On the recordApril 7, 1998
If I could just follow up, because he made a point there that I think deserves some greater attention. I didn't mean to dismiss your question as lightly as it may have sounded like. There are people who believe that it would be better--let's assume that what I said is right. It is right now, as long as we keep the balanced budget, we run the surplus. Let's assume that's right. Still there are people who say, ``Okay, Mr. President, so the Social Security Trust Fund had a surplus, and they invested their surplus in Government securities, and they'll get it back plus interest. But wouldn't it be better, if we had any surplus, that in effect the surplus was invested in a way that went to the individual in accumulating benefits of the people who were paying the taxes?'' That's basically what a lot of people say. See, one reason the return is not any higher than it is, is that 90 percent of your taxes, when you pay Social Security every year, are going to pay for the current Social Security benefits of your parents and grandparents. And that's what Senator Kerrey was talking about. That's what a lot of the people--the individual account argument is. If you get money this year, even if it's just $2, if all you get is a 5 percent return on it, if you keep it there for 50 years, pretty soon you're going to have a pretty good chunk of change. That's the argument for having something for children at birth. But I just want to point out, it will not be all that easy to shift from a system where you take all the surplus of any given year and apply it to each individual's future retirement when 90 percent of the money you're paying out now is being used to pay your parents' and grandparents' retirement. So it sounds like a good idea, but it's going to be hard to make the transition. [An audience member requested the President's encouragement for more local discussion forums explaining the details of the Social Security crisis. Panelist Senator Rick Santorum agreed on the need to lay a foundation of public understanding before Congress could act.]
Source
govinfo.gov




