Social Security, Should it be Privatized?

Posted by Ray on April 13, 2010 under Main | Be the First to Comment

The privatization of any social program always brings a hot debate between conservatives, liberals and, well, anyone in the middle. Many free market minded individuals think Social Security should be privatized while liberals say no way. Who is right and is it even possible to privatize such a huge chunk of the Federal pie?

First, let’s answer whether or not Social Security could be privatized. The answer is simple, it cannot be and privatization will never, ever happen. Why? Anyone who has been alive for more than 15 years knows that the federal government takes a nice chunk of your paycheck for FICA, basically Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid, but what they do not know, usually, is that the Social Security portion does not go where you might think. There is no actual account for your Social Security benefits instead you build up credits and your payout is determined by what age you retire. The size of your check will vary some depending how long you have worked and who much you put into the system. This is a very 30,000 foot view.

You receive credits into your Social Security account and not a “cash balance” report because there is no cash actually in your account. Believe it or not the government borrows against Social Security assets all the time and gives you an I.O.U. instead – the Social Security Administration is now cashing in some of those I.O.U.’s because they are now broke. You should know this because it means that if the cash flow into Social Security was ever stopped the whole house of cards would come crashing down. In effect, your entitlement program is the largest Ponzi Scheme in the history of scams. It is for that very reason Social Security will never be privatized because all of the lies would be exposed. But, what if we could privatize it?

Is it a good idea to privatize Social Security? That is a complex question and I am inclined to say yes, but with severe limitations. I do not think it is a great idea to put it into an account with only equities because people do dumb things when equities are involved. In my opinion I believe that using a deferred income annuity product would be the best option or some other type of account that has guarantees attached to it. An income Annuity would give the investor much higher lifetime income than you might think. I am also inclined to believe that insurance companies would create a product that would create a greater stream of lifetime income than what Social Security could ever provide.

However, I think some products should never be considered as an investment option. On my list I believe products that involve higher fees should be excluded such as equity index annuities and variable annuities. I am a believer in Variable annuities, but I feel that the current product fees are too prohibitive to make them a suitable option, a new one would have to be created. I am not a believer in equity index annuities, call me crazy but monthly or daily averaging which intentionally lower the rate of return is not a good idea and then throw on caps, yields or spreads and you have a product that is just not good. I am sure someone will disagree with me about indexed annuities, but that is their opinion and I have not seen a product I actually like. Plus when you exclude the dividends for these products it will drastically underperform the market rate of return. In short, these types of insurance products, which I am sure are valuable, are just too complex for a self directed Social Security account and I do not have faith in the government to choose the best products if they were allowed.

I think a hybrid product with a living benefit, which would payout 5% for as long as the owner lives regardless of account value, might be a decent option. They have a lower cost compared to a variable annuity, but provide similar lifetime income guarantees. These accounts also would mandate an asset allocation model that would have to be adhered to or all guarantees are off. Contrary to belief, asset allocation did work throughout the market crisis. Yes, you took a loss even in a diversified portfolio, but a balanced fund only lost 19% and has a standard deviation of 12.7, not bad.

If this were to happen, privatization of Social Security, it would lead to bad products being created since the government has no sense of what is and what is not a good investment for people. It would also lead to great confusion by investors since many have no idea how any type of guaranteed products work or their drawbacks. There is also the possibility that if/when we have another meltdown in the markets the losses incurred by investors would bankrupt insurance companies or whoever is offering guarantees. It is clear that traditional pension funds have not worked, the taxpayer is already making good on those guarantees, which leads me to believe that any type of equity investment options are simply a bad idea.

The only feasible option for privatizing Social Security would be using a traditional income annuity. The risk is manageable and the returns are predictable as well. However, this is all a moot point because it will never, ever, happen simply because if the government did not receive that income from your paycheck they would fold. While I think some investors would benefit from this the larger population would not and the only real winner would be Wall Street, as usual.

Subscribe to Annuity IQ's Feed

LS Blogs


Sphere: Related Content

Uneasy feeling

Posted by Ray on February 28, 2010 under Politics | Be the First to Comment

As I conduct my regular daily readings of various blogs and news sites I cannot help to get a very uneasy feeling brewing out there. The negativity is running very high in the political realm and from those who report on economic events. I keep seeing tag lines like; “expect more social unrest” when people report on things like the Berkley protests, which are disturbingly violent I might add. When I hit my favorite Libertarian blogs the feeling is more uneasy as I keep seeing words like revolution being used.

When you add in the Washington factor where our elected leaders are going to hammer unpopular legislation through, with no compromise, it makes me even more uneasy. There is no doubt that we need to make painful decisions in order to get our fiscal house in order, but that usually means less spending, not more. Unfortunately, our current political leaders do not see it that way and are hammering through more spending, in particular the health care reform bill. Look, I know we need to do something, but not this. Deducting money from Medicare and then adding it back in to other areas is not rational, this bill is not paid for and will make costs rise not fall.

Regardless, people are not happy about unpopular legislation being thrown down their thoughts. The kicker is that people like Nancy Pelosi come out and say that programs like Social Security and Medicare were unpopular when they were enacted. I guess what she means is that politicians know what is best for Americans and we should keep our mouths shut. We all know how right politicians are their track record speaks for itself just look at the stellar decisions they made over the last 10 years. Iraq was a great decision, the prescription drug coverage was fantastic (albeit unpaid for), the PATRIOT Act was a winner, free speech zones were fantastic, how many stimulus bills did we have again – they worked out well, eliminating a paper trail for voting is a sure disaster waiting to happen, and need I go on?

Politicians do not know what is good for Americans, they know what is good for them and getting reelected. Well, they did used to know how to get elected until now. If they pass this next unpopular batch of legislative nightmare on the docket they are in for a rude awakening come November because the people are coming for them. My only hope is that people come for them at the polls and not in any other way. Based on what I have read combined with the recent plane crash in Texas into the IRS building I think we might see more people going out to make a statement. Meaning, some nut job will more than likely blow something up or worse.

Who knows what will happen in the future, but we know that the average person feels left out right now. Wall Street got their massive bonuses and, for them, nothing really changed with the exception of having to play defense in the media. At the end of the day, the average person knows they got nothing over the past 2 years except for a higher future tax bill and, maybe, they got to keep their job, but we know about 20% of Americans were not so lucky as they are either unemployed or underemployed. Wall Street though, they are fine. Washington, well, they are doing OK as well as campaign contributions, from Wall Street, are still coming in and many have received raises. Clearly, there is a double standard and John Edwards was completely right when he said there are 2 Americas.

Discontent is here and that discontent could become a powder keg if not rectified. The unfortunate thing is I do not see how the public can be pacified, especially as this thing we are in deepens as we are now seeing. Things could get ugly and politicians need to figure out that they are representing the people and start acting that way. It is beyond me how they cannot see that Americans view them as being on the wrong path, but, again, that is politics and they will be surprised if they get voted out in November.

Subscribe to Annuity IQ's Feed

LS Blogs


Sphere: Related Content