Social
Security Rant
by
Hank Bohannon
As the
Baby Boomer Generation continue to get older, one of the hot topics
will continue to be Social Security. Critics claim that Social Security
is going bankrupt, and that it needs to be privatized as soon as possible,
or people will lose their benefits. This rant examines if Social Security
needs to be privatized, and if it is actually going broke.
Thanks
to various search engines, and thanks to the Information Superhighway,
there is much data to suggest that Social Security—even at the going
rate—will be able to pay full benefits at least until 2032, and some
research indicates it could survive as long as 2042. Also, seventy-five
percent of Social Security funding comes from the payroll tax, which
guarantees that Social Security will never go broke. The trick is—in
about thirty or forty years, to come up with a system to make up the
other twenty-five percent. Those who like to crunch numbers, and those
who are familiar with the mathematical formula claim that a raise
in the payroll tax by two percent—one percent by the employer, and
one percent by the employee, will guarantee the survival of Social
Security until the Second Coming. Analysts like to stress the fact
that a tax increase—no matter how meager it may or may not be, is
not the only solution. With the advancement of technology and medical
science, people are living longer than they ever have before. Also,
various amounts of disease have been quelled.
About ninety years ago, the number one killer in the world was Spanish
Influenza. Today, the flu is no longer a serious threat. Also, polio
used to be a scourge on society, but these days, that disease has
been virtually eradicated off the face of the planet. Thus, it makes
sense that the retirement age will—and should—be raised to about 70.
Actually, seventy years of age is not old. In fact, it is about the
average age, in this country, and well below the average in many industrialized
nations in the world.
Of course
claiming that Social Security is under-funded is not telling the whole
story. Let us look at the facts. So far, on this war on terror, the
United States has spent over 300 billion dollars. If that amount is
divided by the present population, that equals to about a thousand
dollars for every man, woman, and child in the country. Also, do not
forget about the hundreds of millions of dollars that “loaned” to
other countries in the world. Instead of saying, “Social Security
is going broke because of the population”, the correct statement should
be, “the president believes that there are more important things to
spend money on rather than insuring that benefits will be around for
years to come.”
Whenever
Social Security Reform is mentioned, there are always a select few
that love to clamor that the system should be privatized. Statistically
we know that people spend more than they save. If Social Security
should be privatized, what about the millions of people that do not
have a bank account? Should those people automatically receive an
account? And who is going to make sure that these people get an account--the
federal government? That would defeat the purpose of privatizing Social
Security in the first place. It’s kind of like saying, “let’s fix
our brakes so we can take the car to the mechanic so he can fix the
brakes.”
I could
do a lot of research and list a lot of data and list a lot of references,
or I could use history and common sense to prove that Social Security
should never be put in the hands of a private institution. It is certainly
true that there have been many government scandals that have cost
the taxpayer billions throughout the history of this country. The
failure of the Savings and Loans is one example, and the list is quite
lengthy. Also, there have been many scandals in the private realm
that has wiped out the life savings of countless people. Enron is
just one example in a list that I am sure is exhaustive. Thus, the
conclusion is that history shows that it government bureaucracy is
safer than the private realm, thus leave Social Security alone.
About
the Author
I like to discuss politics and history. I have two college degrees
in those disciplines. Please stop by my site sometime at (www.xtraxtrzxtra(dot)com.)
