Mention Social Security to most people and watch the life drain out of their eyes. I’m guilty of it, too, because discussing bureaucracy is just no fun. On the other hand, the government does take a bite out of your paycheck every two weeks. And nearly everyone is concerned about where their money is going. (Although if you’re not one of those people, feel free to send me the unused portion of your paycheck.)

Social Security works like this: a little more than 6 percent of your paycheck goes to payroll taxes; your employer matches that amount unless you make more than $88,000. In that case, you and your employer’s contribution is capped at $5,456. That money is used to send checks to retirees and the disabled.

In about 40 years, give or take, the Social Security system is probably going to run into money problems. People are living longer and having fewer children, so the ratio of workers-to-retirees is shrinking. At some point, many economists say we’ll have to either reduce the benefits we pay out or raise the payroll tax.

The president’s solution is to privatize the system – in other words, to take the money from Social Security and put it in the stock market. That would be the famous Enron, WorldCom, took-a-nose-dive-five-years-ago stock market. Not the safest choice for your nest egg.

Although Social Security money is supposed to be put into a trust fund, the government often borrows it to pay for other programs. The reason it’s able to do this is because Social Security is one of the most successful government programs ever; in some years, it even collects more taxes than it pays out in benefits. The problem is that instead of banking the extra money for years when there’s a temporary shortfall, Congress tends to blow it on things like bling, custom ring tones and furnishing Dick Cheney’s secret volcano lair. In exchange, Congress gives the trust fund government bonds – which are pretty much the safest investment you can make – as IOUs. Which brings us to today’s “crisis.”

A Feb. 26 New York Times article quotes one of President Bush’s campaign speeches: “Social Security will be bust in 10 years unless there are some changes.” Problem is, that campaign speech is from when Bush unsuccessfully ran for Congress. Back in 1978. I’d say it’s time to learn a new song.

Another problem is, the president’s plan doesn’t even allow you the freedom to pick which stocks and bonds to put your money into. According to the New York Times, the government would place tight restrictions on where you could put your money. On top of that, the Congressional Budget Office says the president’s plan would actually give workers less money than if we did nothing at all.

So why would Bush advocate for a plan that gives workers less money?

According to the Center for Economic and Policy Research, Social Security takes only half a penny from every dollar it collects to run the program; by contrast, private accounts in England and Chile – where they’ve already privatized their countries’ Social Security – cost about 15 cents per dollar to administrate. That’s a sweet deal if you’re an investment broker, and a raw deal for pretty much everyone else.

A better solution would be to take the $88,000 cap off the payroll tax. Let the people who make more pay their 6.2 percent just like the rest of us, and use the extra revenue to shore up the system.

Columns reflect the opinion of the author and not necessarily that of the Northern Star staff.