Karl Zinsmeister has a article in the American Enterprise putting Social Security into historical context:
So: Do you want to base your security in old age on a program engineered at the same time as the Model A and the vacuum-tube radio? Has work changed much since the era when slopping pigs for Auntie Em was a typical job? Does the boundary between state and individual look different now that the USSR has gone from progressive polestar to oppressive flop? Has American finance advanced from the decades when the only choices for ordinary savers were the passbook, the mason jar, or the mattress? Are the retirement goals of Americans still the same as in the days when the Bambino retired? Or is it time for Social Security to enjoy a major-league update?Bring back the sarsaparilla subsidy, consarnit!
1 comment:
While I think the idea of individual accounts has potential if handled correctly, there is one major piece of the puzzle I have yet to see addressed: SSI, specifically the disability insurance.
If somebody is on long term or lifetime disability, before their account has had the time to accumulate funds and grow, where are they going to get the money to survive?
SSI is not welfare. It has definite pre-requisites that can make getting on to it difficult to begin with and they review the claiment's status regularly. They also have work incentive programs to try to get people into the work force, when possible.
I have yet to see anything in the new proposal that would cover this situation, and I really would like to hear about it.
StargazerA5
Post a Comment