Social Security is solid; pending bankruptcy is nonsense
Nader urged Bush & Gore to stop trying to convince the puvblic that the retirement program is headed for bankruptcy. “The idea that Social Security is going to run out of money is simply nonsense,” Nader said. The program has an “extremely solid”
base that will provide benefits until 2037, even under the “pessimistic” assumptions of a 1.7% average annual growth rate to estimate the projections, Nader said. He said that growth rate is about half the average over the last century.
Source: Boston Globe, “Campaign Notebook”
Sep 20, 2000
Pensions controlled by people, not banks or insurers
Working people need a reasonable measure of control over how their pension monies are invested, rather than it being controlled by banks and insurance companies.
Source: The Concord Principles, An Agenda for a New Democracy, # 8
Feb 21, 2000
Social insurance is government at its noblest
Every discussion of Social Security should begin by recognizing that Social Security is a system of social insurance. It places government in one of its noblest roles: Provision of a bedrock guarantee to all members of society that you do not need to
fear the financial consequences of growing old or disabled. It is government as it should work -- a coming together of society to ensure that we, as a community, take care of each other as we age or suffer from disabilities.
Source: Speech at “Saving Social Security” Conference
Jan 21, 1999
Social Security privatization replaces certainty with risk
From the consumer or citizen perspective, one of the great benefits of social security is its very certainty. As one of its great assets, it offers systemic tranquility -- no matter what, people know that in old age or disability, they can count on
the social security guarantee. As soon as the system is privatized in individual accounts, in whole or significant measure, the commonwealth would be perverted into a subsidy bonanza for brokers, who would take their 2-to-5% cut. Systemic tranquility
would be replaced by an enforced anxiety.
By their very nature, market investments introduce risk into the equation. There is nothing inherently wrong with risk, of course. Risk and the returns on risky investments are an important motor
in our economy. If people believe there is an upside to risk and are eager to invest in the stock market, in bonds, in hedge funds or otherwise, they are free to do so, directly or through IRAs, 401Ks and other tax-subsidized private retirement devices.
Source: Speech at “Saving Social Security” Conference
Jan 21, 1999
Fears loss of retirement funds in privatized investments
In a privatized Social Security system, these fears would be well founded:
What would happen if the market crashed, and people suddenly saw the source of 30% of their retirement income stream wiped away?
What should the
government do if some significant portion of the populace loses its entire retirement investment account due to unlucky or misguided investments?
What happens to the old person who is ripped off through investment fraud?
Source: Speech at “Saving Social Security” Conference
Jan 21, 1999
Click here for definitions & background information on Social Security.
