Eliminate Social Security - Dont 'Privitize it'

[Az]

I just wanted to ask one question: The money that is paid to SS, where does it go? because I keep hearing of this "fund", but does it just lie in that fund? or is it invested in treasury bonds?

[Lawrence of Arabia]

it goes to iraq.

[Az]

so it's treasury bonds, eh?

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Berzerker

Without Medicare private insurers would cover old people just as they did before Medicare.

Before you start making blanket statements like this, you need to look up "market failure".

The whole point behind SS is that it provides goods that people want that the market cannot provide adequately.

Unless you understand and are prepared to counter arguments relating to market failure, you have no business taking any sort of position against welfare. We've had this argument over and over again, and you have yet to come up with any sort of argument as to why the market will succeed in providing products like healthcare efficiently when there is no example I have ever seen of a market system doing so.

Markets tend to suck when it comes to insurance products and that is what medicare is. In fact that's what SS is too - it's just insurance against getting old.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Agathon
Anyone else for a law whereby Libertarians are thrown into jail for no other reason than to see the looks on their faces?

I'll vote for it if you're the one who is required to enforce it.

[Agathon]

I'll vote for it if you're the one who is required to enforce it.

No probs. Libertarians are all nerdy get-sand-kicked-in-your-face types anyway.

Why do you think they spend so much time dreaming about owning assault rifles?

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


So you admit that libertarianism is completely heartless?

Assuming we admit something like this , then you will have to admit that all forms of statism ( socialism , fascism , the precious communism , and welfare-statism ) are completely heart-based , and thus illogical and mindless ? I'd say such an admission would doom your systems to failure , simple because they have no grounding in reality ( in the mind , logic , and reason ) .

In fact , I think that statists are doomed as it is . The more statist you are , the more problems you will invite and inflict on yourselves . Just wait and watch . The collapse of the communist Soviet Union was just the beginning . Soon will come the fall of the unsustainable systems of the welfare-states of the Scandanavian countries , then the fall/decay/consignment to oblivion of China , and maybe the last will be the fall of the American statist systems . Thankfully , the Americans have the sense to abandon a sinking ship ( at least , I hope they have ) , so I hope that the fall of SS will be relatively painless for India .

Just wait and watch . It'll be fun to see this show .

[Kuciwalker]

No probs. Libertarians are all nerdy get-sand-kicked-in-your-face types anyway.

With guns.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Berzerker
Doc, SS and Medicare are separate programs, eliminating one doesn't eliminate the other. And you say the healthcare industry can't survive as we know it without Medicare? Then why do so many hospitals shift their losses from dealing with Medicare onto private insurers? Without Medicare private insurers would cover old people just as they did before Medicare.

Originally they were capitalized by the same fund. Your "Medicare" payments come from the same 14% you used to pay for the 2 together, but now they just parcel them into seperate Medicare and Social Security items on your paycheck.
During the 1970s and 1980s over half the income of the healthcare industry came from the US government. I dare say that a majority of the hospitals in the US today would not be around in their present form without Medicare.

You also have to consider that the healthcare industry hires some of the finest PR minds in the country. Private practitioners may sometimes lose money from some services funded by Medicare, but hospitals don't.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by aneeshm
Assuming we admit something like this , then you will have to admit that all forms of statism ( socialism , fascism , the precious communism , and welfare-statism ) are completely heart-based , and thus illogical and mindless?

See, you need a better handle on logic.

Supposing libetarianism is heartless does not mean its opposition is all heart and mindless.

Originally posted by aneeshm
I'd say such an admission would doom your systems to failure , simple because they have no grounding in reality ( in the mind , logic , and reason ).

This does not follow from the premise, i.e. libertarianism is heartless.

Originally posted by aneeshm
Just wait and watch . It'll be fun to see this show.

Unless you put your prediction in a definite time frame, what you said is essentially meaningless.

[pchang]

Insurance only works when there is a small chance that the insured will need a payout. With medicare, the chance is almost 100%. Thus, insurance should cost as much as just paying out of pocket. However, this is too expensive for most older people. Thus, the government tries to fix this by forcing the enlargement of the insured pool of people (to include all workers through the medicare portion of the payroll tax). This lowers the chance that the insured will need immediate payout, but the eventual need for payout is still almost 100%. In addition, the ratio of old people to workers keeps getting higher and higher, so the medicare payroll tax will keep needing to be increased to keep up. At some point, this will become unsustainable and old people beyond a certain point will be left to die.

[GePap]

This is simply an issue of values. The private system will NOT ensure care for every citizen- its not profitable, it won;t happen.

So, are we willing to lower the possible total wealth we create in order to ensure every citizen has a chance for and enhanced quality of life at the end of it, or are we not?

I am all for bettering the lives of all citizens if it means less economic efficiency and lower total wealth.

Obviously many here value money more than people

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Azazel
I just wanted to ask one question: The money that is paid to SS, where does it go? because I keep hearing of this "fund", but does it just lie in that fund? or is it invested in treasury bonds?

It doesn't go anywhere. It goes into the general treasury. It's supposed to be ermarked only for SS, but Congress has been "raiding" that portion of the treasury and so it'snot sitting in our government cofferes or being invested or anything like that. It's been spent.

[molly bloom]

Can we not simply eat the old and the poor?


"I have been assured by a very knowing American of my acquaintance in London, that a healthy adult well nursed is at sixty five years old a most delicious, nourishing, and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled; and I make no doubt that it will equally serve in a fricassee or a ragout. "

Jonathan Swift: A Modest Proposal 1726

http://www.stevebrown.clara.net/html/modest_proposal.htm

[el freako]

The only reason SS is a 'pyramid scheme' is beacuse that the baby boomers chose to have a lot less children than their previous generation.

The system works if the workingforce grows at the same rate as the number of pensioners, but as the workforce is going to stop growing due to less children being born then that is what is causing the system problems.


When people like Ming complain that they should get something back out of the system I would like to remind them that their generation (which is also mine I might add) should have had more children, it is due to the baby boomers desire not to spend so much by having less children that the funds for their retirement are lacking.

So basically the problem with SS is due to a lack of investment (specifically in children), which was a choice of the generation that failed to make that investment - unfortunately it looks like they won't be the generation to pay for it.

It is the choices of the 'baby boom' generation that turned a sustainable system into a pyramid.