It a shame both "experts" in this "debate" had so little to disagree about. Both statists had elaborate plans for other people's money and agreed that Americans are too stupid to plan for their own retirement and too selfish to take care of their own parents. Neither expert would even consider a solution consistent with the US Constitution (ironically, stored in the very building of the discussion). I'd like to see a debate about the best exit strategy from the crown jewel of socialism.

Margo, I enjoyed that session very much despite my repulsion for the kind of "me, only me, me and my own, government enslaves us" theme that was so frequently sounded. One objection: you presented Thomas Saving as if he was as pure as driven snow, "Social Security Trustee, appointed by Pres. Clinton" etc., while John Rother was necessarily linked to the most powerful lobby of senior citizens. The incoherent Dr.Saving is not too bothered by facts! He has published an op-ed where he declares that Soc Sec will have a shortfall of 74 trillion ... yes, ad infinitum! Why? he is adviser and spokesmen for Progress for America, which is fielding most of the anti Social Security ads that we see (by the same publicists who put together the ads denouncing John Kerry's war record). I do not believe that Dr. Saving could convince anybody. He had a marvelous talent for not answering the questions asked.

Social Security is an insurance program. It covers you if things go wrong - early disability, death of a parent or spouse, stock market crash, or investments turning sour. Insurance works best when we share the risk collectively. What Bush is proposing, is that we pull our money out of insurance, so that we have more to invest. That is awful financial advice.

I hope the guests address this:

If privitization occurs, what happens to the market when all the retirees start cashing in on their accounts? Have them address the supply and demand for these securities at the time they need to be cashed in...

There will not be a "solution" to Social Security until everyone realizes that THERE IS NO TRUST FUND. All it contains is IOUs on the Federal Government, which really is just a claim on future taxing. The real problem will occur much sooner when the Federal Gov't can no longer use the annual SS surplus to fund regular Federal spending because the annual contributions fall short of expenditures. The SS taken from pay is a tax, future benefits get paid by taxing the future generations. It is that simple. Will future generations be willing to pay that tax? I wouldn't count on it. Probably, Social Security will have to be adjusted to serve ONLY as a safety net for the lowest poorest people, and the wealth will get no benefits.

The country is not as bad off as we think; its just there are more crooks and elected officials that will vote for the PAC with the top dollar, just look at the medicare bill, legislation written by the pharmeceutical and medical industry. Now its wall streets turn. The 100 top economies on earth include 52 corporations 45 of which are American and are buying your reps vote. I love my country but am begining to dislike my goverment the war is a shame and so is the energy crisis. How did we allow ourselves to be led so far astray. Social security is often the only benefit the average citizen will receive from taxes. Leave soc sec as is; just remove the caps entirely , raise contributions by 1% from employee/employer and dont tamper with wage based colas.

The problem we have w/ our economy,taxes&social security is that for the last 30 greedy bleeding heart conservatives&kneejerk liberal have been selling our citizens future down the river of frre trade.

Every US citizen deserves to be able to live in this country.We should not have our worth in the job market undermined by illegal immigrants&the export of US jobs&&&money to countriesthat hate us&want to dominate us in the future.

Why should women&men have children if there will be very few jobs available for them &only menial minimum wages jobs in the future for their kids??

Where will the replacements for Fed.,state&local taxes come from that good paying factory&union jobs, used to provide?/

Why should Americans suffer for the greed of Buiness&political leaders?/

**Because my post falls under a few different discussion board topics I am going to post it in each.**

The nation is constantly speaking of bankruptcy and the possible "quick fixes" which could be implemented, all the while things are getting worse and will continue to get worse in my opinion. This is a rather large leap and most likely a near impossible proposition, but rather than keeping most things as they are and expecting to improve the financial economy of America by increasing taxes, decreasing social security benefits, or any other action...why not really LOOK at our society and see the problems that are obvious to the citizens who suffer most from the financial burdens? Our country is one that pays salaries to actors of such outlandish amounts as 25 million dollars, while a surgeon who is responsible for saving our very lives receives $250,000. Most careers have annual salaries ranging from $15-$60 thousand. Does the government not see the major gap between the salary of an actor versus the salary of the average American citizen? Then to take it even further there are state-to-state differences. For example, the reported average salary for someone of my own career is approximately $46,000. The starting salary in my state (WV) is nearly half of that amount. In fact, the combined salaries of both myself and my husband STILL do not reach the "average" salary of someone in my field. Salaries and product costs need to be brought into perspective. There should not be such drastic differences between salaries, it should not cost millions or billions of dollars for one NASA flight into space or the construction of a highway, people should not have to pay thousands of dollars into various types of insurance only to never gain anything from it. The nation is in debt by millions or even billions, yet it can afford to pay one actor millions for a movie. The government is suggesting that Americans have extra savings or pay more taxes in order to maintain social security, yet there are people who make less than $16,000 a year and can barely survive on that, let alone giving up more. I doubt there will ever be such a society that everyone has what they need to survive and money is no longer an issue, but if salaries and prices of items were more realistic, we might get close.

I would gladly sign a waver of all future social security benefits if the government would kindly stop taking my money away from me. I want to opt out!