It's also important to note that Bush has acknowledged that benefit cuts would be required.
Important distinction: these are benefit cuts beyond the amount that benefits would be reduced via the payroll tax diversions.
That means that even if you don't participate in privatization, that you would still be facing benefit cuts.
Familiar pattern: Bush uses the privatization plan as justification for the cuts, and the the need for cuts as justification for the privatization plan. Classic dependency loop. When the truth is that if you didn't privatize, you wouldn't need an extreme cut like that.
You ever bought a car for the sole reason to get to the job that you wouldn't need if you didn't have those expensive car payments?