If the GOP privatized Social Security, over half of it would have been lost last year.
meth:
Of course, that won’t stop Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) from trying again!
BLACKBURN: You know, people forget Medicare is a program that individuals have paid into every single year with their Medicare and their Social Security beneifts the federal government has first right of refusal on that paycheck. And this is one of the reasons we need to make sure individuals get the money out that they have placed in. This is one of the reasons we have had the discussion over and over for our younger earners of having accounts that have their Social Security number and their information on that — personal accounts.
VARNEY: You’re right, but it was roundly rejected when President Bush suggested doing just that. Didn’t fly. […]
BLACKBURN: I was just going to say, and it’s interesting to me the number of people now that are coming to town hall meetings and are saying ‘you know what, if you were to scale back some of this bureaucracy and you began to look at some options for younger workers, you could get some of this under control.’
I get it now. The Republican party is the home of the world’s most extreme masochists. Kinda hot, if you think about it.
If this gains any traction—an idea that was rejected, loudly, by people back when the stock market was booming—now, I’m afraid this country will have passed the Idiocy Threshold.
Don’t listen to the Bad Idea Bears people!
I’m not going to get into the policy side of this argument, because I tend to think that investment of these types of fund is a fairly questionable issue that needs an extreme amount of study before any action should even be considered. And it seems likely that no action may be best answer.
However.
The headline of this post reads “if the GOP privatized Social Security, over half of it would have been lost last year.”
This is so disingenuous, it’s pathetic. There’s absolutely no way to make this claim with a straight face. It depends on a million different things. It depends on how the funds are invested. It depends on the amount of divestment and it depends on the level of risk of the investment. Anyone who says otherwise or makes such a blanket statement is flat out lying.
My 401Ks lost between 30-40% value in first half of last year. As of the statements I got last week, they are all back above pre-January 09 levels. And my investments are at least moderately risky. The markets tend to recover over time, and investing that kind of capital is a very, very long term game.
Lots of good ways to discuss this issue, and lots of reasonable and valid viewpoints. So please, put away the bullshit rhetoric. It makes you sound like the people who are saying there’s no global warming because a little snow fell on the ground.
Not to mention, “lost value” only matters to those needing to cash out. I didn’t really care too much as I know that my portfolio will recover and I don’t need the funds right now. the markets will recover, but spent funds from the government coffers only return when they take more money from us.
Source: jonathan-cunningham
