Who should manage your money, the Government or You?

Not sure who Martin Frost is or why Foxnews.com would run an opinion piece by him, especially one so obviously biased against President Bush and private Social Security accounts. But here's my emailed response:

Mr. Frost,

Your opinion piece on Foxnews.com today on President Bush's social security reforms are so clearly a Democrat's effort at spin I'm a bit surprised that Fox ran it without a rebuttal.

First, the evidence is clear to me that under current conditions Social Security will begin running out of money LONG before 2042 as you and most Democrats want us to believe. More educated assesments put it around 2014, less than 10 years from now. Spinning the date out further is what all Democrats are doing, nothing new, but it does a serious disservice to Americans to fudge the facts.

Secondly, to suggest that Democrats have proposed alternatives to private accounts that would 'patch' the problem is disingenous to say the least. Patching is not what Americans are interested in, they want it FIXED. Government-run retirement accounts are NOT what I believe the founding fathers intended, and run contrary to the democratic principles this country was founded upon. Americans DO NOT want big government, and we wish you Democrats (and in fairness, some Republicans) would get off that kick.

Third, your statement: "He stubbornly persists in trying to sell the public his privatization scheme -- which has nothing to do with Social Security's long-term solvency and which the public roundly rejects." is way off base. There's so much wrong with that statement I don't know where to start. The public doesn't need to be sold on this, the public HAS NOT 'roundly rejected' private accounts, only your buddies in the Democratic party and their stooges in the liberal media/polling companies have. I've met NO ONE who wouldn't prefer to manage their own retirement savings. Not to mention that despite your attempts to paint Bush as 'stubborn' (like that's a bad thing), no one is buying it. It's Democrats that come off looking like obstructionists, liars, and arrogant elitists here.

Democrat efforts at spin on this issue are quickly reaching fantasy level. President Bush is not 'falling off the cliff', but Democrats are backed right up against it, aren't they? Why else would they be resorting to your kind of assinine rhetoric?

Fourth, your proposal for making the elderly work longer, and for increasing taxes are standard 'I don't give a crap about the common man' Democrat hypocracy. Americans are no longer content to quietly bear bigger and heavier burdens to further the liberal/Democrat vision of a socialist society. Get OUT of my pocket, get OFF my retirement age - manage your own house (for a BIG change) to solve the problem, not mine. Or if you can't reign in Democrat (and again in fairness, some Republican) tendencies for spending money you don't have, then just acceed to the wishes of the electorate and LET US MANAGE OUR OWN MONEY with private accounts.

I fire people for blowing budgets, politicians somehow get reelected. To me, that seems more of a cause for the current SS problems than anything else.

For you to say that fixing SS "won't be easy" is again disingenuous. Private accounts would be VERY easy. It's your counter-proposals that would be hard, unjust, and serve only to perpuate the problem. Again, Americans don't want to patch a corrupted, badly outdated system - we want a new system that WORKS for everyone, for all time. One in which we KEEP our money, which of course is the root cause of liberal/Democrat (sorry for the redundancy) angst about this - Democrats arrogantly believe government can manage our retirement planning better than citizens. Government sure did a good job with SS, didn't they? And now you advocate more of the same - get real please.

Your final comments warning about "benefit cuts and increased taxes" down the road are again - BS. Enacting private accounts will obviate the need for benefit cuts and increased taxes, your refusal to admit that aside.

The fact is that everyone understands Democrat opposition to private accounts instead of Social Security: it's simply about control and greed, with a little anti-Bush spite thrown in. Private accounts for social security are a first step in reducing the size of government and the control they have over average Americans. But this is directly contrary to modern Democrat philosophy, who like today's liberal media, now overwhelmingly believe in the concepts of socialism.

Well, most American's don't. President Bush should keep pushing for privatization of SS, he's got 100% of my support.

Doug


You should all send this idiot a letter too, copy views@foxnews.com so that Fox understands that running an con job like that opinion piece is not conducive to 'fair and balanced' reporting.

Bush: We should manage our OWN money in at least partial Social Security private accounts, it will bring bigger returns and ease the burden on the system.

Democrats: What problem? But if there is one, just work more years and pay more taxes.

Adios MF,

Doug