Re: Economist forecasts for 2005 and Beyond......
Ever since I read "Bias in the Media" by Bernard Goldberg (I think the title and author is correct - but I'm on my second glass of wine so maybe not) I am much more sensitive to who is telling me what. I listen to NPR but I know they have a "point of view"
As to Bush's Social Security idea. I'll take some space to give an alternate point of view. Where to begin.
First it is a proposal and those in the media that are against it are doing what they normaly do - they marginalize the idea and show it to be extream. For example, we on this board know that when you invest you have options cash, bonds, stocks, mutual funds etc. Those against the idea only focus on stocks and how risky they are. Well, if you were to put the 16%+ (your contribution and your employeers) money into US treasury notes and/or bonds you would have a greater payout than under the current system. Why? Because the current system is based on your earnings not contributions.
There are several other aspects of the proposal that address inequities in the current system.
1. Wealth building - the wealthy can leave money to their children. Under the curent system you die and nothing (except a small burial amount) is given to your family. So think about it. You work from 15 (when I started working) - 65 and die at 65.5 years - nothing is there for your children.
2. Racial inequalities - African Americans have a shorter life span than white Americans. So take two people who contribute the same amount but the African American or American Indian etc gets less out of the system
3. Investment - see above - & we would all have more SS retirement if what we contributed was in 30 yr US Bonds.
If you are going to take issue with these concept please do so on substancial aspects and not minor details.
Sometimes death is not as tragic as not knowing how to live. This man knew how to live--and how to make others glad they were living. - Jack Benny at Nat King Cole's funeral