 |
 |
How Steadfast Should Bush Stand On Reform?
August 30th 10:07:57 PM
There's been a fair about written about Jack Kemp's op-ed "To Grow the
Majority". Rock the Vote naturally totally mis-analyzes it.
I have to take issue with it for another reason. Security faces two problems. First is the CongressionalRaid on the trust fund, which Kemp rightly notes GROW accounts would fix. But the problem is also demographic. Without substantive reform Social Security will not be solvent and GROW accounts do nothing to address solvency. President Bush advocates solving the two-fold problem of Social Security at the same time. He should be commended for tackling both the popular reform, stopping Congressmen from selling our retirement on the Congressional floor, and the more difficult reform, changing the inherent demographic problem of Social Security.
Personal Accounts address both issues and they bring instruments of wealth creation to all Americans. That's something to be commended. Bush should stay strong in demanding comprehensive reform until the last possible moment.
I'm really interested in what others think about how comprehensive reform should be and how strong and for how long Bush should stand for complete reform, so please leave comments.
Posted by Chris Schrimpf
Comments
I agree, but GROW accounts are still a good first step.
Posted by Adam Cahn on August 30th 11:59:49 PM
Again, if "reform" actually passes it will be about expanding government power into our equity markets, not anything to do with social security's solvency.
Posted by Noid on August 31st 01:23:02 AM
I think we should implement the President's plan as-is, while using all of the remaining surpluses to pay for the so-called "transition costs" that opponents constantly complain about. Seems like a pretty fair-minded approach to me. Pass the progressive indexing plus personal accounts plan, and put a provision in it that halts all Congressional raids of the Social Security surplus, diverting all of it towards the reform package.
GROW accounts are a good idea, but the President's plan is a better one.
Posted by Sunny Sidhu on August 31st 04:18:52 AM
GROW accounts are the only feasible solution through Congress. Once they are passed the rest will come, it's only natural.
Bush's reform has too many questions from his own supporters and will put Republicans on the defensive. With GROW accounts democrats will be on the defensive and as people understand the idea better, they'll want more of the very reform Bush is asking for.
Do this one step at a time. But let's do it.
Posted by Joe on August 31st 08:41:01 AM
social security belongs to left wing policy
Bush is better to keep close to national security and global networks,to strengthen a lasting majority
Posted by Andrea Fuzzi on August 31st 02:52:45 PM
Ms. Fuzzi,
How long will said national majority last if the President fails to act on the coming entitlement crisis?
Posted by Adam Cahn on August 31st 05:56:50 PM
I see where you're going with this. But, we should ask ourselves if baby steps are better than no steps at all. This will take a real political assessment. Can we get something better this year? Next year (election season)?
Posted by Curt Mercadante on August 31st 09:52:15 PM
Personal accounts are good for responsible adults, but how many adults are responsible these days? Also, let's say that this bill is passed, who is going to tell these responsible adults how to invest their retirement funds responsibly? The government, brokerage firms, or even the media?
I believe this will create a bigger problem long term than currently exists. TY
Posted by gharghur2 on August 31st 10:13:37 PM
gharghur2,
You don't realize that, at least at first, reform will only allow people to invest in safe, broadly diversivied, bond and stock funds. You also have to remember that we're discussing long term investing, over 10, 20, 30, or 40 years. Thus, people should be relatively safe, and if there is a short-run downturn, they'll have more than enough time to recover.
BTW, Noid, if you're reading, concerns like these are why we wouldn't be able to completly dismantle SS, even if we wanted to. You can't raise people to be government dependant sheep, then expect to throw them to the wolves immeadiately. Now, if we were to raise a generation of wolves, as we are now doing, that's another story...
Posted by Adam Cahn on August 31st 10:53:51 PM
Curt-
YOu raise good points, ones that we all have to consider. If reform is going to be done, a lot of people say it has to be by a second term president in an off year. so if nothing happens this year, the prospects for reform would diminish. at the same time we want to make sure as much reform happens as possible, so the stakes are clearly quite high.
Posted by Chris Schrimpf on August 31st 10:59:51 PM
QUOTE:
BTW, Noid, if you're reading, concerns like these are why we wouldn't be able to completly dismantle SS, even if we wanted to. You can't raise people to be government dependant sheep, then expect to throw them to the wolves immeadiately. Now, if we were to raise a generation of wolves, as we are now doing, that's another story...
/QUOTE:
You obviously haven't taken the time to try to understand my proposed solution
Posted by Noid on September 01st 04:35:20 AM
GROW Accounts are great by themselves, but if that is the end game, bad idea.
The best part about them is that we'll be able to create some semblance of personal accounts, and we'll be able to prove to skeptics that personal accounts are not scary and not dangerous.
It's a decent first step in a long and much more comprehensive process.
Posted by Will Franklin on September 01st 07:31:50 PM
The problem is that even though it may feel like a first step, it's far more likely that if GROW accounts pass, Bush and Congress will declare victory and move on. The political will to tackle this issue incrementally doesn't exist. It has to be more of an all or nothing thing. GROW accounts were never intended to PASS! It was just supposed to get Democrats on the record as saying, "Sure, we're against raiding the trust fund."
But their ranks haven't really broken. It's like we've taken this practical joke much too far and now we're stuck with this crappy proposal.
Posted by anna on September 02nd 02:46:34 PM
Anna-
Very interesting comments. I think you are right to a large degree GROW wasn't expected to pass, but to open the debate, but they've proven popular, and you could say either that a) that proves that ownership is possible and if we just get GROW accounts people will want more later, just like what has happened in many foreign countries; or b) politicians will be happy to have done something and get Bush off their back and it will end there while the solvency crisis continues. It's a very difficult dilemna, but not a bad one to have, I think.
Posted by Chris on September 02nd 08:44:09 PM
|
|
|
|
|
