Massachusetts Daily Collegian

A free and responsible press serving the UMass community since 1890

A free and responsible press serving the UMass community since 1890

Massachusetts Daily Collegian

A free and responsible press serving the UMass community since 1890

Massachusetts Daily Collegian

Reforming social security

According to a recent Gallup poll, more than three-quarters of Americans age 18-34 believe they will not benefit from Social Security when they retire. Among the two wars in the Middle East, the retiring baby boomers, and the astronomical spending of the George W. Bush and Barrack Obama administrations, it is easy to see why so many younger Americans subscribe to the fear that the United States’ flagship entitlement program is headed for bankruptcy. However, they are wrong. Sort of.

At present, Social Security is running a surplus. The $2.5 trillion nesting in the Social Security Trust Fund is sufficient to pay retirees through 2037. After that year, the program will be able to meet about three-quarters of its obligations.

So how best to fix this projected shortfall? The most commonly circulated remedies are raising the retirement age and raising taxes. Both of these are unpopular, though the former is likely to happen sooner rather than later. President Bush’s plan to privatize the system during his tenure faced intense opposition. However, I think he was on to something.

The best way to reform Social Security without raising taxes or reducing benefits is to partially privatize the program. This will nudge Americans into investing a small portion of their Social Security taxes in the stock market, while the bulk of their taxes are directed to the Social Security Trust Fund as it is now. Since its inception more than 70 years ago, Social Security was not intended to be a full benefit pension plan. Its function was and is to supplement each individual American’s private savings. The more than 10 million Americans who rely on Social Security alone as income (almost one quarter of recipients), are testament to the fact that the U.S. should update the plan to prevent future recipients from doing so in addition to a future monetary shortfall in the program.   

Although Bush was lambasted for attempting to do so in 2005, partially privatizing social security through personal savings accounts is a sagacious idea. Privatization should resemble the Roth IRA plan, which is a sensible, lower risk method of participating in the stock market. Unlike Social Security, money can be withdrawn from Roth IRAs under certain conditions and without penalty prior to the legal retirement age. These include serious illness, paying for college, a first time home purchase, and paying for medical insurance premiums after losing employment. Therefore, in addition to being retirement accounts, Roth IRAs also act as personal safety nets. Furthermore, investors can withdraw any or all of their contributions at 59 1/2 years – several years before qualifying for reduced Social Security benefits. In order to minimize the risks of the market’s fluctuations and better insure investors, the government should create a handful of default private plans. Americans should be allowed to choose their own investment strategies. However, considering the difficulties the majority of Americans experienced at the inception of Medicare Part D, the average citizen needs professional investing advice (myself included).

I propose that 25 percent of an individual’s Social Security taxes fund her own private retirement account while 75 percent continues to fund the traditional program. For example, a person who contributes $100 in monthly Social Security taxes will now allocate $25 to her own private account. Therefore, if she retires in an economic downturn, the majority of her money will remain free of risk. The small portion subject to risk will be mitigated through years of dividend yields.

These private accounts should mostly include blue chip stocks such as AT&T, Proctor and Gamble, and Colgate-Palmolive. Private investment funds, such as American Funds Investment Company of America, should manage these personal accounts (Full disclosure: I hold a Roth IRA with American Funds Investment Co. of America and invest in AT&T) This particular fund’s strategy includes investing in many of these blue chip corporations. Operating since 1934 the fund has weathered depressions, booms, and recessions. AFI aside, the investment options in the private sector are copious. This should alleviate skeptical Americans who worry that investing in the market is nothing more than a high stakes gamble. Steadily investing in blue chip stocks can position the average retiree to earn hundreds or even thousands of dollars in quarterly dividends. Because of the heavy taxation of corporate investments and dividends, the government should significantly lower or eliminate these taxes to make partial retirement privatization more attractive. Roth IRA plans are not subject to tax because contributions to them are already taxed.

That being said, our government must take proactive measures to accommodate a population facing increasing longevity. Yes, investing in the stock market poses risks. Millions of Americans with 401(k) plans and IRAs already know this. However, what is even riskier than investing a portion of one’s money in the stock market is relying solely on Social Security payments. The average monthly check is about $1000. For a family of two, this is the equivalent of living at the federal poverty level. The key to smarter savings resides in partial privatization of Social Security.

Shane Cronin is a Collegian columnist. He can be reached at [email protected].

View Comments (4)
More to Discover

Comments (4)

All Massachusetts Daily Collegian Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  • L

    LocksmithDec 21, 2010 at 11:22 pm

    Relating to security products, particularly for companies, I have to agree with what you have said totally. You will find so many choices on the market, it really is significant for any specialist to be aware what is idealfor his or her situation along with specific construction. The experience you are providing are a excellent support to companies and also security experts alike. Thanks again!

    Reply
  • K

    KyleNov 17, 2010 at 4:24 pm

    How screwed would the Social Security System be if your Private funds lost 40% of their value in one year (2008)? The system would literally collapse overnight if this were to happen, think about it, 40% of 25% is roughly 10% of the total value of Social Security. Gone in one bad market.

    Pretty terrible idea really, and I’m a Financial Advisor that would benefit and have clients that would benefit from your idea.

    Reply
  • B

    Ben RudnickNov 16, 2010 at 11:28 am

    Shane,
    Great column on an important subject.

    However, it is importnat for people to know that, while the current projections are that Social Security will cover the status quo until 2037, it will begin to lose money by 2016 or 2017. In other words, at that point in time the Social Security system will be taking in less money than it is paying out. People need to educate themselves as to the danger we are courting if we do not come up with ways to fix this problem. Here’s a link to get them started:
    http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=98406

    Furthermore, and more ominously, there is no money in the Social Security trust fund, except in the fertile imaginations of government accountants. In fact, for many years now, the surplus payroll tax revenue coming in that was supposed to be in that trust fund has been counted as “general funds” for the purposes of determining the federal deficit. Again, I strongly encourage everyone to check this out for themselves, but the simple fact is that the only reason the budget was balanced under Clinton was because they were including the surplus money coming into the Social Security system as general revenue.

    Ben Rudnick – Former Collegian Columnist

    Reply
  • N

    NickNov 16, 2010 at 12:15 am

    “This will nudge Americans into investing a small portion of their Social Security taxes in the stock market.”

    What a brilliant idea! After all, what could possibly go wrong with the stock market?

    Oh, wait…

    Reply