Wall St. Lobby Quietly Tackles Social Security

[Rose Siding]

As President Bush prepares to disclose the details of his plan to funnel hundreds of billions of dollars of future Social Security funds into privately held investment accounts, Wall Street has begun a muted lobbying campaign, chastened by bolder forays that failed in years past.

So far, the chief executives of most financial firms have refused to take a public stand in support of private accounts, wary of being seen as too eager to embrace a potential new revenue stream.
...
There are signs, however, that the industry is becoming a little more aggressive in pushing for private accounts, through a loose assemblage of trade associations, business coalitions and conservative research centers. These groups have lately begun trying to raise money from business interests and to marshal support on Capitol Hill, while also seeking to deflect criticism that Wall Street is behind the move simply to reap rich rewards for administering the accounts.

The first salvo was launched by the Securities Industry Association, which recently issued a research report arguing that the private accounts would not be a financial bonanza for Wall Street. In the paper, the association calculated that firms would collect at least $39 billion in fees, and perhaps considerably more, from managing such accounts over the next 75 years. But the group noted that the fees charged would be significantly below the fees that investment firms receive these days from low-cost mutual funds......

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/21/business/21lobby.html?ex=1261371600&en=ddc408605b5d3d09&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland

[UpInArms]

1. utter bullshit

In the paper, the association calculated that firms would collect at least $39 billion in fees, and perhaps considerably more, from managing such accounts over the next 75 years. But the group noted that the fees charged would be significantly below the fees that investment firms receive these days from low-cost mutual funds

I don't care that $39 billion is less than they collect - it is $39 billion that they haven't been able to get their freakin' grubby hands on and they want to take the funds away from our social safety net.

:argh:

[truthisfreedom]

2. ahh, they love the smell of fees in the morning. it smells like...

victory.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

3. "Tackle" is the right word

They want to bring it to the ground.

[Tinoire]

4. Of course because Wall Street is dead and they know it

Foreign investment firms are pulling their money out of Wall Street as are wealthy Arabs and Europeans. The rich need to unload all those worthless pieces of paper on someone. Why not the working people? Totally disgusting

[izzie]

5. You can almost see the slime dripping from the lips of these guys

Bush will have a trail of brown noses after him for the next 4 years. Oh well lets see what happens. I do not think all these Chilean models have worked well.Been reading up on the Swiss one of late.

[Triana]

6. SALIVATES is the correct word...

Wall Street Wolves SALIVATE Over Social Security.

Let's be HONEST about it, shall we?

[Kolesar]

7. Fidelity Investments gave Bush a lot of money this year

Heretofore, they were not noted for such large donations. Privatization of SS is an obvious "quid pro quo" for all those donations.

[MidwestTransplant]

8. That's so sweet. The brokerage industry is just trying to help us

all out. I will have to remember them for Christmas.

[Bozita]

9. toon sums up the Bush approach to Social Security

another Handelsman bullseye:

[flpoljunkie]

11. Yes, and it looks like the bastards are going to screw us twice...

By raising the ceiling, the Bushies will make us pay for destroying Social Security for our children and grandchildren--a guaranteed benefit will be replaced by a risky promise and automatically reduced SS benefits. Lifting the ceiling to save Social Security is one thing, lifting the ceiling to destroy it is entirely another, and is not only unacceptable, it is outrageous!

Yesterday Bush refused to "negotiate with himself" and would not answer the question from the Los Angeles Times White House reporter about who he considered to be "nearing retirement." The answer from his handpicked Social Security Commission was 55 years old. This means that they will be able to screw an awful lot of folks--many who have paid into the retirement system for over 30 years.

Don't think for a minute they they won't make the privatization of Social Security mandatory for those under 55 as it is their aim to destroy Social Security and rid the government of this financial burden. After all, there is no lockbox and Bush has already spent not only the Social Security surplus but any Medicare surplus while borrowing billions from Japan, China, South Korea and even Caribbean banks to finance his profligate "tax cut and spend" administration.

This is reckless beyond belief and the chickens will come home to roost--the only question is exactly when.

[zann725]

13. Once they get the approval...no matter how limited it appears...

they're gonna clear out ALL the funds. No one, no matter the age, will ever receive a SS check again. Elderly and Disabled will be out in the street, and without any medical care...as they're also moving toward eliminating Medicare too. No doubt about it.

[TahitiNut]

10. I have a better idea.

Slap a 1% national sales tax on equities. Put the majority of the proceeds of that sales tax into the Social Security Trust Fund.

[LynnTheDem]

12. bush's plan will make Wall St rich...of course they're lobbying.

And as ALWAYS with republicans, it's a fuck you to "we the not wealthy insignificant little people"