From: utzoo!decvax!harpo!ihnp4!houxz!houxi!hou5d!hou5a!hou5e!mat Newsgroups: net.misc Title: Re: Social Security solution Article-I.D.: hou5e.217 Posted: Wed Jan 26 20:52:08 1983 Received: Sat Jan 29 08:57:21 1983 References: iwsl2.135 Here's a variation on Social securityIt takes the form of a Gov't-required savings/payroll plan, but the monies involved are directly calculable, and when outgo exceeds income, it will be easy to place the responsibility ... Here's what we do: The government continues it's payroll deductions/employee contributions as it does now, but all money collectedfrom an individual is invested in, say, Treasury Bills at current rates. You would be free to contribute MORE tax free, if you wished. Every year, at tax time, you get a statement. You can begin collecting at some reasonable age, and a portion of the fund might be available for catastrophic injury insurance. My quick computaions suggest that over a 40-year period, at 10%, a contribution of $1/annum would come out to $442, so an annual contribution of $2000 TOTAL would come out to almost 900,000 dollars. Presumably contribution amounts would be partially indexed to inflation, etc. Problems? Apart from the fact that it makes sense, this could drive the T-bill rate down some; on the other hand, when the time comes to bail SS out using general funds, the stress on the economy will probably be greater than the damage caused by making some of the money available. In the meantime, those now receiving SS would be put on a general fund ``retirement entitlement'' welfare, which, coming out of the general fun, will push rates back up ... and in the future, when a persons savings runs out, the same ``entitlement'' will be available ... but in a VERY limited way. This way, it LOOKS like welfare -- which it is. True, it is a ``moral obligation'' expense, but isn't that the very nature of welfare? hou5a!mat