CATO admits goal is the end of Social Security -replaced w/ savings acct's

[papau]

I love it when William G. Shipman,co-chairman of The Cato Project on Social Security Choice, admits the goal is the destruction of social security and it's replacement with savings accounts - "because this tis market base solution! And never does lower the National Debt now via a tax increase now on the rich - as in ending the Bush tax cut for the rich - get mentioned as a way to decrease that future tax increase that is the IOU of government bonds. Do you think the media will note the confession? :-)

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/02/07/no_half_way_measures/

WILLIAM G. SHIPMAN
No half-way measures
By William G. Shipman | February 7, 2005

<snip>The optimal solution is to move completely from tax-based to market-based financing. But this is difficult for politicians, causing them normally to promote interim measures which are easier to sell but which are ineffective. The first two deal with taxes and benefits because the challenge is often thought of as a cash flow mismatch.
<snip>

Once the benefit-cut strategy hits its political wall the real fun starts: "notional accounts." These come in many forms, but a common variant is offering citizens the right to save and invest in a portfolio of government bonds. Although this may sound secure, keep in mind that the principal and interest when due on government bonds are financed by taxes. The notional account structure closely approximates a tax-based retirement system, but it's gussied up to appear more attractive.<snip>

When I was in Moscow advising the Russian Federation on how to reform its Social Security system by investing in wealth-producing assets, one Duma member asked me what's wrong with a notional account. Wanting to be certain that we were thinking of the same structure, I asked if she meant by this that citizens would have individual accounts that were invested in Russian government bonds. She responded yes. I asked her if she agreed that this was basically the same as each citizen owning a government bond outright? She said yes. To answer her "what's wrong" question I offered the following -- Instead of individuals owning government bonds, why not deliver a government bond to each Russian worker -- literally -- to his house, farm, or apartment? And let us not be stingy; let's make each bond worth $1 million. Now, every Russian worker is a millionaire. Except, that is, for one inconvenient fact. We have to pay principal and interest when due on each bond, so we'll have to tax each worker $1 million. I asked her what we have accomplished? She smiled and responded, "nothing." After concurring, I took the next step.

<snip>
Our country is now in the middle of the Social Security reform debate. The solution is to reform the system's finances through market-based investing in wealth-producing assets. By themselves, tax hikes, benefit cuts, or notional accounts don't work. If employed sparsely, however, each may play a useful role. Be on guard, however, as to how sparse that role is, because our government has already raised taxes and cut benefits, and some members of Congress are advocating notional accounts. Don't let them fool us for a minute.

[struggle4progress]

1. kick

[Emillereid]

2. This is criminal -- to destroy one of the best social programs in our

history that provides a real safety net for millions of people in their old age -- for what -- fucking ideological purity! God I hate these guys!! I fear that by the time they're finished so will this experiment called the US of A.