(Dear Moderator: These are two articles debating the same question - pro and con - and I posted both together, thus including a total of more that 4 paragraphs. Please do not delete. Thank you - QE)
An 'ownership society'
Is President Bush's proposed 'ownership society' a good deal for American workers?
By Herman Cain
March 25, 2005
Yes: It's a common-sense way to help everyone build wealth
President Bush rightfully has made ownership the central theme of his domestic agenda. The president deserves great credit for his political courage in advancing the ownership theme, but in reality it's nothing new.
The ownership society is simply a modern expression of the fundamental American idea. The core of an ownership society is the philosophy of giving individuals more control of their own destiny. Its lineage can be traced to the Boston Tea Party, when settlers rebelled against the idea of paying taxes into a system over which they had no control. This is a lesson politicians should keep in mind as they approach the current Social Security debate.
A new retirement security strategy is the first step in creating this ownership society. That strategy starts with replacing an outdated Social Security program left over from the Industrial Age with a new system that meets the needs of the 21st century.
More..
Find this article at:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20050325/news_lz1e25cain.html An 'ownership society'
Is President Bush's proposed 'ownership society' a good deal for American workers?
By Mark Weisbrot
March 25, 2005
No: It only makes the rich richer and most of us poorer
(snip)
But they will not really own this money – it is actually a loan from the government, which they will individually have to pay back, with interest, after retirement. In addition, people would be forced to convert some or all of their accumulated private accounts into an annuity, or lifetime annual payment. This is not what most people think of when they hear the world "ownership."
President Bush and his party have won a number of tax cuts in recent years that have had a considerable impact on the benefits of ownership. But these have had the effect of increasing the wealth of existing, primarily large owners of wealth – rather than aiding or helping to create new, smaller owners. Repealing the estate – or inheritance tax – certainly falls in this category. It has generated enormous tax savings for some individuals, but these include only the richest 2 percent of taxpayers.
Reducing the tax on capital gains has also benefited existing owners enormously. If Donald Trump decides to sell $20 million worth of stock today, and makes a few million dollars on the sale, he will pay only 15 percent in taxes on his profit – assuming the stock was held for more than a year. This is a much smaller bite than the federal government takes from the average schoolteacher or firefighter, for example, when they are lucky enough to get a pay raise.
Cutting the tax on stock dividends was billed as a bonus for ordinary Americans, despite the fact that nearly half the country owns no stock at all. But even for those who do own some stock, most of us hold it in retirement accounts. When we retire, we have to pay taxes on the money we draw out. So we won't get anything from the dividend tax cut; only the upper-income groups who buy and sell stocks outside of retirement accounts will be able to cash in on this new loophole.
More..
Find this article at:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20050325/news_lz1e25weisbro.html