SS is like "whole" life insurance -- not just insurance.

[gulliver]

I like the frame of pointing out that Social Security is insurance and not an annuity. It was all over on America Left. The one thing that is missing is tying SS to "whole" insurance.

Whole life insurance is something people understand. It is insurance with a guaranteed payoff. Insurance plus.

Why is it compulsory? Well, so is car insurance. SS is compulsory because it is in the best interest of the country that people secure their retirement from disaster. People aren't free to opt out of car insurance for the same reason.

Also, I still think it would be a good idea to frame Republicans as thinking Social Security is just another form of welfare. They are wide open to that punch, IMO.

[Kokonoe]

1. Good point,I remember when the replican talking point was

there is no way people deserve what ss they get, Because they only pay in a fraction of what they receive upon retirement

[WillowTree]

2. Sorry, but those are two terrible analogies.

First of all, any financial planner will tell you that whole life insurance is one of the absolute worst ways to use your money. Horrible return on investment.

Secondly, though most people are unaware of it and most couldn't afford to do it if they were, in most states you can opt out of automobile insurance by posting a Financial Responsibility bond.

[gulliver]

3. This is a special kind of "whole" insurance.

Your employer pays half. Also, it covers long term disability and survivors. I don't buy whole life, but I would if it had the features that SS has.

I think most people are aware that some states let you self-insure. You're quibbling there. The bond you are talking about is compulsory insurance.

[gulliver]

5. OK. I give on the "whole life" framing.

You're right. A lot of people will tune out (as evidenced by the post above as well).

I still think the reasoning for SS being compulsory is sound. Also, I do think Republicans are ready to be cold-cocked for thinking of SS as a form of welfare.

Meant this in response to Nickster...

[Nickster]

4. You're setting yourself up to fail right at the start.

Whole life insurance has managed to get a terrible rap from years and years of bashing on the one side from get rich quick investment managers and terribly mis-used by bad insurance salesmen on the other side. Using that analogy is a no-win. People already hate whole life and they don't know why, so your framing will just lead them to hate your idea without hearing its merits.

[applegrove]

6. Yeah and what is wrong with sharing the risk of poverty across a whole

mighty nation? Don't let them take it away from you!