Re:Cash to the poor: Giving money directly works surprisingl...
by dragonwriter on Monday October 28, 2013 @01:05PM
(#6628157)
> It would make a lot of sense to simply require citizens to save or invest a certain portion of their annual income.
Not to serve the purpose of social security, which is to serve as a minimal fallback defined benefit pension to to mitigate the effects of old-age poverty in the event that personal retirement savings fail due to investment risk (either by failure of personal investment, failure of private pensions, etc.)
It would be a nice public subsidy to the financial services industry, which is why that industry and their political proxies keep recommending this, but it wouldn't actually serve the purpose social security is designed to serve.
> It would be quite a bit less draconian than the government simply confiscating the money.
Not really; either way the government is seizing the money and directing its use.
Not to serve the purpose of social security, which is to serve as a minimal fallback defined benefit pension to to mitigate the effects of old-age poverty in the event that personal retirement savings fail due to investment risk (either by failure of personal investment, failure of private pensions, etc.)
It would be a nice public subsidy to the financial services industry, which is why that industry and their political proxies keep recommending this, but it wouldn't actually serve the purpose social security is designed to serve.
> It would be quite a bit less draconian than the government simply confiscating the money.
Not really; either way the government is seizing the money and directing its use.