BUSH PLAN
		If you had a major tumor, would you go to the doctor and ask to have half of it removed? That's what we're getting when George W. Bush tells us: "this generation will save Social Security." He certainly offers something better than the democratic plan to steal all of our extra entitlement payments in order to pay down their national debt, but Bush's alternative only addresses part of the problem. At the close of fiscal 1999, the Social Security Trust Fund held $864 billion worth of double taxation debt bonds. All trust funds together were just short of $2 trillion ($1.989 trillion) of these bogus UOU bonds. What does the presidential candidate plan to do about Medicare excess taxes, gas taxes, airport and airways taxes, harbor taxes, and dozens of other entitlement and user taxes caught in the same mess? Caught in the situation of having all of their excess/surplus stolen by Congress and the Administration. The "personal accounts" Bush touts for Social Security's excess overpayments, what the government calls a "surplus," seems very much like the Thrift Savings Plan that his father helped set up for government employees in 1986. There's nothing wrong with getting advice from daddy, it's one of the advantages of a dynasty, but does Bubba understand this plan or is it just another sales pitch? He has never told us why it's needed or addressed the Social Security problem in any sense other than the fictitious baby-boomer scare propaganda. Bush doesn't seem to know that it's the government itself Social Security needs saving from. A government that steals surplus funds, spends them wherever it pleases, and then leaves UOUs behind to account for the theft. The federal Thrift Savings Plan under the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS) gives federal employees, including congressmen, the cabinet and judges, the choice of investing in three areas: (1) Treasury securities; (2) Municipal bonds; (3) the stock market. What's more, it seems federal people can invest as much as 10 percent of their salaries in any combination of these three woth the government matching their contributions dollar-for-dollar. Right off the bat, you know that the first area is ridiculous and amounts to loaning ourselves our own money, with interest. While the government would, no doubt, love to see people pick this option and would probably saturate us with ads to do so, it's the same old rip-off—so disregard it. Most importantly, why separate areas two and three? Why restrict the trustees or money managers handling these funds? There are times when good managers, who spend full time studying investment possibilities, need to anticipate trends and move quickly. Why should they be forced to wait for individuals to switch channels? Areas two and three should be lumped together and include real estate and mortgage investment, precious metal, the money market and a great many other investment possibilities. Barclay Bank of Great Britain handles the government's Thrift Savings Plan investment in the stock market. They use the Standard and Poors index of the top blue chip companies on the New York Stock Exchange. Most federal employees are probably throwing as much as they can into stocks since these have returned an average annual profit of 28 percent each of the last four years. But remember, when it comes to Social Security's excess we're talking about hundreds of billions in investments. Enough to seriously effect trends in the economy. An arena where expertise and flexibility are crucial. Not what should be left up to the whims of the average citizen. ..................................................................Further The Social Security Administration has never kept track of individual FICA payments. The checks sent in by employers have always gone directly into the Treasury's general fund. When someone retires, their pay-out is calculated from Internal Revenue records. Internal Revenue, also part of the Treasury, knows exactly how much each person earned in their lifetime, even if they cheated on returns. Now, if the Bush plan works like the Thrift Savings Plan, then the Social Security Administration or the Treasury is going to be forced to keep track of each individual's contribution. It will be an enormous and unnecessary expense for the government to keep track of each individual contribution, separating the 2 points in excess off the top (16% of your FICA payments) and investing it in one plan or the other, and switching as the individual specifies. And think of the paperwork for employers. Instead of sending in one check to cover all employees, large and small employers will all be required to report each employee separately. The cost for this will, of course, increase prices in consumer products or services. Since we are not hearing the pros and cons on this subject, you can be pretty sure that Bush's plan to "save" Social Security is just talk. Just a sales or political puff to get elected.