Should Social Security in the U.S Be Privatized?

[sc94597]

enlightenedmaster said:

sc94597 said:

1. well most the time time,remaining assets do not really cover the amount of fraud that has taken place

2. diversifying assets is good but most of all government shud be taking of certain basic things in human life

people who have worked 40 years in a corporation ahev their pensions lost as the company they worked for went under and as corporations have ups and downs and no company has more than 10-20 of high stability normally,its better not to trust private sector

also the headache of shifting money over and over again in ur old age is not the most liked scenario

 

3. USA was a small country back then so people didn't expect much

today,USA is the biggest and greatest EMPIRE the world has ever seen

 

4. People expect better things as a Nation progresses and prospers

also if you know,USA was able to live happily and work-out its democratic experiment only because World Security and Trade was maintained by Britain without which USA wudn't have succeeded

1. I can guarantee you that these individuals don't suffer when their company goes in bankruptsy. They have secured funds elsewhere. 

2. It doesn't matter if the company you are employed by goes under. All that matters is that the companies and resources you've invested in go under. And if you invest in many of them the probability is low for you to lose a sizeable portion of your savings. 

3. No it wasn't. It was the largest economy since the 1870's when it surpassed Britain, and it was quite large even before then. That is a good generation before the progressive era. 

4. A huge proportion of the growth was internal. So I definetely would not say the U.S would not had suceeded without world trade. World trade was actually a problem for the U.S's establishment at the time and that is why tariffs were so high during that period.  I don't think Americans truly took advantage of free-trade during that period, like they could've - again, because of protectionism. It's natural resources allowed it to be self-sufficient, in contract, however.

But all of that is besides the point: people want their cake and to eat it to. They want low unemployment and large economic growth with no downturns, AND they want huge safety nets (for which they are not responsible) and/or large militaries. You can't have both, at least not in the excess that there is today.