Bush’s failure to partially privatize social security was a massive fumble

He was absolutely crucified for it.

POTUS Trump or TS Bessent, with their business acumen, could certainly push for a program that enhances SS return going forward that is probably stronger than what Bush suggested.

Why don't they?

And Reagan’s failure to shut down the department of education. Trump is the only one to actually get rid of something: USAID.

quote:

---

Trump cannot even get a DST bill though Congress. You think he can rally a coalition to reform and restructure SS?

---

Pretty sure it all changes when the dems and rino's get blown out this year in these primaries and, ultimately, the mid-terms.

It Will Be GLORIOUS!!

quote:

---

People rejected this.

---

Nope, Democrats rejected it. I remember their commercials showing old people in wheelchairs being shoved off a cliff to their deaths.

quote:

---

POTUS Trump or TS Bessent, with their business acumen, could certainly push for a program that enhances SS return going forward that is probably stronger than what Bush suggested.

Why don't they?

---

Real Patriots don’t question these things.

Here’s how the Democrats viewed Bush’s proposal.

Democrats argued that Social Security faced long-term funding challenges but is not in immediate danger of collapse. They stated that Social Security is a guaranteed retirement benefit, and Bush’s proposal would replace part of that guarantee with stock market risk while adding large amounts of debt and potentially reducing benefits.

Some Democratic comments:

Nancy Pelosi accused the administration of creating a crisis narrative to justify privatization.

Harry Reid
It’s wrong to replace the guaranteed benefit that Americans have earned with a guaranteed benefit cut of up to 40 percent.

Absolutely, but then by the time he got around to proposing that solution, the bill came due for Bill Clinton's scheme to lean on lending institutions (banks, mortgage companies, etc) to make high risk loans to minorities. I watched the scheme unfold.

So, the banks and mortgage companies made the high risk loans to minorities and the minorities simply defaulted on the loans leaving the banks and lending institutions holding the bad loans.

It was then, towards the end of GWB II term in office that his Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson came running in with a panicked tone saying - the sky is falling - the Banks and Lending Institutions are in danger of collapsing - we gotta do something.

So what did GWB II, the RINOs, and the Mafia Democrats do? . They came up with TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program) scheme. The program allocated billions of dollars to bail out the troubled banks and lending institutions. And just like that Bill Clinton's fiasco was wiped out.

And there my friends went the chance to solve the funding crisis for Social Security once and for all.

Now get this.....the American electorate is about to hand control of our government back to the people who created stuff like TARP. If you guessed the Mafia Democrats you guessed right.

The only problem with that? We've maxed out the credit card. To the tune of.........(wait for it).........$ 40 trillion dollars.

quote:

---

Bush’s failure to partially privatize social security was a massive fumble

---

If they did that where would they "borrow" all of their money from?

quote:

---

I think a better way if we were starting today would be to invest it at the government level instead of the private level

---

If you did that, the Dems would demand you invest the money in low income housing and companies that hire minorities, etc. If you demanded that it be invested in index funds then the dems would probably place Dems on the boards of all the companies that create indexes to keep the companies they don't like out of them.

The Gov can't be in charge of investing.

We have annuities, and have had them through insurance companies for years. We have a means of regulating them, of examining their books and making sure they can pay their obligations. One thing that could be done is have qualified companies bid for a pool of future annuity payments based on a basket of risk for a given amount of money. The private companies could then invest to meet their future obligations and generate a profit, the bidding process would lead them to offer a higher return to score more AUM, the regulatory process would examine their books to make sure they could deliver. We have well established regulations for this. We might have to tighten them in this case, but get the investment decision out of the Gov's hands.

Second, teachers, preachers, firemen, railroad workers, and gov employees don't pay into SS (mostly dems). Why is that good for them and bad for us?