OT: Social Security

A lapse on my part. I should have said a "simple passbook" account, i.e. a savings account.

You're low. Unless the kid has a decent financial package. (And what's annoying: a college/university offers their financial package, then when scholarships are applied for & won by the student, the scholarships' $ amounts are lopped off the financial aid package. Arghhh. Where's the incentive for scholarship?)

OTOH, I agree that the trades professions need to be promoted & filled by people who are interested in them & who excel in those skills. For every one who *wants* to go to a 4 year college, I think there should be a way for them to do so, but not every kid is cut out for a 4 - 5 (or more) year college education. And we need the skills of the kids who are so inclined, re: the various trades.

Cathy

I think we need more doctors in addition to engineers. For the rest it's optional. We don't need more lawyers that is for sure.

That's too broad of a brush. We need more qualified Math & Science teachers, for starters.

Cathy

We don't need more lawyers that is for sure.

Oh? Aren't the ones now working qualified to do the job? That reflects poor hiring practices. The schools should do a better job of screening.

There aren't enough of them presently specializing/graduating in Math & Science. Which then may result in hiring someone who's not certified. Need more to go to college for acquiring teaching certification in Math & Science.

Cathy

So, the problem thrives on itself, in other words.

Is it just me that imagines millions of parents being vegetables in front of TV sets, instead of dragging their tired asses off the couch and doing something creative with their kids? This is where it begins, the interest in virtually everything.

True. On a very basic level, I've known teachers who've had kids enter their Kdg. class who had never held a pair of kiddy scissors before, who had never used paste/glue, who'd never climbed a full flight of stairs...

But my biggest gripe is the lack of discipline by parents, & the amount of spoiling going on. Kids often don't earn things - just given way too much, at an early age (TV, DVD in bedroom, cell phone... when they're -little- kids). And threats re: discipline aren't carried out - the child just continues to do whatever they're not supposed to be doing, with no actual consequences. Kids have parents wrapped around their little fingers, have no real idea of appropriate public behavior, etc. See that sort of thing in stores on a constant basis. Not all parents (thank goodness there are plenty who exhibit very good parenting); but too many. If I get well-behave children & don't have to spend a lot of my time on discipline, it makes for a much more pleasant learning environment & a lot more teaching/learning takes place.

Cathy

Why aren't you willing to you open your mind and consider beachfront retirement property in beautiful Haiti, Lebanon, or Iraq? ;)

Why did even the GW Bush administration admit that the transition from traditional Social Security to the privatized or individual accounts plan would require BORROWING money to fund the new system? Why wouldn't its miraculously superior returns take care of that?

In Britain, which has long had a privatized system, the private companies have been warning investors that their returns will have a high probability of falling short, mostly because the private plans cost much more than a government-run system. Britain isn't the only country with a privatized national pension in this condition. One of the few countries with a privatized system that sort of works is Singapore, but it's mandatory, and the only investment choices are run by the government.

Republican John Bogle, founder of Vanguard, the second-largest mutual fund family in the US, wrote, "The Social Security system cannot be entrusted to the mutual fund industry". He suggested maintaining the current system, but if we ever decided on a privatized system, it should be run by people of undeniable integrity and invest in the whole US, meaning it should be a couple of index funds.

Your handwriting's awful. Just to clarify, a Republican said this?

As in "republican"?

DUH! GWB never said we should PRIVATIZE S.S. he said we should allows those new people coming into the system to have the CHOISE to invest 2% of THEIR half of FICA. It was the lefty kook who called that PRIVATIZING S.S. LOL

Yes, John Bogle, a registered Republican He has a blog:

As in "non-royalist for elected government" republican and "limited government, fiscally conservative" Republican. Bogle voted against GW Bush in 2004, calling him "wreckless".

Yes, the vast majority of brokerage houses and big mutual fund companies, who backed this plan, were lobbying to prevent privatization, not to get their hands on 0.5% of the Social Security money. Don't be a Orwellian newspeaking dupe, you drunk. Use real words, not Republican party marching order words.

You also haven't explained why the GW Bush administration admitted that privatization would require adding debt to the Social Security system, and I mean $500B to $1T.

The real problem isn't whether Social Security is a real pension or a pay-as-you-go system. The real problem is the ratio of retirees to workers, and the economic impact of this isn't affected by the funding of our retirement systems.