The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: The Proof's in the Pension
I can't understand how we are still talking about this. The columnist says how great it is that his friend in Chile has his money in a government account that will make many percent better than social security and let him retire to a huge estate with many beautiful women and have been doing so since 1980. Ok, sweet! Couple of quick questions:- If this is so great, then why does 20% of the country STILL live in extreme poverty? EVERYONE who was 40 in 1980 would be well out of poverty by now (or passed on, in which case their descendents would be). According to the article, we must account for so many people who work in the cash economy and thus cannot participate. Fine, I'll accept that, but if the benefits really WERE that fantastic, wouldn't people be falling all over themselves to take jobs in the real economy, no matter how much they paid?
- If we are so confident in the stock market, why do we continue to put the surplus have in social security in government bonds!?! We get 3.5% in 15-year non-negotiable US treasury bonds, resulting in $1.7 trillion in 2018 which then starts getting drawn down in 2018. But if we take the SAME surplus we're getting every year (call it $100 billion a year, growing smaller every year), and put it in the same accounts that the author is proposing, we'd double the surplus! It'd be around long enough for the baby boom bubble to significantly pass and we'd be free and clear. Either this math works or the people pushing privatization are hiding something. Make up your mind. Either way, it's totally unnecessary for a form of private accounts that are being proposed currently.
