Who will buy the bonds?

[seminole97]

Why do you think we and our European allies are getting ready for war?

In 2006, NATO Defence Ministers agreed to commit a minimum of 2% of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to defence spending to continue to ensure the Alliance's military readiness.

…

According to data released as of July 1, the number of NATO countries which have reached or exceeded the spending level was only 11 out of 30 members with armed forces.

 

[seminole97]

I would also have 3% taken out of everybody’s Check on top of social security and put on an index fund which is all theirs. People are too stupid with guns, credit, drugs, alcohol, and retirement planning.

I’m too libertarian to want a forced savings program (and I fear you’d just massively overvalue whatever you chose to pour the funds into), but I’d support swapping SS with an actual savings/investment portfolio that the contributor had a property right to (unlike SS, which the USSC already said is a welfare program that the Congress can change at its whim).

It would be a boon to the economy to boost investment.

A welfare program for the disabled and indigent should be separate.

 

[onlyTheObvious]

In 2006, NATO Defence Ministers agreed to commit a minimum of 2% of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to defence spending to continue to ensure the Alliance's military readiness.

…

According to data released as of July 1, the number of NATO countries which have reached or exceeded the spending level was only 11 out of 30 members with armed forces.

I am fine with libertarian idea but it seems like when it goes bad they want other peoples money.

I would be cool with legalized drugs and when they OD let them die if they don’t have insurance or their family can’t help them out. And government insurance doesn’t pay for drug users.

Freedom of choice doesn’t absolve people from consequences.

I also sometimes think the other extreme might be better. A cashless society where everything is known and tracked. Didn’t pay child support? Well you can’t buy that beer or dine out until you do pay type of thing. Behind on mortgage? No beer or airline tickets for you.

I work with people that drive cars, trucks, SUVs that are way more than what somebody with that income should be buying. Many of these people then cry they can’t make ends meet and life isn’t fair.

 

[B1GDeal]

I’m too libertarian to want a forced savings program (and I fear you’d just massively overvalue whatever you chose to pour the funds into), but I’d support swapping SS with an actual savings/investment portfolio that the contributor had a property right to (unlike SS, which the USSC already said is a welfare program that the Congress can change at its whim).

It would be a boon to the economy to boost investment.

A welfare program for the disabled and indigent should be separate.

I agree that reforms are needed and one I like is one where the savings go into an account the person owns upon retirement. One that Congress/govt cannot touch or borrow from. The fact that they can change SS and borrow from it is a huge issue.

 

[onlyTheObvious]

I agree that reforms are needed and one I like is one where the savings go into an account the person owns upon retirement. One that Congress/govt cannot touch or borrow from. The fact that they can change SS and borrow from it is a huge issue.

The money they collect now isn’t enough so a private portion would need to be a new tax. Which I am fine with.

 

[nolesincebirth]

In 2006, NATO Defence Ministers agreed to commit a minimum of 2% of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to defence spending to continue to ensure the Alliance's military readiness.

…

According to data released as of July 1, the number of NATO countries which have reached or exceeded the spending level was only 11 out of 30 members with armed forces.

MSN

www.msn.com

MSN

www.msn.com

MSN

www.msn.com

The world is getting ready.

 

[B1GDeal]

The money they collect now isn’t enough so a private portion would need to be a new tax. Which I am fine with.

People will adjust. If it's taken out of their check like FICA, SS, etc., people do not see if and get used to living off their take home pay.

 

[artradley]

Every time anyone wants to do anything to fix it the other party says "see they want to get rid of your social security and leave grandma homeless," and it gets lapped up by the low information voter. Then no politician wants to touch it, because they're always thinking about their next election instead of figuring out what's really best for America.

We collectively have ourselves to blame.

This is true, any time fixes are suggested the other side screams. The GOP certainly hasn’t helped its case by constantly calling it a “Ponzi Scheme” and making genuine suggestions to end it. That makes it pretty easy for the Dems to say “Look, they’re trying to end it.”

But the point is well taken that neither side is too interested in making the changes required. From a math point of view, I don’t think the fix is that hard. Politically, however, it’s toxic.