The two papers that make up the core of this book address a fundamental question in the current debate over Social Security, whether to shift, in part or entirely, from today's pay-as-you-go system to one in which individuals retain control over the investment of their funds and therefore personally bear the associated risk. John Shoven argues yes, Henry Aaron no.
Related books and articles
International Security Management and the United Nations By Muthiah Alagappa; Takashi Inoguchi United Nations University Press, 1999
Social Security Reform in Advanced Countries: Evaluating Pension Finance By Toshihiro Ihori; Toshiaki Tachibanaki Routledge, 2002
Population Growth: Its Effect on Human Security with Emphasis on South Africa By Kruys, G. P. H. Strategic Review for Southern Africa, Vol. 30, No. 2, November 2008
Peer-reviewed publications on Questia are publications containing articles which were subject to evaluation for accuracy and substance by professional peers of the article's author(s).
Recent Decisions- SUPREME COURT By Journal of Law and Education, Vol. 35, No. 2, April 2006
Sovereignty and Delegation in International Organizations By Epstein, David O'Halloran, Sharyn Law and Contemporary Problems, Vol. 71, No. 1, Winter 2008
Our Best Anti-Poverty Program: Private Accounts Cannot Match Social Security's Guaranteed Benefits By Aaron, Henry The American Prospect, Vol. 16, No. 2, February 2005
The Doable Dozen: Whether or Not the Democrats Have a Big Idea, They-And Some Republicans, Too!-Have a Slew of Very Good Small Ones. Here's an Unscientific List of 12 That Don't Ask for the Moon but Deserve to See the Light of Day By The American Prospect, Vol. 17, No. 6, June 2006
Social Security Miscue By Edwards, James R., Jr. The Washington Times (Washington, DC), February 26, 2003
Left or Right-Which Way, America? By Peterson, William H. The Washington Times (Washington, DC), March 22, 2009
Budget Deal Ignores Long-Term Impact of Senior Boom By St Louis Post-Dispatch (MO), August 6, 1997