Paul Ryan on the need to strengthen Social Security
I'm 40 years old. I'll get about a one percent return on my payroll taxes. If Social Security could pay me my benefit, which of course it can't, my children who are five, seven and eight years old will get a negative one percent rate of return on their money. And I would argue that Social Security is probably one of the most successful programs ever created, and it's popular because multiple generations value it. If my kids are going to get a negative one percent rate of return on 13 percent of their payroll taxes basically, do you think they're going to continue to support the program? We should provide future seniors with the choice of having a personal account, like I have as a Federal employee, as a Member of Congress. It's not privatized. It's managed by the government in safe index funds. It harnesses the power of compound interest so they grow their money at five or six percent a year instead of negative one percent a year. They get better benefits. It's a nest egg they own and control. It is their property. My dad died when I was a kid. My mom got his Social Security benefits. She had to forego all those taxes she paid when she worked as a lab technician in Milwaukee. She lost that because it went back to the government. So there are inequities in the system right now and I think that can be fixed with personal accounts. If you don't like them and you don't want them, then don't have it. I just think it ought to be an additional voluntary option, but it is not necessary to actuarially solve this problem. I personally think it's preferential for younger people to have the option so they get a better deal, so they get a better benefit, so that we don't consign them to a miserable rate of return. Full video: http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/11292 http://www.americanroadmap.org/ http://house.gov/budget_republicans