WallStreet Hears-SocialSecurity Plan(asks howmuch debt can Wall Street han

[papau]

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/11/business/11social.html?oref=login&oref=login

WallStreet Hears-SocialSecurity Plan(asks how much debt can Wall Street handle)
By EDMUND L. ANDREWS

ASHINGTON, Jan. 10 - Treasury Secretary John W. Snow began a three-day sales effort on Monday to drum up Wall Street support for President Bush's plans to overhaul Social Security.

Despite what some see as the potential boon to the stock market from allowing younger employees to invest part of their Social Security tax payments in personal accounts, many Wall Street economists are dubious about the costs. Administration officials acknowledge that their plan could require the government to borrow as much as $2 trillion over the next two decades, to pay for costs during a transition period when the government still has to pay full benefits to existing retirees.

In private meetings, Mr. Snow will confer with top executives from the biggest bond-trading firms on Wall Street and is expected to argue that such borrowing would more than pay for itself at the end of 75 years.

Industry executives said the meetings would include firms like Goldman Sachs, J. P. Morgan Chase and Lehman Brothers. Mr. Snow is also expected to meet with brokerage firms and mutual fund companies that could end up managing the personal savings accounts.<snip>

[Turbineguy]

1. It's Chimponomics!

"We'll borrow our way to properity!"

How to pay for your old age with no money down!

[Spinzonner]

5. Actually that's a pretty good word: Properity

Is that prosperity for members of the 'Ownership Society' ?

[Turbineguy]

8. Hmm...

unintended consequeces... spell checker where is they stain?

[Spinzonner]

11. Are consequeces

anything like feces ?

[unblock]

2. pays for itself in only 75 years!

from the people who insisted there was enough surplus to allow for a trillion in tax cuts, a trillion for paying down the debt, and a trillion for special projects.

yeah, right, we trust yer faith-based math, chimpy!

[mikehiggins]

3. Once again for the choir

These people are lying.

They are not mistaken, misled or misreading the data.

They are lying. Deliberately, repeatedly and with full knowledge of the fact that they are lying before they open their lying lips and let loose another barrage of lies that the opposition (if you can seriously give it that label) treats as if there was the slightest possibility that these lies are anything but that.

How long before you guys realise that and act accordingly?

Why doesn't someone just get up in Congress, like the guy who ranted about the draft, and point out what the lies are and where they come from?

Oh, that's right. I forgot. No balls at all.

[Massachusetts]

4. They're lickin their chops!

[struggle4progress]

6. Another trillion or two in US debt? The international financial ...

... institutions are already so unhappy with US debt, they couldn't really become that much more upset, could they?

[Mountainman]

7. 2 questions

Will the brokerage houses make money managing the funds?

Will someone who loses value in their funds also lose future benefits?

If the answer is yes to both, does it make sense to a young person to pay for a risky plan with no guarantee of future benefits when they can have a risk free plan with guaranteed benefits for free?

[FreeStateDemocrat]

9. Where is the Democratic Party response?

Where is the outrage by the Democratic Party over these lies and misrepresentations? Why does the *idiot* always have an open field without any organized and intelligent response? If you tell the same lie enough times the American public swallows it as the truth. This simple tactic always works for the repukes because there is NOT an opposition party that represents the interests of the American public. If the Democratic Party wants to know why they lose elections they should pay attention to what they are NOT doing right now. By not standing up and representing working class Americans right now they have already lost in 2006 and beyond. Party leadership is not that dumb, so is the fix in have and we been sold out again?

[cthrumatrix]

10. the dems are essentially taking the "paul krugman view" there is not an

imminent threat of SS collapse... so they are not putting "options" on the table.

Just like how the rethugs bashed Hilary's Health Care plan w/o bringing forth another plan.