Hi Ellen and others There are several brands of "privatization" of Social Security floating around. For example, there is the "privatize the work" aspect. In other words, some private sector profiteers see some gain in transferring the SSA work to them and away from unionized SSA workers. Of course, there is a signficiant problem that comes immediately to mind: the bottom line on securing benefits payments will be how cheaply can the service be provided so that the company can obtain maximum profits. I envision a considerable bias in the work methodology when profits, not service to the client, is the basis for access to citizens rights. Then, there is "privatizing the investment" aspect. Social Security benefits are invested in government IOU's not the stock market. Some, including former SSA Commissioner Bob Ball suggest that a portion of the trust funds should be loosened to invest in the market. Based upon market history, this seems an acceptable and sensible proposal. However, I wonder what the immediate effect of such a substantial sum going into the market would have on the averages? The other alternatives call for more drastic use of the trust funds into private investments with citizen control of these funds. The Chilean model comes to mind where the funds are privately invested. Imagine, if you will, however, that the U.S. chooses Chile to model its largest social investment program. Somehow, the history of the country leaves something to be desired as a model. But, our congress is talking it up. Why is that? A friend of mine is a stock broker. He collects antique cars and is a ver intelligent fellow. I have no idea how much he makes, but he's quite well off and just happens to be Republican. He also believes that Social Security should be abolished. I know it is dangerous to generalize, but it seems that the better off folks are, the less the enjoy the investment in and the return of Social Security benefits. My friend, of course, can afford to invest privately. He does not seem interested in the many Americans who cannot. What do we do for them? Perhaps one way is to take it all out of general revenues. Why is a seperate FICA tax necessary? The SSA funds are merged with general revenues for spending purposes anyway. Why maintain the charade? I suppose if our rich friends did not see the seperate FICA tax, then they wouldn't bellyache so much. Bob Ball's proposal looks like its got promise in terms of historical return on investment to bolster the trust funds. I believe he said he'd invest 5%. Perhaps our economics-oriented experts could offer an opinion on government investment in the market. Warren Fretwell AFGE Local 3342 PO Box 7247 Syracuse New York 13261-7247 315-448-0766 FAX 315-448-0767 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
