired population.
Why? Because the AARP is dedicated to the proposition that all of the benefits flowing to its members should come from the earnings of non-members. It is the primary mission of the AARP to use its considerable clout to lobby for taxpayer-financed benefits for its members. Any policy or program change that might benefit future retirees without the need for AARP lobbying efforts diminishes the power of and the need for the AARP itself.
That is why the AARP will spend $5 million in the near future on political advertising to oppose the use of private accounts in Social Security reform. It is purely and simply a self-preservation effort by the AARP.
The AARP ads will attempt to convince older people that the Social Security reform plan backed by President Bush and a very broad, bi-partisan coalition of past and current members of Congress, will threaten their future benefits, even though every proposal put forth has, as its first provision, the preservation of the benefits of current retirees and those preparing to retire.
The AARP ads will also try to convince younger people that such reform is too risky. One advertisement shows a 40-something couple looking at the reader and saying, "If we feel like gambling, we'll play the slots." Another advertisement shows traders in the pit of a commodities exchange. The caption says, "Winners and losers are stock market terms. Do you really want them to become retirement terms?"
Of course there is some risk in investing for one's financial future in the stock market, but the AARP stubbornly refuses to acknowledge the indisputable fact that such risk is drastically reduced by time and diversification. The fact is, among those who have invested for any 20-year period in a portfolio of U.S. stocks that mirrors any of the major indices, there have been no losers, no one - only winners. That is no guarantee that there will be no losers in the future, but there are only two chances that will be the case - slim and slimmer.
Furthermore, the AARP stubbornly refuses to acknowledge the indisputable fact that if Congress does not reform Social Security with private accounts, future generations will - not might, but will - either pay much higher taxes or receive much lower benefits from Social Security. That is not a risk. That is a mathematical certainty.
The AARP is either too corrupt or too obtuse to honestly examine all of the obvious and pertinent facts and probabilities regarding the future of Social Security. It is blinded by self-interest and it attempts to hide that self-interest in arguments designed to generate fear among its members.
Worse, it does this without regard to the hardship it might cause either its members or their offspring. I can think of no more evil or despicable behavior by any special interest group. It's one thing to place the best interest of your constituents before all others. It's quite another to ignore the best interest of your own dues-paying members and their children simply to protect your own power and influence.
One more dime sent in dues to the AARP is an investment that supports a level of corruption unequalled among special interest politics.
Visit Ralph's website at: www.ralphbristol.com
Then, of course, AARP is owned by Big Business
Finally, Fox News report on AARP's rampant conflicts of interest, due to the fact they sell retirement services while opposing reforms that would compete with their privlaged market position.
Posted by Adam Cahn| Comments (1)
September 16th, 2005More on Tom Reynolds
September 16th 09:59:16 AM
Check out this recent editorial on how Tom Reynolds is acting like Tom Daschle.
Or Continue to read this entry for more.
News sources reported yesterday that Republican Congressman Tom Reynolds, who sits on the Ways and Means Committee and also chairs the Republican Congressional Campaign Committee urged his colleagues to table Social Security reform for this Congress. Such a move would end any chances of reform for years to come.
Reynolds comments are troubling for several reasons. First they came in a closed door meeting that is not supposed to be reported on by the media. Clearly House Republicans don't share the White House views on keeping internal debates just that; internal.
More importantly some House Republicans seemingly do not share President Bush’s desire to create a better American society through ownership. Reynolds reportedly said that he did not want to make vulnerable Republican candidates "walk the plank" on Social Security. It seems that Reynolds would rather push future generations over the edge, than lead on an issue Republicans can win on.
News reports said that Reynolds and strategists did not think Republicans could run on Social Security. Reynolds should look at some different polls. All polls indicate that the vast majority of American recognize that Social Security is facing a crisis and something should be done. What's more polls show that two-thirds of young Americans favor Personal Accounts. If Reynolds cares more about creating a lasting majority than he does about just winning the next election he should pay careful attention to the polling on young people. They are the ones that will be making electoral decisions in the years and decades to come.
Even if Reynolds plays to only win the next election, one must ask why bother? Why bother to create a majority if once you have one, you do not act? Congress currently has a mandate to act. They should or they do not deserve their majority.
By ducking the issue Congressmen like Tom Reynolds are facilitating a do-nothing Congress. Nothing will alienate the electorate more than failing to act; just ask Tom Daschle.
Tom Reynolds should remember that when a citizen is elected to Congress they are expected to govern, and not run only for the next election.
Posted by Chris Schrimpf| Comments (1)
S4 Release: Disappointment in Congressman Tom Reynolds
September 16th 09:51:52 AM
S4 reminds Congressman that he was elected to govern; not run from tough issues.
Washington D.C. - Students for Saving Social Security, www.secureourfuture.org, a non-partisan student group with over 230 chapters in more than 45 states expressed disappointment today with Republican Congressman Tom Reynolds' recent comments allegedly urging his colleagues to shelve Social Security reform for the remainder of the Congress.
Group founder Jonathan Swanson said, "Tom Reynolds along with all members of Congress were elected to govern and make tough decisions. Running away from an issue is the antithesis of the kind of leadership young Americans are looking for from politicians."
"Today's youth are facing a looming Social Security crisis that can be avoided if this Congress takes action," Swanson continued. "Sources have claimed that Reynolds said he wanted to avoid forcing Republican vulnerables from 'walking the plank' if they didn't have to. I hope this is not what Reynolds said. It would be akin to pushing an entire generation off the edge, so a handful of Congressmen have an easier time getting elected."
S4 Communications Director, Ben Ferguson added, "If Congress wants to look at polls, they should look at all the polls that say Americans overwhelmingly recognize a crisis in Social Security and the polls that say two-thirds of young people want Personal Accounts. The Congressmen and women should recognize that Americans will view this Congress as the do-nothing Congress. They are running a great risk of alienating voters now and for years to come. Members of Congress are elected to tackle difficult issues, not duck them."
Posted by Chris Schrimpf| Comments (2)
September 15th, 2005Stop the Raid
September 15th 08:35:15 PM
Stopping the Raid is clearly better than nothing.
Posted by Chris Schrimpf| Comments (2)
September 14th, 2005Ooops She Did It Again....
September 14th 09:37:10 PM
S4's Chris Liakos wasn't the only person who caught Senator Hillary Clinton politicizing Katrina, the Washington Times did as well.
"'People would say, "What am I going to do? Can I count on Social Security?" ' Mrs. Clinton said. 'And the answer would be, well, we'll have to check on the stock market.' The crack tickled the group, which opposes President Bush's plan to incorporate private accounts into the retirement system.
Taking Mrs. Clinton's advice, we checked the stock market: Dow Jones Industrial Average on Aug. 24, three days before the storm hit: around 10,450; Dow Jones Industrial Average yesterday: 10,600.
Looks like even disaster victims would do better playing the stock market than waiting for a check from the government, which hasn't exactly covered itself with glory for a job it is supposed to do well — disaster relief."
Solvency and Choice.
Posted by Chris Schrimpf| Comments (4)
do college students want personal account?
September 14th 02:33:58 PM
earn it
have it
save it
OWN IT!
Posted by Ursula Williams| Comments (1)
[Next 10 >>]
|
|
|
|
|
