Bear - 2015-12-22 2:13 PM It's simply a matter of comparing the value of two different investment strategies. Status quo: 1.) A "promise" to provide basic healthcare needs, IF you live long enough, which often necessitates a supplimental policy to cover anything that the .gov refuses to cover. 2.) A "promise" to grant you a minimum subsistence income once you retire. One that usually can't meet the bare minimum on which you can live......again, that is IF you live long enough. 3.) Does nothing for the economy.....no revenues, no investment, no jobs. 4.) If you die and have no living dependents, the IOU gets torn up. In other words, the system incentivizes early death. Goes hand-in-hand with Medicare, interestingly. Privatized System: 1.) Allows you to select from a wide range of insurance options that would be available from a competitive free market. Of that several hundred thousand dollar nest egg reserved for healthcare needs, you could choose a catastrophic plan that would easily be affordable for your lifetime, with more than enough to cover the deductibles for the rest of your life. 2.) In the case of retirement income, you can easily live at or above the level you lived on while working, without putting much of a dent in that nest egg. 3.) Creates a "stimulus" to the economy through the infusion of hundreds of billions every year....maybe even more than $1 Trillion. This stimulus would be via non borrowed money....investments through the private sector. This generates tax jobs, incomes, and massive tax revenues, which could both fund a system designed to care for the poor, as well as lower our national debt. Gee...imagine that. 4.) If you die, it goes wherever you want......charity, family, whatever. That's because you own it. For a peek at how this would work, take a look at how it worked for Galveston county. They were able to opt out of social security, in lieu of their own privatized system.

Bear - 2015-12-22 2:13 PM It's simply a matter of comparing the value of two different investment strategies. Status quo: 1.) A "promise" to provide basic healthcare needs, IF you live long enough, which often necessitates a supplimental policy to cover anything that the .gov refuses to cover. 2.) A "promise" to grant you a minimum subsistence income once you retire. One that usually can't meet the bare minimum on which you can live......again, that is IF you live long enough. 3.) Does nothing for the economy.....no revenues, no investment, no jobs. 4.) If you die and have no living dependents, the IOU gets torn up. In other words, the system incentivizes early death. Goes hand-in-hand with Medicare, interestingly. Privatized System: 1.) Allows you to select from a wide range of insurance options that would be available from a competitive free market. Of that several hundred thousand dollar nest egg reserved for healthcare needs, you could choose a catastrophic plan that would easily be affordable for your lifetime, with more than enough to cover the deductibles for the rest of your life. 2.) In the case of retirement income, you can easily live at or above the level you lived on while working, without putting much of a dent in that nest egg. 3.) Creates a "stimulus" to the economy through the infusion of hundreds of billions every year....maybe even more than $1 Trillion. This stimulus would be via non borrowed money....investments through the private sector. This generates tax jobs, incomes, and massive tax revenues, which could both fund a system designed to care for the poor, as well as lower our national debt. Gee...imagine that. 4.) If you die, it goes wherever you want......charity, family, whatever. That's because you own it. For a peek at how this would work, take a look at how it worked for Galveston county. They were able to opt out of social security, in lieu of their own privatized system.