At 02:38 PM 3/31/99 -0800, you wrote:
>As long as SS remains defined-benefit (social insurance), I don't really
>care what the predicted returns on the stock market are. For me, the
>tradeoff in investing in equities is that more money goes to the private
>rather than the public sector (bad) but opportunities are presented for
>intervening in corporate governance (good).
why is it guaranteed that SS will remain defined-benefit? why do you think
the SS will be given any kind of say over corporate governance and, if it
is, that it will be better than the current corporate leaderships? after
all, the SS trustees are part of the effort to scare everyone into thinking
that the SS system is going to go belly-up. What kind of control does the
people of the US have over the SS system? It seems very efficient at doing
its job of taking tax revenues ("contributions") from working people and
distributing them to the SS beneficiaries (people who were once workers);
they're much more efficient than the insurance companies. But loading
another job on them might interfere with this efficiency.
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] &
http://clawww.lmu.edu/Faculty/JDevine/JDevine.html
