Posted on Sep 21, 2011 in Social Business by 4 Comments

Question by Hot Government Injection: To run America “like a organization” need to we turn Social Security more than to the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp?
“The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation has turn out to be an increasingly popular option for private-capital funds and other investors who are searching for to spin investments in near-bankrupt industrial businesses into gold. The key is to shift the responsibility for pensions, which weigh as heavily as bank loans on a company’s balance sheet, to the pension corporation.

The identical financial alchemy has been performed at Polaroid and US Airways, at textile businesses like Cone Mills and WestPoint Stevens, and at a host of smaller organizations more than the last 4 years. And bankruptcy specialists say that it is nearly certain to maintain happening, due to the fact shedding pensions – and pensioners’ well being care obligations – is turning into an irresistible way to make a high-risk investment pay off. “

https://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/18/enterprise/18pensions.html

Sorry for the bad link:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/18/enterprise/18pensions.html

Very best answer:

Answer by Dark Night
I want out of social security altogether.

Know much better? Leave your own answer in the comments!


Comments (4)
  • Avatar

    Joe in texas Sep 21 2011 - 3:46 pm

    If I could own my social security myself and invested in the stock market with the crash I would have lost 1/2 of my social security pension

    Instead the government handles my social security. They take all my contributions, throw them into general revenue and spend them. That way when I retire I will have lost 100% of my social security

    Yeah government!

  • Avatar

    James L Sep 21 2011 - 4:25 pm

    Yea, lets give the big banks another huge pool of the peoples money and let them gamble it away in risky investments. Have we not learned anything?

  • Avatar

    Mr. Smartypants Sep 21 2011 - 4:43 pm

    LOL! For decades the Republicans have wanted to run the US ‘like a business’. But that meant something different in the 1920s than what it means today.

    Today ‘like a business’ means you screw customers, workers, small investors, etc. It means that a handful of execs get 9-figure salaries while doing just everything they can to reduce costs, shift jobs overseas, anti-competitive business practices, legally bribing politicians with campaign contributions, spending billions in advertising, lobbying, backroom deals, etc. etc. With the ultimate goal of growing ‘too big to fail’, so that managers can take huge risks, and if they win they’re heroes, and if they lose the taxpayers come in to bail them out.

    Is this how you want your retirement plan to work? If you had turned 65 in 2006 and wanted to retire, but all your money was in the stock market, you would really have been up sh*t creek!

    Republicans just hate the idea that the ‘little people’, workers who are no longer contributing to growing the wealth of rich people, should be entitled to pension money. The whole party agenda is about concentrating wealth. Privatize SS and 10-20% of that money goes into the pockets of a very small cadre of powerful investment brokerages. Who, in return, spend millions in campaign contributions, and hire politicians who have been faithful to them into cushy, low-pressure jobs. Yeah that’s just what we need in the US, billionaires running the economy into the ground for short-term gain.

  • Avatar

    Calvin N Hobbes Sep 21 2011 - 4:47 pm

    A democracy had no right to tax an individual’s income, also require a matching tax from the employer, in order to state that such was for their ‘retirement’. Yes, it makes sense that there should be some regulations regarding retirement savings, but the government should not has access to these funds. Rather, the individual worker should determine how the funds would be administered and they should own their own fund.

    One interesting point, since the formation of Social Security Congress has made sure that they were exempt from the mandatory participation requirement. They have administrative control over a program from which they are exempt. Does this sound reasonable to you??



Comments are closed.