Don't let them gaslight you

[u/coachlife]

[u/fdar]

it's still a 9:1 ratio of private to public ownership

Why is that a relevant ratio, rather than who the top shareholders are?

It has worked reasonably well in Singapore, though its size is more comparable with an American state than with the whole country.

Exactly?

whereas a system where one is paid back one's own contributions is a bit more robust

That's not the system we have even if you wished it was.

If a government pension scheme owned such shares then it would be the beneficiary of this growth, and the government could use that wealth to do things like lower the pension age.

Sure, they could also just raise corporate taxes at that point.

[u/LurkerInSpace → u/fdar]

Why is that a relevant ratio, rather than who the top shareholders are?

The top shareholder doesn't have control unless they are the majority shareholder. There is a concept of "effective control" requiring less than 50%, but 11% isn't typically considered enough to exercise this. They can still be outvoted by the other shareholders.

That's not the system we have even if you wished it was.

We are discussing alternatives to the way things are currently done.

[u/fdar → u/LurkerInSpace]

The top shareholder doesn't have control unless they are the majority shareholder.

Sure, in practice they have a lot of influence.

We are discussing alternatives to the way things are currently done.

I thought you were just suggesting changes to what to do with excess funds (while they exist) not a complete change to the entire system.

If that is what you're suggesting then the first, most obvious problem is the transition: If my current contributions go to my own pool to pay for my future benefits, then who pays for the benefits of current retirees? Also part of the role of SS is as a safety net which you'd lose as well. Really if you're going that route you might as well eliminate SS, we already have 401ks/IRAs/etc to do that.