He specifically opposes privatization, which is the only viable solution that has been mentioned.
Of course he opposes privatization, he’s part of the big government bullshit that caused the social security mess.
I’m against privatization of Social Security.
Why, are you against Americans having control over their own retirement?
I’ll let AI tell you the bottom line, so I don’t have to type.
- Privatizing Social Security is widely considered risky, especially for low‑income and middle‑class workers.
- It introduces market volatility, higher fees, and unequal outcomes.
- Countries that tried it saw lower benefits and eventually reversed course.
- The current U.S. system is stable, predictable, and intentionally designed to protect vulnerable retirees.
- Chile (1981–2020)
-
Privatized its pension system
-
Workers ended up with much lower benefits
-
Government had to bail out the system
-
Chile reversed privatization in 2020
Argentina (1994–2008)
-
Privatized
-
Fees skyrocketed
-
Benefits fell
-
Government re‑nationalized the system
UK (1980s–1990s)
-
Partial privatization
-
Widespread mis‑selling scandals
-
Workers lost billions
-
Government had to intervene
The pattern is consistent: privatization increases risk and reduces guaranteed income.
Exactly as it should.
2 Likes
Market volatility
Private accounts rise and fall with the stock market.
If you retire during a crash (2008, 2020, 2022), your retirement income could collapse.
Social Security’s current benefit does not fluctuate with markets.
2. Higher administrative costs
Private investment accounts cost 10–20× more to administer than Social Security’s current system.
That means:
-
more fees
-
lower net returns
-
less money for retirees
Unequal outcomes
Privatization tends to benefit:
-
higher‑income workers
-
financially savvy investors
And harms:
-
low‑income workers
-
people with unstable work histories
-
people who retire during downturns
Social Security’s current structure is intentionally progressive.
Transition costs
Switching to private accounts requires trillions in new funding to keep paying current retirees while younger workers divert money into private accounts.
No country has ever privatized a system as large as Social Security without massive fiscal strain.
Why?
It has worked everywhere it has been implemented.
And what solution that has not already failed would you suggest to fix social security?
No. It stays stagnant and is spent by the DC idiots.
Did you miss this part or just didn’t read it?
- Chile (1981–2020)
-
Privatized its pension system
-
Workers ended up with much lower benefits
-
Government had to bail out the system
-
Chile reversed privatization in 2020
Argentina (1994–2008)
-
Privatized
-
Fees skyrocketed
-
Benefits fell
-
Government re‑nationalized the system
UK (1980s–1990s)
-
Partial privatization
-
Widespread mis‑selling scandals
-
Workers lost billions
-
Government had to intervene
I am not impressed with AI slop.