Alright, here I go, I'm going to touch that "third rail". Ready?
We should abolish Social Security.
Whew, that felt kind of liberating.
Ok, so abolish is a strong word. The more appropriate thing to do would be to sunset the program so people who've already put their money into it still receive that money upon retirement. This would also allow those of middle age to take responsibility and seriously look at how they want to spend or save their money. This would also provide incentive for businesses to offer sound pension plans for their workers.
Why would I want such a thing?
For one, we need to change how our society runs when the structure of society changes. Our society is becoming a much more service oriented. Gone are the days when most people toiled away as laborers. Also, federal regulations within the manufacturing and agricultural industry have improved. People aren't getting maimed on the job in nearly the proportion they where at the time Social Security was imposed.
Why are we arbitrarily saying through social security that people don't have worth as working individuals past 65? We have healthier and more coherent retirees than ever before. And these superiorly abled seniors are going to stay more capable for a longer period as time goes on. People should retire when they feel they're able to, not when it's mandated for them. This gives the spending power to the people. If a person saves for their own retirement, they can spend it as they wish. If they get sick and are close to death, they can determine who or what charity to best spend their saved cash on.
Why is this such a big issue to me?
Because soon we will have the proportionally largest generation retiring. This will happen. Time doesn't stop. This group will inevitably be the healthiest and longest living group in history due to medical advances (until the next, of course). This group will be unbridled in their spending from one social security check to the next. Economically, this will mean more dollars will be chasing around smaller amounts of good (less goods since most of the retirees won't be contributing to production, a "double whammy"). This will mean that either the dollar will be worth less, or insurance rates will rise to reign in inflationary effects.
So you would just abandon seniors in need?
Not necessarily. Social security is a program for the masses. It doesn't matter how wealthy the senior is. They are still getting the same check as a senior in need. Actually, the weathier seniors receive more than their less fortunate peers in proportion to how much more they put in.
Separate programs which offer less perverse incentives could be created. The government could offer pension guarantees much like their FDIC does to checking accounts. Also, welfare programs could be started for those seniors in dire need of support (preferably at the state level).
These solutions are targeted programs. Society as a whole would get the largest living quality "bang for the buck" by using such programs rather than blanket contributions.
Many of the larger and more successful business of modern times have embraced decentralized processes so that the people closer to the problem are the ones who deal with it instead of needing to deal with a heirarchy of command. Government programs should follow the same trend if we are to help those truly in need more quickly.

posted by Brett @ Sunday, October 02, 2005