Americans really need to ask a fundamental question about retirement benefits: would you rather plow 12.4% of your income into payroll taxes for your entire life or place that money into a mutual fund that you control? And if – God forbid – you should die before you turn 65 (or 67) that nest egg will be passed on to your family. Anyway, the Ankle-biting Pundits have a response to the NYT
Sunday, June 19, 2005
Who doesn’t love getting cash? – The NY Times published a lengthy, tendentious article about how wonderful the Social Security benefit is to a whole cross-section of Americans. I’ll admit, I couldn’t read the whole thing. Who doesn’t love government benefits? We all love shiny new aircraft carriers, prescription drug benefits and Pell grants. But, as taxpayers, we’re paying for this stuff anyway.
Americans really need to ask a fundamental question about retirement benefits: would you rather plow 12.4% of your income into payroll taxes for your entire life or place that money into a mutual fund that you control? And if – God forbid – you should die before you turn 65 (or 67) that nest egg will be passed on to your family. Anyway, the Ankle-biting Pundits have a response to the NYTeditorial news analysis.
Americans really need to ask a fundamental question about retirement benefits: would you rather plow 12.4% of your income into payroll taxes for your entire life or place that money into a mutual fund that you control? And if – God forbid – you should die before you turn 65 (or 67) that nest egg will be passed on to your family. Anyway, the Ankle-biting Pundits have a response to the NYT
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
A problem with your proposition is that our national motto is "E pluribus unum," or "Out of many, one." It's not "Sulum vir pro sui" ("Every man for himself").
Post a Comment