Thompson's Social Security plan: Short on details

I don't think the plan was short on details. I encourage readers to look over the 2,000 word plan themselves at http://www.fred08.com/virtual/socialsecurity.aspx

The proposal would seem to do more to help those who can afford to build their own retirement funds than it would to resolve the projected Social Security deficit.

Of course it does. That is the "conservative" way. They are against big government unless they decide to give the rich a little more. They are "for" family values as long as it is "their" family.

What pisses me off is that Thompson's generation is responsible for raiding the Social Security trust fund (and receiving the benefits of lower taxes / higher govt. spending elsewhere). And, under his plan, Thompson's generation is the only one who won't see a benefit cut. Just another example of the baby boomers pushing responsibility off to their kids and grand-fids. Once people understand this plan, it's an invitation to generational warfare.

If one was allowed to take the 12.4% of their income that is confiscated by the gov't for social security (as Buzz put it so well - raided for spending elsewhere) and invest that money themselves in teh stock market - the avg person would have a seven figure lump sum to retire on. That does not include any 401K or pension.

Younger generation needs to think about these facts as they go to the polls next year

Fred is going in the right direction, and the plan isn't "short" on details. The Federal Government should have never involved itself in providing for our retirement in the first place. Since we are saddled with a system that we can't opt out of, reducing benefits for future retirees is will be necessary if we want to sustain this program at all.

For some of the earlier commenters on here who bemoan the current system- ultimately, it's your responsbility to provide for your own retirement, as it is every other thing in life that you enjoy. It's too bad that FDR didn't have the foresight to see that entitlement programs always spiral out of control and become unsustainable without more and more onerous taxation.

Ok, if you guys are so smart, what is YOUR plan? Care to spell it out? Or are you just the cut & run type?

http://Vets4Fred.net

Thompson's plan short on details? At least he had some. What about Hillary's. Hers is, "I'll appoint a committee to study the problem." If her approach is government by committee, who needs her?"

Dipwitch, we already HAVE a plan. It's called Social Security and it works fine. There IS NO CRISIS. This is more scaremongering from the Republic party nitwits.

The real problem is with budget deficits generated by the idiot in chief. Social Security is FULLY FUNDED for another 20+ years. Good grief, it's a full time job trying to combat all the misinformation and outright lies that spew from the wingnuts.

did you read all four pages of his plan?

Short on details???

He's got a 4-1/2 page (2,000+ words) proposal on his website with three linked pdf's of background information.

What's lacking, in your assessment?

Hillary's put out 4-1/2 words on the subject: I'll appoint a task force.

This article is one of the sloppiest, most poorly written hatchet jobs I've read in a long time.

You must be proud of yourself.

Weinerdog, it is an unsustainable plan, it is not fear mongering by any stretch of your imagination. By 2017, Social Security will pay out more in benefits than it collects in taxes. It will be bankrupt in 2041 if nothing is done, having sucked tens of thousands of dollars over the lifetime from each individual payee, with nothing in return to pay back. These dates aren't too far off in the future, and they will affect folks now living as well as future generations.

And of course, it's your side of the aisle (predominantly) which spends us into those budget deficits in the first place- SCHIP is just the latest entitlement nonsense that only furthers deficits. If you're so concerned about deficits, why don't you tell your Dems to enact spending cuts on entitlements?

We know you would never do that - you wouldn't want to lose the votes of the Democratic voters who are feeding at the trough.

weinerdog43 will someday come to understand the president can only spend money Congress gives him; and he is required to spend it. But he's no idiot. It just takes him a while. A long while.

I am concerned about politicians raising fears about the Social Security system based on misinformation.

For example, the 2041 date for the reduction of benefits assumes that the baby boomers will live beyond that date- the youngest of them was born in 1964.

Let's quit debating the social security system based on the assumptions of the 1980s and start a discussion on an intergenerational compact based on current projections.

For a truly conservative approach to SS check out what Ron Paul has to say. Ron Paul 2008 - Hope for America, anyone else is just the status quo.

Scott and Mark, as part of a challenge from the Left I was told to look through Obama's website for what he will do as president. I chose the issue of Social Security. Wonderful nicetudes about how he'll make sure everyone gets what they deserve, but nothing beyond that. Please, tell us, what are the Obama plans on Social Security? What are the details?

So Fred Thompson is short on a few details. What B.S. What do you want..a four hundred page plan to rip apart. At least he has some answers unlike Hillary's canned responses to canned questions.

Scott "Buzz" Martele must be someones idiot in denial.

Thompson was the first to touch a subject no one else would which is where we get all these niceties without a hint of how.

Nice try as a spinswayer Scotty, now I'm sure your momma's callin' you.

Bill Clinton proposed the Thompson plan in 1999. Universal Savings Accounts with voluntary govt matched retirement accounts for individuals. The conservatives hated it then. But only cause of the messenger, it appears. Now that it's dressed up in Freds suit its palatable.

He Couldn't give enough "Details" to satisfy you no matter what...Wake up!!!!!!!

The main thrust of his plan is to change the way initial Social Security benefits are calculated. The current formula is on the ssa.gov website. Why didn't he provide a pdf or a link to his new formula?

He has some nice pdf charts that show how his plan will be "better". Rather than take his word I would like to see the new formula.

Short on details. Compared to whose? Right, he's the only candidate to offer a plan.

Go to the original LA Times blog entry by Scott Martelle.

Pay close attention to the link at the words "offered a proposal" in the first paragraph.

Martelle's synopsis on Thompson's detail-lacking proposal was based entirely on the PRESS RELEASE announcing the proposal, NOT the proposal itself.

I iz a jernalist.

Bruce,

Small detail missing:

"I iz a BAISED jernalist."

Freds plan doesn't address the deficit folks. Fred plan subtly plays the shell game, rob peter to pay paul.

The only one with his pulse on the economy and social security is

RON PAUL 08' check him out he's the only true fiscally responsible individual running for president.

"So Fred Thompson is short on a few details. What B.S. What do you want..a four hundred page plan to rip apart?"

We already went through this exercise with Bush - and Bush couldn't even get the plan adopted with a Republican majority in both houses.

The answer to the question is "Yes!" It's our money, our retirement. We very much want to see a full plan and we want the opportunity to review it in detail. The current over-70-year-old plan isn't just solvent, it shows a surplus. It is analyzed annually. Any alteration or replacement has to receive the same kind of analysis. Otherwise we get "discussions" based on sound bites, wild claims, lies, mischaracterizations, and evasions.