Paul O'Neill's Sunday NYTimes op-ed presents a formula for Social Security that repeats the same mistakes that Dubya makes.
First, there is no guarantee that the stock market will perform "its miracle" again in this Century. Remember, the 20th Century was the American Century, and the 21st is.....well, not!
Second, Social Security should require the better off to subsidize the less fortunate. It has been a sort of quasi-welfare and redistribution program all along. The notion of a trust funds, individual or collective, always was false..
True, redistribution has a bad name with the elites, but it works wonders for the economy in the long run. To-wit: All that Social Security money is in Walmart's cash registers the same day the checks come out! Bet on it....
Third, Social Security should be a scheme to COLLECTIVIZE RISK, not to set up private crap shoots! The "Miracle of Insurance" is that when risk is pooled everyone is safer. These private accounts would strip Social Security of any "insurance" value that it might have otherwise had.
Fourth, if these stock investments are so wonderful, let the Federal Government invest 4% of Social Secuirty in "safe indexes" for a few years to prove it!
Fifth, Social Security Reform is DOA in Congress this year anyway, so it's really a waste of time and space even discussing it.
I would much rather hear ONeill's solution to the Medicare and Medicaide Crisis!
