Are you sure you want to delete this post?
David Sirota has an article over at IBT that's from the 'you've got to be shitting me file.'
"Hillary Clinton And Wall Street: Financial Industry May Control Retirement Savings In A Clinton Administration"
This is one of the most rapaciously idiotic ideas I've ever heard.
Instead of increasing Social Security benefits or cutting payroll taxes, financial industry allies of Hillary Clinton are eyeing a 3% payroll tax hike to fund mandated private retirement accounts ran by presumably government approved fund managers.
Instead of privatizing Social Security, it would create a complementary mandated privately-ran retirement program.
The problem is that people don't save and invest enough, so we must force them to, not that they don't have enough incomes to save and invest in the first place?
This is horrible economics. It won't create any new dollars in the economy for returns and added savings. Some will win and some will lose in relative comparison, but no new returns will be added to the economy. In fact, it may invariably contribute further to inequality, while lowering incomes and savings, increasing the need for larger government budget deficits.
I say cut the payroll tax and let people do what they will with their increased after-tax incomes. They may choose to spend, save, or invest more. If they want to send their money to Blackstone, that's their business (so long as crimes aren't being committed). At the same time, I would add to Social Security and Medicare benefits.
It is completely obvious what these fund managers are trying to do. They want to create a heavy stream of fees and incomes for themselves. That's it. Some of them may also think they are helping regular people in the process. That's what makes them really dangerous.
In any event, if this shit comes down from the top of the Hillary administration, I will take my ball and go work with the f---ing Republicans, if necessary, to defeat it.