Homestead mailing list

[tvoivozhd <tvoivozd AT infionline.net>]

Gene GeRue wrote:

> > tvoivozhd---The Bush proposal is NOT personal investment in a cheaply 
> > managed index fund----it envisions each individual account be managed 
> > (as an individual account) by a stock broker---20% being siphoned off 
> > annually as broker administrative cost.
>
>
> The reason I have now posted seven or eight articles on the subject, 
> both pro and con, is because I believe we need to be as fully informed 
> as possible before the fun begins at the D.C. Whorehouse level. This 
> so we can send well-articulated missives to our representatives 
> expressing our desires. I have yet to see the Bush proposal. If you 
> have knowledge of where one can read it, please post the url.
>
>
>
> tvoivozhd---here are a few.   One thing of which you may be absolutely 
> certain however is that a Bush proposal will NEVER , NEVER include the 
> hoi polloi joining the fine Federal Employees U.S Thrift Savings 
> Plan---you would have hundreds of superbribers fighting each other to 
> get to his jugular vein first.  What Bush wants to do is sleaze out of 
> paying (taxes my Dear Watson}---more Borrow and Spend, and dump the 
> load on our children, grandchildren and great-great grandchildren.

http://www.epinet.org/content.cfm/issuebriefs_ib145

http://www.tcf.org/Publications/RetirementSecurity/individualaccountsproposal.pdf

http://www.yuricareport.com/Social%20Security/VastBorrowingNecessaryToAlterSocialSec.html

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-12-16-ss-accounts-inside_x.htm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A57568-2004Sep2.html

http://spinwatch.server101.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=38  
(follow the money trail for a clear picture on the deliberately hazy, 
sloganized Bush proposal to date)

http://www.thedubyareport.com/socsec1.html  (less than 1% of Social 
Security funds go to administration)  NO, I repeat, NO private 
organization achieves that efficiency.