First the by now familiar bamboozle:
Toomey has said he does not favor wholesale investment of the Social Security Trust Fund into the stock market. Rather, he favors allowing younger workers the option of taking a portion of their Social Security payroll tax and creating private - also known as personal - accounts and they could invest any way they wanted.This is what Toomey's old friends at the Club For Growth have called PRIVATIZATION.
Toomey, by the way, still denies that it is. Where's the ideological loyalty, man??
Anyway, a few days ago, I wrote about Toomey:
He never gets around to explaining how those who are retired now will still "get all the benefits they were promised" while reducing the funds flowing into the system. Those funds would be the "accumulated" savings of those "young workers" he talked about.Well, now I have an answer. It's at Citizen's Voice. In explaining his plan to allow young workers to divert money to private accounts (though that's not privatization, doncha know):
The downside, which Toomey acknowledges, is the government would have to borrow trillions of dollars to replace the money removed by the younger workers to help pay the benefits of present-day Social Security beneficiaries.So Toomey's in favor of increasing the national debt? In order to divert more money to Wall Street?
Over time, however, Toomey and advocates of his approach say, the private accounts would mean more money than traditional Social Security benefits and would reduce the amount private account-holders must take out of the Social Security Trust Fund.
Say it ain't so, Pat! Say it ain't so!