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