• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Life After Retirement

E

EvansS

On the initiative of President Bush, partial privatization of American pensions is on the way to ratification. How do you think, what was it designed for? Don't know exactly why, but I don't trust George Bush anymore. Did it come to you that the pension reform was only brought up to conceal a mass embezzlement of retirement funds for the war in Iraq. Looks like, thus pension funds had been mostly cleaned out by higher military ranks or drawn against by companies close to the White House. Anyway, it was a clever stroke, as President is no responsible bankrupt private companies. There will certainly be one more financial failure scandal comparable to that of Enron failure. Do I need to specify that in the result of the framed pension privatization hundreds of thousands of people will be deprived of a warm existence in their old age? I'm 52 and personally I don't wanna be beggar after retirement.
 

Kandahar

Enemy Combatant
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
20,688
Reaction score
7,319
Location
Washington, DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Privatization of social security is fundamentally a good idea, and we WILL have to do it at some point in the future whether we like it or not. The sooner we do it, the cheaper it will be.

I don't trust George Bush either, but this is one of the few issues where I think he's correct. He's not proposing that we eliminate the benefits for people who have paid into the system their whole lives; he's just proposing that people be allowed to spend or invest their own money without the government holding it for them for several decades. Of course, privatization will undoubtedly cost an enormous amount of money...but since that money has already been promised to retirees anyway, the costs associated with privatization are really just a recognition of liabilities that already exist.

You're right about the mass embezzlement part...which is one reason I don't think the government should hold on to our money for us. Even the most irresponsible people can certainly find a better use for that money than the government can.
 
Top Bottom