What A Social Security Deal Could Look Like

[REACTIVATED IN CT]

Republicans, Democrats, and President Bush are inching toward compromise

For months, the Social Security debate has been stuck in an endless round of recriminations between President George W. Bush and Capitol Hill Democrats. But with House and Senate committees ready to start drafting a Social Security overhaul in June, partisan whining is likely to wind down. And while it is too early to know whether Bush and Congress will reach a deal, the framework for an agreement is -- surprisingly -- beginning to take shape.

http://businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_22/b3935097_mz057.htm

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[REACTIVATED IN CT]

2. self delete

[robertangel30]

3. Social Security Reform and a True Ownership Society

Social Security is not in crisis it just needs a few minor adjustments. As one columnist I read recently put it “dismantling...... would be like buying a new car because the one you have has a flat. " http://www.aarpmagazine.org/money/Articles/myths_and_truths_about_social_security.html A 1 to 1.8% increase in FICA taxes would cover it, however, I am inclined to think we could combine some other ideas with a .50% increase. One of those ideas is to do away with the current 90,000-income cap subject to FICA taxes. For those who do not understand the cap it means no matter if you make 10 million a year only the first 90k is subject to the FICA tax. My oh my, I think we could close the gap by just raising the cap! There is absolutely no reason to lower benefits for future recipients such as me!
If Bush were really serious about his “ownership” society why not make 401k plans easier? Why not pass a law requiring all businesses that employ ten or more people to have a 401k plan? Perhaps we could provide a government sponsored—by the Social Security Administration of course—401k plan that these workers could pay into and at the same time requiring that the worker must deduct a minimum 1% of his weekly salary that could be rolled over to whatever job he goes to. (Or maybe throw a bone to Wall Street to manage these accounts in the lowest risk investments.) Wouldn’t that make more sense? At $6 an hour for a 40 hour week that would amount to $124 a year and in 20 years $3,331 at 3% interest.

I am speaking here about the poor and ignorant aren’t I? Let us continue with the above example and please keep in mind that this in IN ADDITION to Social Security not a replacement. And it is meant for teenagers and people like myself that have be shortchanged by the system.
$6 an hour for a 40-hour week is only $240 a week. One percent of that is $2.40. In ten years it is only $1,430 at 3% interest. Now, if this person would do just 3% he would pay only $7.20 a week or $374.40 a year. (Let us not forget he is lowering his tax burden too.) At 3% he would have in ten years a little over $4,200 saved and in twenty years, a little over $10,000. Doesn’t this make more sense then Bushco’s “destroy Social Security plan”? And I certainly hope no one would be making only $6 an hour throughout his or her life. I am not talking about nest eggs here. I am talking about leaving a little money for your burial or your surviving spouse or children without any major pain for the worker and for the government. Surely we could do this.

Even more importantly many teenagers after working for a couple of years might look at what they have saved in their 401k and just maybe, just maybe, say to themselves; gee I wonder how much I have could save in five years if I raised that to 3 percent or 5 percent?

The plan should also be flexible enough to allow withdrawal to pay for college tuition or a new home.

Based on my own life I would now have had over 100 thousand in my retirement plan had there been such a mandatory 401k. None of my jobs ever had a 401k plan until recently. My present job of 18 years only got one 6 years ago and I have been able to accumulate over 12k in that short time.

Oh, and lets not forget: Universal Health Care, CEO/Management salary caps, the end to corporate personhood, and instant run-off balloting.

Well, those are my thoughts on the subject.

[REACTIVATED IN CT]

4. Removal of the wage cap makes sense to me

It was removed from the Medicare tax years ago when more funding was needed.