More Data Questions Value of Social Security Privitization

Retirement Accounts Questioned
Paper Challenges Expected Benefits

By Jonathan Weisman

Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, March 19, 2005; Page E01

Nearly three-quarters of workers who opt for Social Security personal accounts under President Bush's "default" investment option are likely to earn less in benefits than those who stay with the traditional Social Security system, a prominent finance economist has concluded.

A new paper by Yale University economist Robert J. Shiller found that under Bush's default "life-cycle accounts," which shift assets from stocks to bonds over a worker's lifetime, nearly a third of workers would bring in less in benefits than if they remained in the traditional system. That analysis is based on historical rates of return in the United States. Using global rates of return, which Shiller says more closely track future conditions, life-cycle portfolios could be expected to fall short of the traditional system's returns 71 percent of the time.

MORE

RELATED POSTS ON SOCIAL SECURITY:
Social Security and the Young, or Beware the Great Deceiver
Democrats, Social Security, and the Investor Class
Democrats Response on Social Security
Fact Check Disputes GOP Claims on Social Security
No End to The Absurd From Bush on Social Security
Bush World Meets Bizzaro World on Social Security
Cheney: Privitize Social Security, Or Else?
Social Security, A Program For All Times
Women & Social Security, Some Facts and a Calculator
Fact Check on Bush's Social Security Proposals
"The Money in the Account" is NOT All Yours
Social Security Privitization in Chile
Scheming Your Social Security Down the Drain, What Privatization Could Mean to You