Letter: Radical change to Social Security is better for all

Wednesday, March 30, 2005 | 9:28 a.m.

Hallelujah, letter writer Daniel Olivier and I finally agree on something. We agree with columnist Paul Krugman's assessment (Feb. 27) that the GOP and conservatives are dedicated to ending Social Security as we now know it.

The reason conservatives want to end it is that there is a better way! Here is an oversimplified outline: Currently all wage earners pay a 12-plus percent payroll tax on their income in addition to income tax and Medicare tax. If 5 percent of their income went into a mandatory, private, personal and diversified investment account, and 5 percent went to purchase mandatory, private, personal disability/life insurance, every worker in America would fund their own retirement and be covered in the case of tragic circumstances. An added bonus would be a 2 percent lifetime wage increase and maybe leave the kids something other than a tax bill.

The biggest bonus, however, would be that the federal government could not force us to dump our money into a Ponzi scheme from which we never recover our investment. The federal government currently takes this revenue, spends it on its whims, and then taxes our grandchildren a second time when the bill comes due.

Democrats and liberals are trying to hang onto an outdated, socialistic way of doing things. Conservatives and the GOP encourage personal responsibility and discourage dependence on government. Things usually work out better that way.

F. JAY HARRELL

archive