Should social security be privatized?

Daren Ventrice: Well this is in R & S...so let me ask why? Now I'll answer you. I think it should be a partnership between gov't and investment firms. As it stands now the US is BROKE and can't fund it's obligations long term without rethinking the process. Had the monies been invested in the capital markets instead of diverted to fund gov't we'd all be better off. I'll say though that the money MUST be taken via the gov't because if given a choice most folks won't save nickle one feeling that their Social Security will support them in retirement. They than retire and surprise they're also on WELFARE because that Social Security check isn't enough. I think the gov't should fund a flex annuity for everyone in which they can make investment choices themselves. The annuity part is a fixed amount and the investment account flexible, folks that don't want/care to take their time and invest can just buy the annuity--others can invest.govtthat way we can be assured a rob! ust economy with plenty of capital to go around. Investing in the gov't all this time has not been a good idea and it never was....Show more

Tyrone Disanti: No, why is this question in this section?

Irvin Guiles: i've got been paying into it for some years, and if i might been allowed to speculate myself what i've got paid into it, i might have a potful of money there. They extra suitable no longer substitute it for my age team. i've got by no skill voted in my life yet I registered final month and that i intend to vote to any extent further. in the event that they hadn't "borrowed" money from the social secure practices fund, there may be a lot of money there. That became no longer something yet common robbery and a organic crime. Politicians save whining that the generic public will could sacrifice to tug the rustic out of debt and the generic public justly demands that the sacrifice start up with the political establishments that initiated the debt- congress! . enable them to start by lowering their pay and advantages. T! hey assume individuals to fully go through, they can supply up plenty and nevertheless stay an entire life of ease....Show more

Melina Minneweather: No.

Hal Rouse: Consider these quotes taken from the Social Security website’s FAQ (this page was recently taken down) :"Social Security is not sustainable over the long term at present benefit and tax rates without large infusions of additional revenue. There will be a massive and growing shortfall over the 75-year period.""People are living longer, the first baby boomers are nearing retirement, and the birth rate is low. The result is that the worker-to-beneficiary ratio has fallen from 16.5-to-1 in 1950 to 3.3-to-1 today. Within 40 years it will be 2-to-1. At this ratio there will not be enough workers to pay scheduled benefits at current tax rates.""If Social Security is not changed, payroll taxes will have to be increased, the benefits of today's younger workers will have to be cut, or massive transfers from g! eneral revenues will be required."With the high unemployment rate, less people are paying into Social Security. Many people have already chosen to retire early so for the first time ever, Social Security has started paying out more in benefits than is being taken in. By the year 2040 the social security fund will be completely exhausted. Why are people afraid to talk about this?Here’s the fundamental flaw in social security: the benefits being received by retirees now are being paid by those people still working. When the current workers retire, future workers will pay their benefits. This is formally known as a “pay as you go” system. You might know it better as a pyramid scheme. Such a plan is doomed from the start. This is what happens when the government gets involved in “helping people.” And now we're doing the same thing with health care?! In 50 years the health care system will be in the same boat.Ok, so the government shouldn’t be involved in our retire! ment â€" but here we are. We’ve got to do something to fix the system! . We need to start getting people off this train wreck. The bankruptcy of social security is here!...Show more

Brock Hladik: No. The recent stock market collapse should put an end to that question. SS is a safety net. It needs to be safe. What would you do with elderly people who were poor or unlucky investors? Let them beg on the street? That's the very situation that SS was designed to eliminate.

Asley Quickle: HELL NO!!!

Jesse Pirieda: I think people should get up off their lazy bums and work for their money instead of relying on handouts from others. You don't work, you don't eat, and if you can't work, you better hope that you have enough friends or relatives that you treated nice in your life to help you out.As a Christian, I love to assist the needy and gladly help those that truly need it. When I see someone who is taking advantage of the system because it is easier than being responsible, my faith in humanity wanes.As for social security.... We! wouldn't be having this problem if we hadn't kept making exceptions and handing out money to those that don't need it.I say privatize it. Let the church decide where the money goes. They would take better care of it than the politicians....Show more