Yep. The real question is, what's your attitude toward risk? Do you think it should be shared socially, or do you basically think "fuck everyone else; I'll take care of myself."
If you doubt that the plan is to get rid of Social Security entirely you are simply naive. Look at the structure of all the phase-out proposals. They don't really envision a hybrid system for the longterm. They are all designed to siphon money out of the system, weaken it, trigger the crisis President Bush now falsely claims exists and create an accelerating pressure to complete the process of phase-out.
If you think about it, nothing else would really make sense. If partial phase-out is a good thing, why isn't total phase-out even better? This isn't about solvency; it's about the ideology of people who don't believe in or approve of the near-universal, defined-benefit program America has had for seven decades.
That's the plan and that's what's at stake.
Actually, let's be fair. Many of the advocates of this program think to themselves, "I'll take care of myself; those who can't, should turn to the church. And if they won't turn the church, then f...."