It's Already Started!
It didn't take long for the liberals to start picking apart President Bush's Social Security indexing proposal. What I never thought I would see, however, is the liberals siding with the RICH. Michelle Malkin covers it brilliantly today.
The problem I have with it is much different. I agree with establishing private accounts that allow us to put a portion of our Social Security contributions into private investments. I don't agree that indexing is a fair approach to the problem because the so-called "rich" are not getting the same return on their contribution. Let me make it clear from the start that I am not included in the rich category, so any comments I get on the subject should take this into consideration.
Suppose two individuals, one in the "rich" category and one in the "poor" category go to an investment advisor with the same dollar amount, make the same exact investments, and say 20 years down the line, cash in their investments at the same time. Would anyone believe it is fair, given the exact same market conditions, that the poor person receive a 20% return, while the rich person receive only 10% based solely on the net worth of each?
Of course, the percentages in the example are hypothetical. I am simply trying to make a point. I don't believe that a person should be penalized for achievement. It shouldn't matter what either person earned, the investment should pay the same return. In fact, in the private sector it does just that. It would be illegal in the private sector to pay either person less. It is based solely on the dollar amount invested. Why should the government be allowed to calculate the return differently than the private sector?
Some people will say the rich don't need the extra money, they are already rich. They may not need the money, but that's not the point. You also get into the whole game of defining what actually constitutes "rich". That's something I don't think the government should be defining. Being rich is a state of mind more than anything: the definition varies from person to person.
Social Security is in desperate need of reform not only for us, but for our children and grandchildren. I am for the President's plan to strengthen Social Security as long as the approach remains fair to all involved. Private accounts are a great idea as long as the return for all Americans is the same in proportion to the investment made.
The problem I have with it is much different. I agree with establishing private accounts that allow us to put a portion of our Social Security contributions into private investments. I don't agree that indexing is a fair approach to the problem because the so-called "rich" are not getting the same return on their contribution. Let me make it clear from the start that I am not included in the rich category, so any comments I get on the subject should take this into consideration.
Suppose two individuals, one in the "rich" category and one in the "poor" category go to an investment advisor with the same dollar amount, make the same exact investments, and say 20 years down the line, cash in their investments at the same time. Would anyone believe it is fair, given the exact same market conditions, that the poor person receive a 20% return, while the rich person receive only 10% based solely on the net worth of each?
Of course, the percentages in the example are hypothetical. I am simply trying to make a point. I don't believe that a person should be penalized for achievement. It shouldn't matter what either person earned, the investment should pay the same return. In fact, in the private sector it does just that. It would be illegal in the private sector to pay either person less. It is based solely on the dollar amount invested. Why should the government be allowed to calculate the return differently than the private sector?
Some people will say the rich don't need the extra money, they are already rich. They may not need the money, but that's not the point. You also get into the whole game of defining what actually constitutes "rich". That's something I don't think the government should be defining. Being rich is a state of mind more than anything: the definition varies from person to person.
Social Security is in desperate need of reform not only for us, but for our children and grandchildren. I am for the President's plan to strengthen Social Security as long as the approach remains fair to all involved. Private accounts are a great idea as long as the return for all Americans is the same in proportion to the investment made.
posted by Barry at
5:30 PM
<< Home