Archives for posts with tag: Social Security

This Blog “The Philosopher on Politics has been combined with “A New Paradigm in Christian Thinking”.  All new Posts will appear on http://gadflyblog.com/ effective 12/12/2016.

Thanks for your interest in these topics.

The Philosopher

Advertisements

The Gad Fly ver. 1.2.1

The Philosopher

https://thephilosopheronpolitics.wordpress.com/tag/gad-fly/

http://anewparadigminchristianthinking.wordpress.com/tag/gad-fly/

7/20/2016

Copyright 2016

Definition of Gad Fly

  • A fly that bites livestock, especially a horsefly, warble fly, or bot-fly.
  • An annoying person, especially one who provokes others into action by criticism.

The Gad Fly of the Greek Democracy[i]

  • Plato refers to Socrates as the “gad fly” of the state (as the gad fly stings the horse into action, so Socrates stung various Athenians).

The Gad Fly of the Christian Church[ii]

A New Paradigm in Christian Thinkingis the gad fly of the Christian Church.  Christian Churches do not accept criticism, ever. The price of criticism in the Christian Church is excommunication.  Christian sees themselves as “birds of a feather” and a critical bird is not of their nest.  They must protect the income and salaries of the professional Christians, the minds of their youth and the minds of all of their members from the gad flies of the Christian Church. Professional Christians must preach to the choir, instructing them on the religion that they have chosen to put their faith.  The cost of not preaching to the choir is that the choir will vote with their feet and donations, resulting in a loss of income to the church and the professional Christians who probably have children – if Protestant – that they need to get through college and a mortgage to pay off.   If the professional Christians are Catholic, they will not meet with the approval of the hierarchy of the church and will be excommunicated.

Max Planck, the German nuclear physicist of the early twentieth century, stated, “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.[iii]

The same statement can be made of religion.  Acceptance of a new viewpoint of the existing data on religion can only take place when a younger generation becomes comfortable with these new views and those who are adamantly opposed to these new views die off.

Because of this self-protection of the minds of the youths, the church is destined to disappear for failure to keep up with our knowledge of the universe and the light it has shined on our knowledge and purpose of the visit to planet Earth of the Representative of the Creator of the Universe (RoCoU) two thousand years ago, and taught how the Homo sapiens who have evolved over the past thousands of centuries can get their basic needs of food, clothing and shelter met on this planet Earth and how to live in peace with each other and other nations.

An interesting side note is that Paleoanthropologist has found no link to the evolution of the Homo sapiens skull to that of the evolved Ancient Man, leaving open the creation of the Homo species by the “Creator of the Universe”.  Although ancient man and modern man have identical bone structure from the neck on down, their skulls and thus brains are much different, nor is there any evidence of a transitional development from the skull of Ancient Man to the skull (Brain) of the Homo Species. [iv]

The advances in our knowledge of the universe and the life creation process in the last one hundred years, mainly due to the Hubble Telescope and advances in life science, have put the Christian Church in a position where they need to update their theology from religious to pragmatic (cause and effect, science) or face extinction.  The church is clearly in a positon of “grow or die” and the church cannot possibly grow with the determination to maintain their existing course, a course established and handed down through the generations and centuries by people that did not understand the meaning, instructions from the RoCoU and implications of the events that had taken place in the very beginning of “The Way” or the Christian Church.  These events took place in a very religious society and that society, for the most part, saw and recorded these events through a religious lens (perspective).

Case Study I

The RoCoU that visited planet Earth two thousand years ago taught the audience that had gathered around Him how to get along with other people on a one-on-one basis and how nations could live in peace with one another on a nation-to-nation basis.[v]

  • For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.” [vi] From the accepted Christian perspective, their judgments will be judged by a higher power at the end of the life of planet Earth. They do not see their judging others as something that has immediate consequences.  From the pragmatic perspective, the effect of judging others – be it one-on-one or nation-to-nation – will have immediate consequences.  All Homo sapiens on planet Earth are of equal authority; one does not have dominion over another. And as one Homo sapien judges another, so in turn are they judged by those they are judging in real time by the same measure they are using to judge!This holds true for one nation to judge another nation. As one nation judges another, so is that nation judged, by the measure they use to judge, by the nation they are judging.  As in the case where the USA is judging ISIS with “air strikes,” the USA is being judged by ISIS attacking soft target (civilian targets, airplanes, restaurants, public places, etc.) with bombing and assault weapons.  The USA has judged ISIS as “barbaric” and ISIS, in turn, has judged the USA as “barbaric”.  This ISIS War has made it impossible to tell the Barbarians from the Barbarians.

Wars of our past have been mislabeled.  We must remember that the President of the USA is also the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the USA.  The orders given by the President must be followed by the USA military forces.  The President does not issue illegal orders.  If the President  orders it, it is a legal order and must be obeyed by those in subornation to the Commander-in-Chief.  One can argue that they do not have to follow an illegal order, but they will probably be sent to the brig while the Supreme Court reviews their case. They will be removed from and replaced from duty and someone else will carry out the Commander-in-Chief’s order.

Therefore the Civil War as we know it was not our civil war – it was  Lincoln’s War.  The USA involvement in WWII was FDR’s and Truman’s War.  Harry Truman was President when the Korean War began in 1950, and Dwight Eisenhower was elected in 1952 and was President when the armistice was signed in 1953.  The Vietnam War was JFK’s initiative and LBJ’s Bombing War; Nixon pulled USA troops out of Vietnam. The Serbia vs. Bosnia, Kosovo, NATO was Clinton’s war.  The Persian Gulf War I with Iraq was G.H.W. Bush’s War.  The Iraq War was G.W. Bush’s War and the ISIS-ISIL War is Obama’s War.

As a professional troubleshooter for over forty years, I can equivalently state that, “A problem must be accurately described before action is taken to try and solve the problem; if not, a bigger problem will be the result.”  By placing the proper labels on our past wars, we should gain some insight as to the right problem to solve.

The Right Problem to Solve

  • Settle matters quickly with your adversary who is taking you to court. Do it while you are still together on the way, or your adversary may hand you over to the judge, and the judge may hand you over to the officer, and you may be thrown into prison.” [vii]

The term “workable compromise” was not coined until the twentieth century. Is it any wonder that our ancestors did not understand the meaning of the above instruction from the RoCoU during his visit to planet Earth two thousand years ago?  A workable Compromise is a solution to conflicts that work for all participants in the disagreement.  The first step in search of a workable compromise is to ask the conflicting subject, “What do you want?”  If one does not understand what the conflicting parties want, how can a resolution ever be found that works for the principle parties?

  • Or suppose a king is about to go to war against another king. Won’t he first sit down and consider whether he is able with ten thousand men to oppose the one coming against him with twenty thousand? If he is not able, he will send a delegation while the other is still a long way off and will ask for terms of peace.[viii]

Here we have the workable compromise on a much larger scale.  In the case of USA vs. ISIS, the question was never asked, “What do you want?”  If we trace back the steps of the previous administrations, we should be able to predict what ISIS-ISIL wants.  The Sunni Muslims were in power in Iraq prior to G.W. Bush’s administration.  G.W. Bush’s War left the Sunni dispossessed from their homeland by the puppet Shiite Muslim administration installed by Bush. Iraq’s neighbor, Syria, was involved in its own civil war; The Sunni Muslims, now still armed with their weapons from the now defunct Iraq Red Army, seized the opportunity and developed their base of operation in Syria.  This new ISIL then made pronouncement on video, in a very barbaric way, for the USA to “Stay out of our fight.”  The Obama administration judged ISIL as “terrorists” and initiated air strikes against ISIS-ISIL as they threatened our allies in power in Iraq.

As described above in Case Study I, judging a nation as terrorist will result in the judging nation to be judged as terrorist by the judged nation.   As the USA conducted air strikes against “hard targets” (military targets) in an attempt to minimize collateral damage (civilian deaths), ISIS-ISIL, in retaliation, began bombing and assaulting soft targets (Civilian Targets).

Judging and the lack of ability to negotiate a workable compromise by the Obama administration has, and will continue to, cost the western civilization much cost in damage, dislocation of refugees and lives of civilians.  It is apparent that even a routine change in the administration by a newly elected administration will not end this conflict with ISIS-ISIL. A resignation or impeachment of the Chief Executive seems the proper road to pursue.  A newly elected administration would be in a position of trying to apologize for the actions of the previous administrations, and that never happens.

The Lens Used for the Viewing of the Facts

The lens one views the facts, events or evidence through determines the conclusions that the viewer will hold as the correct interpretation of the facts, events or evidence. The classic scenario is this: Two men who are walking in the woods come upon an immaculate garden, complete with trimmed hedges, flower garden arrangements, etc.   One man states, “There must be a caretaker for this place.” The other man states, “What a wonderful work of nature.”   The events that took place during the visit of the RoCoU two thousand years ago can be looked at through a religious lens or a pragmatic lens.

There are two and maybe three writers that were able to record the events, of the visit to Earth by the RoCoU and the events that took place, without looking though there religious lens.  Mark, who wrote the book of Mark in the Book of Books, the Bible, was a young man on the perimeter of the core group who became the Apostles of the RoCoU. He found himself in Rome where much persecution was taking place of the “Christians” in Rome.  He took it upon himself to record for the purpose of history the events that had taken place during his life.  He was an eyewitness to some of the events and received reports from those who were part of the core group of the RoCoU.  The style of writing for an historian is to answer the questions, “who, what, where and when.”   Luke, who wrote the books of Luke (Luke I) and Acts of the Apostles (Luke II), was contracted to record the events that had and were taking place in this time period. [ix]  Luke wrote under the guidelines of a journalist, answering “who, what, where and when.”  Luke was an eyewitness to many of the events that took place, he interviewed others who were eyewitnesses of events and he was an embedded journalist with the Apostle Paul on his missionary journeys.  Matthew was a tax collector and a Jew who made an argument to Jews of the authentication of the RoCoU to the Jewish religion.  He sometimes included the “why” in his writings, as did John in the book of John.  This would make their writing styles, “who, what, where, when and why” a little more difficult to sort out the facts from their interpretation of the facts and events that took place during this visit of the RoCoU.  The Apostle Paul was highly educated in Jewish religion and history.  He viewed our relationship with the RoCoU through the lens of Jewish religion and history.  A close examination of the writing of Paul will disclose that his view of the RoCoU’s visit to planet Earth was religious and the RoCoU’s view of his visit to earth was pragmatic and the next step in the evolution of the Homo species on planet Earth.

 The Gad Fly of the Democracy of the USA

The present day gad fly of democracy in the USA is The Top Gun National Crises Troubleshooter, Retired.[x]  The Greeks invented democracy from scratch and it worked well for them for about 170 years.  The Greeks were on the peak of their Golden Age when they got tired of hearing their gad fly, Socrates, who was a critic of their society, in particular of the shortcomings and corruption in this democracy.  Socrates was one of the founders of western philosophy.  The Greek Senate charged Socrates with “corrupting the minds of the youth,” and they sentenced Socrates to death.  The death of Socrates was the beginning of the downfall of Greece, for they had lost their “guidepost.”

The Top Gun National Crises Troubleshooter, like Socrates has been excommunicated from his position at a national laboratory by management that took offense to his proposals that threated their power structure.  His teaching credentials were canceled in a local church for “corrupting the minds of the youth” and not teaching the church’s official view on the subject. He was excommunicated from a church where he was a member in good standing for twenty years for publishing “A New Paradigm in Christian Thinking” [xi] and corrupting the minds of their youth and any other person in their church with science and philosophy.  Thank God for civil laws that protects our citizens from physical harm.

Our President has not chosen to listen to this gad fly, when he suggested that a workable compromise be initiated to resolve the conflict of space, control and authority in Iraq between the three different sects of Muslims. This was proposed by the Vice President, and now the reining authority in Syria has been added to the mix; he chose to put together a coalition of nations to wipe ISIS-ISIL from planet Earth.  ISIS-ISIL has retaliated with attacks against this coalition of nations and the USA hitting soft targets.  We should expect this activity to continue. The best outcome, using the best military forces on the planet,  for a military victory, will be guerilla warfare with the soft targets continuing to be hit by these guerilla fighters.  The only solution to the ISIS-ISIL conflict is a workable compromise – a permanent home for the displaced Sunni Muslims from their Iraq home.

Lessons from History

In 480 B.C. the Persians were set upon wiping the Greeks off the Earth or enslaving them.  The Persians greatly outnumbered the Greeks.  The Persians were under autocratic the rule of Xerxes; the Greeks were under democratic rule (one for all and all for one).   The Persians overran the Greek Spartans (trained warriors) at the pass of Thermopylae [xii] and sacked Athens, which had been evacuated by the Greeks.

The Persians had large war ships (similar to that of the USA navy, bigger than their opponents).  The Greeks built small maneuverable war ships with a torpedo like Ram on the bow of the ship (A trireme).  The Greeks lured the Persian navy in to the Aegean Sea where there were many islands presenting a maneuverable issue for the Persians.  With their mobility (like ISIS-ISIL), the Greeks ran circles around the larger Persian ships and rammed the Persian ships with their torpedo like Rams at the front of their ships and sank the Persian Fleet. [xiii]

Beware USA your large arsenal of weapons is being out maneuvered by an adversary who is focused on mobility.

The USA Transition from a Republic to a Democracy

The USA was formed as a republic and has been in a long transition to a democracy in small steps. This change has come about by allowing more of the population to vote in elections and it changed the way our President was elected.  In the beginning, only land owners could vote in the elections.  These were the people who had an invested interest in the profitability of the nation, much like that of stockholders voting in a corporation. [xiv]  The vote has slowly been extended, for various reasons, to other segments of our society who do not have an investment or knowledge of producing a profitable nation (women, teens, those on government assistance).  We certainly have improved on the lifestyles of our citizens, as have the Greeks, but our national debt is rising above our ability to pay the interest, which could eventually result in foreclosure on our property (nation) by our creditors (like the two bailouts of the Greeks by the EU in recent history).

The Life Span of a Democracy

The average lifespan for a democracy is about 170 years, as established by the Greeks.  In the Greek democracy, leaders were chosen by a lottery, thus minimizing payoffs and corruption in the government.  Serving as a leader was considered a duty of citizenship.  Ballots could be cast to remove a government leader from office and they would be exiled for ten years from their society. In the Greek democracy, only about 20 percent of the population could vote. [xv]   The Greeks now have more people on the government payroll than people paying taxes to support the government. Is this direction the USA wants to continue to pursue?

The Code of Conduct to Live Long in this Land

There is a “code of conduct” that was intended to provide for the continued success of a nation living long in the land that had been giving to them.  Unfortunately, these were given to a very religious people and they did not understand the economic implications of these Ten Codes of Conduct.  Unfortunately, these Ten Codes of Conduct are still seen as religious by almost our entire society, religious and secular alike.  When one sets aside their religious lens, the pragmatic lens shows that the economics of these Ten Codes of Conduct can be realized.  The original Codes of Conduct were given in an ancient language; therefore, the proper perspective is to look at them through the eyes of a parent giving instruction to their children so that they might live long in the land the parent was giving them to raise their generations.

  1. You will not listen to anyone but your father for guidance.
  2. You will not form addictions that will prevent you from making your own decisions.
  3. You will not use my name as an authority to cause trouble or discomfort for any other person on this planet Earth.
  4. You will take a day off, after every six days of work, and remember who gave you this land and enjoy your time with family and friends, and you will allow your employees time off to enjoy their family and friends, and you will not mow your lawn on this day and interrupt the peace of your neighbors.
  5. Remember what your mother and father taught you, and hand down those teaching to your children and grandchildren, that you might live long in this land I have given you.
  6. You shall not murder.
  7. You shall not steal.
  8. You shall not give false witness against your neighbor.
  9. You shall not seek an intimate relationship with your neighbor’s wife.
  10. You shall not scheme to gain possession of your neighbor’s property.
  11. You will not build a big mansion type house in your neighbor’s back yard.
  12. You shall keep the walk-ways, of your communities, free of “F oxtails” that injure our pets. [xvi]

QED

 

 

[i] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socrates

[ii] http://anewparadigminchristianthinking.wordpress.com/

[iii] Max Plank, http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/m/max_planck.html/

[iv] NOVA: Dawn of Humanity DVD, http://www.shoppbs.org/home/index.jsp/

[v] Jesus on judging, negotiating

[vi] Matthew 7:2, The Bible

[vii] Matthew 5:25, The Bible

[viii] Luke 14:31-32, The Bible

[ix] Luke 1:1-4, The Bible

[x] http://thephilosopheronpolitics.worpress.com/

[xi] http://anewparadigminchristianthinking.wordpress.com/

[xii] http://www.ancient.eu/thermopylae/

[xiii] National Geographic The Greeks DVD, 2016, http://ancienthistory.about.com/cs/weaponswar/p/blpwtherm.htm/

[xiv] https://thephilosopheronpolitics.wordpress.com/tag/voting/  TBC

[xv] PBS, “The Greeks”, 2016

[xvi] http://pets.webmd.com/dogs/foxtail-grass-and-your-dog/

We got Trouble, Trouble, Trouble, Right here in the USA, it starts with “A” and that stands for Apathy Ver. 1.0.0

The Top Gun National Crises Troubleshooter, Retired

https://thephilosopheronpolitics.wordpress.com/Apathy

10/27/2014

Introduction:

The Social Security Administration (SSA) will need a major adjustment or be replaced by a better retirement plan for USA Taxpayers to stay solvent.  A new retirement plan is proposed.

History of the SSA:

The Social Security Administration was formed during the Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR) administration in the 1930’s.  It was spearheaded by a Social Worker, Francis Perkins, aka Miss Perkins, aka, Madam Secretary, aka Mrs. Wilson, who worked with FDR when he was the governor of New York.  An appointed Cabinet Member as the Secretary of the newly formed Labor Department, she meant The Social Security Administration to be insurance for the old aged.  When FDR offered her the position as the Secretary of Labor, she made it clear to FDR that she would only accept the position if he agreed to support her agenda: Minimum Wage and Maximum Working Hours, a ban on Child Labor, Unemployment Insurance and Insurance for the Old Aged.[i]  FDR made it clear that he would not support a “Dole” by the Federal Government.  Secretary Perkins then devised ways to support these proposals, through taxation.

Today we see the fruits of her “Labor”.  A federal Minimum Wage, a forty-hour workweek, although she proposed a fifty-four hour maximum workweek, Federal supported State Unemployment Insurance, Federal-State Workers Compensation, and the Social Security Administration (SSA).

The Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) (Insurance contributions for the SSA and now Medicare) would be collected by the employers and deducted from the paychecks of the workers.  The collected funds go to the SSA general account to distribute funds to those qualified based on their “Quarters” of contributing to the SSA, today the minimum to qualify is forty “Quarters” of contributions to the SSA.  These funds have not and are not going to an account designated for the Taxpayer, but to a general fund of the SSA.  Therefore, this is not a retirement account for the Taxpayer, but an account where the workers are paying for the retirement of those that qualify for SSA benefits (New investors are paying for the matured investors, aka the Ponzi scheme).

This SSA system brought relief to the aged, of those qualified, by supplementing their retirement.  The system worked somewhat as long as the population of Taxpayers was increasing and the expected life of a Taxpayer was sixty-five years of age.  Therefore, about half of the Taxpayers that contributed to the SSA general fund did not receive benefits because they succumbed before the age of sixty-five.  The average age for the general population of males in the USA is now eighty-two and for females age eighty-five.  In milder climates like Florida, Arizona and California, the average age is higher.  The “Baby-Boomers” are now retiring.   The “Baby-Boomers” are those born after WWII when our service men were returning back from the war and starting families, resulting in a larger average population for a generation (a large bump in the population curve).  The result is that there are now many fewer working taxpayers per SSA Beneficiary than in the past, increasing the burden on both the working Taxpayer and the retiring Taxpayer.   There is much discussion about how long it will take for the SSA to become insolvent; a popular date range is 2025-2045, when funds will no longer be available from the SSA for the aged/qualifying Taxpayers.

Solution Alternatives:

Solutions include 1) increasing the age of retirement for the Taxpayer from sixty-five to as much as seventy years of age to qualify for full benefits. Given that the average mal lives to the age of eighty-two, it seems reasonable that the qualifying age would be eighty-two to receive full SSA benefits to make the existing SSA system of Taxpayer supporting other Taxpayers in their retirement to work. 2) Alternatives in place are a mixture of self-investing for retirement such as the 401k and the 403B savings plan.  The Taxpayer and sometimes the employers make contributions to the investment and the employers offer investment vehicles for their employees giving their employees some latitude in their investments. This is in addition to their contributions to the SSA through FICA.  3) Another proposal on the table is a Federal Reserve Saving Account for the Taxpayer, guaranteed by the Federal Government, to not lose any money.

Case (1) the SSA Plan:

In the first case (1) SSA plan, we will have some very aged workers in the workforce that will need to be accommodated for limited abilities to compete with younger Taxpayers and make meaningful contributions to the overall economics of the USA.  Employers do not want to carry non-productive workers as this will increase the cost of doing business.  So it will fall on the Federal and State governments to make up these extra costs to the employers.

Case (2) 401k and 403B Plans:

In the second case (2) 401k and 403B plans, the average Taxpayer is not an investment broker and may well make investment decisions based on their emotions rather than on a sound long-term investment plan.  If they notice from news reports that the market is declining, they will want to move their investments from an aggressive fund to a much more conservative fund to prevent loosing “dollar value” to their retirement accounts.  The problem then arises of when to move their funds back from the conservative funds to an aggressive fund that can compete with inflation. 

Inflation:

“Inflation” was another alternative chosen by the Roosevelt administration to combat the great depression of the 1930’s by going off “The Gold Standard” and allowing the Federal Reserve to manage the inflated-dollar as needed to make adjustments to our economy.  Therefore, an investment must at least match the inflation-rate to not loose “Purchasing Power” (Value).

Timing Investments:

Timing the move from a conservative investment, which is marginal at best to exceed the “Inflation-Rate”, is next to impossible.  The market usually goes up faster that it declines and if one thinks the market is going up and they make the change in their investment strategy, the Market will unmistakably go down. Visa versa, if they think the Market is going down, it will unmistakably go up.  The Market, however, has shown to progress upwards over a long time span.   A successful long-term investment strategy must be based on objective reasoning and not on emotions.

Investment Advisors:

Investment advisors come in all sorts of varieties including “Fraudulent Advisors”, “Sales Advisors” (earning a commission for recommending an investment fund), to “Fee Based” advisors that receive a percentage fee from the total of the Taxpayers investments.  Some of these “Investment Advisors” are not much more capable than the Taxpayers themselves.  To quote one of our long-term advisors “Stock Brokers have the highest turnover of any profession, a lot of people want to be “Stock Brokers” but very few are successful at this vocation”.   Where does this leave the Taxpayer who is in charge of their own individual retirement investment?  In many cases they lose either their “dollar value” or they lose their “Purchased Power” of their investments.

Case (3) the Fed:

In the third case (3), requiring a mandatory contribution to a Taxpayer account with the Federal Reserve, the Taxpayer will not lose their “dollar value”, because the “dollar value” is backed by the Federal Government, but again they will lose “Purchasing Power” because the Federal Reserve cannot offer a Rate-of-Return on the investment that exceeds the Rate-of-Inflation, and the Taxpayer will lose “Purchasing Power” from this investment.

A New Alternative for the Taxpayer to Save for Their Retirement. 

The University of California (UC) probably has the best pension plan management in the country, or is among the best, and could be used as a role model to restructure the Social Security Administration (SSA).   Breaking apart UC to its component parts results in a “Non-Profit, Academic Institution, managing a pension plan for its members”.

The model of UC can be multiplied several times over using “non-profit, academic organization to manage pension plans for our Taxpayer citizens”.  With a choice of academic organizations there will be competition between the academic organizations which should produce excellent rate of returns on investments for our citizens, especially if the non-profit organizations are required to publish annual rate-of-returns after fees.  The Taxpayer can move their pension plan from one academic organization to another of the non-profit academic organization.  If the Non-profit academics would be allowed to collect a small management fee (less than 3% prorated) of the funds invested for managing the pension funds, they will have even more incentive to produce excellent rate-of-returns on investments.  This program results in smaller government, the funds will be out of the control of the government, so legislators trying to balance a budget will not have access to the pension funds, this should produce long-term stability.

The Federal Budget:

The Federal Budget will benefit as the nation will not have the expense of operating the SSA and the government will be only be in a subsidizing position. The transition from the present SSA system of paying the mature investors with new investor’s funds will probably have to be a negotiated transition and could be coordinated with the 401K and 403B programs.

There are several advantages to this proposal:
1) Allowing citizens to choose their pension provider, the nonprofit academic organizations would be in competition with each other for funds to manage; this will result in them striving to make good investments.
2) Several portfolios could be offered depending on the level of risk the Citizen Taxpayer feels comfortable with and the time line when they will need the funds in retirement.
3) Authorizing the nonprofit academic organizations to charge a small management fee of less than 3% of invested funds prorated, will also provide incentive to fund good investments and the funds they manage will grow in value creating more income from the fee charged to each account.
4) The nonprofit academic organizations will be receiving income, therefore; they will be able to lower their tuition fees for their academic organization providing education to more of our future GDP producers at a lower education expense increasing income to the federal budget through taxes collected on a highly paid, highly educated work force.
5) The federal budget will be reduced by eliminating the existing Social Security Administration overhead expense and reduce the obligation of the federal budget to subsiding the retirement of those qualifying for benefits. This will be a big budget cutter. 

Our Federal Representatives:

Congressmen are elected to serve their constituents.  When a Congressman’s constituents let their Congressional representatives know what they want, the Congressman are duty-bound to represent their requests.  Senators are elected to “Serve their Country” that is they are duty-bound to do what they think is in the “Best interest for the country”.  When a Senators constituents let them know what they think is “Best for the country” the Senators are duty-bound to consider these thoughts on how to improve our country.  A president is elected to lead the country and has the final signature on any law that congress has enacted.  When the citizens of the country let the president know how they feel and think are in the best interests of the country, the president is duty-bound to consider these views when they chose to sign or not sign a bill that is presented to them by congress.

“The Only Thing we have to Fear is Apathy and Apathy Itself”.

As long as the citizens and Taxpayers of the USA chose to let someone else express their desires for the restructuring of the Social Security Administration (Kick the can down the road) or its elimination in favor of “Non-profit, academic organization to manage pension plans for our Taxpaying citizens” they will have only themselves to blame for their inaction when the SSA is no longer a solvent institution.

Action Now:

[i] Adam Cohen, “Nothing to Fear”, p192, The Penguin Press, New York, 2009

Restructuring the Social Security Administration to Achieve a Smaller Government Ver. 1.0
The Top Gun National Crises Troubleshooter
February 14, 2014

The University of California (UC) probably has the best pension plan management in the country or is among the best and should be used as a role model to restructure the Social Security Administration (SSA). Breaking apart UC to its component parts results in a “Non-Profit, Academic Institution, managing a pension plan for its members”. The present SSA uses new investor’s funds to pay unearned dividends to the matured investors. The 401K and 403B plans put the pension plans in the hands of inexperienced investors or limited options provided by employers. My Stock Broker of many years, states “Stock brokers have the highest turnover rate of any profession”. A lot of people want to become Stock Brokers, but few are successful. The 401K-403B investors have only a few choices of investment provided by their employer, or they need to find a fund manager or manage their investments themselves. The MYIRA program suggested by the president will result in a larger government, something not supported in the conservative House and not losing any funds means that either the tax payer must cover the losses or the rate of return is smaller than the rate of inflation and inflation will eat away at the funds (they will lose money). There is a slim chance they will find a successful investment manager; there is also a slim chance of investing with a dishonest investor that steals their invested funds, and they themselves have a long learning curve to go through to be successful managers of their own pension plans.

There is more than a good chance that when recession comes and their 401K is losing money they will pull their fund from the market and put the money in a bank solidifying their losses because they will not be in the market when the market recovers and they will not be able to time their transfers to take advantage of upturns in the market. Upturns in the market usually happen with fast response times, downturns usually happen with slower response times, so timing of the market transfers is very difficult if not impossible. If you think the market is going to go up it will invariable go down, if you think it will go down it will invariable go up, the probability of making the wrong decision is greater than the probability of making the right decision.

The model of UC can be multiplied several times over using “non-profit, academic organization to manage pension plans for our citizens”. With a choice of Academic organizations there will be competition between the academic organizations which should produce excellent rate of returns on investments for our citizens, especially if they can move their pension plan from one academic organization to another and the non-profit academic organization are allowed to collect a small management fee (1-3% prorated) of the funds invested for managing the pension funds, they will have even more incentive to produce excellent rate of returns on investments. Rate of returns for the various academic organizations should be made available to the public. This program results in smaller government, something that is supported in the conservative House. The funds will be out of the control of the government, so legislators trying to balance a budget will not have access to the pension funds, this should produce long-term stability.

The Budget will benefit as the nation will not have the expense of operating the SSA and the government will be only be in a subsidizing position. The transition from the present SSA system of paying the mature investors with new investor’s funds will probably have to be a negotiated transition and could be coordinated with the 401K and 403B programs.

There are several advantages to this proposal:
1) Allowing citizens to choose their pension provider, the nonprofit academic organizations would be in competition with each other for funds to manage; this will result in them striving to make good investments.
2) Several portfolios could be offered depending on the level of risk the citizens feel comfortable with and the time line when they will need the funds in retirement.
3) Authorizing the nonprofit academic organizations to charge a small management fee of around 1-3% of invested funds prorated, will also provide incentive to fund good investments and the funds they manage will grow in value creating more income from the fee charged to each account.
4) The nonprofit academic organizations will be receiving income therefore; they will be able to lower their tuition fees for their academic organization providing education to more of our future GDP producers at a lower education expense increasing income to the federal budget through taxes collected on a highly paid, highly educated work force.
5) The federal budget will be reduced by eliminating the existing Social Security Administration overhead expense and reduce the obligation of the federal budget to subsiding the retirement of those qualifying for benefits. This will be a big budget cutter.