Private accounts a better option

In regard to Jimmy Soni"s Feb. 2 column opposing private accounts for Social Security, I don"t know what planet he lives on if he believes that he will ever see a dime of Social Security or even that Social Security is a good deal for him.

For decades, the government has collected Social Security taxes from employees and employers. Every year, a portion of that money was spent on benefits to recipients in that year, and the remainder was loaned to the government, which then spent it.

All along, the government effectively made a bookkeeping entry to keep track of the loans. In 2018, the government will have to start paying those loans back. In 2042, or about the time that Soni will want to retire, the fund will run completely dry. E

In the meantime, the federal government will have to either raise taxes or cut spending to make up for the money that it cannot borrow from Social Security any more. Benefit cuts will have to result. And, the reason is basically that there are a lot of baby boomers getting older who will live a lot longer than they were expected to when Social Security started.

The government will take 12.4 percent of Soni"s salary to fund social security, half from him and half from his employer. If he makes $60,000 per year for his working life (presumably a low estimate for a Duke grad) and invests that money for himself at a moderate 8 percent, he will have about $2.5 million at retirement. With that money, he could pay himself about $200,000 per year for the rest of his life. Social Security, if it still exists then, would give about $50,000 of benefits.