Posted on 12/01/2004 4:27:47 AM PST by Lance Romance
CREDIT the Bush administration with this. It is at least imaginative in its improvidence. The administration's plan to modernize Social Security rests on this novel concept: We should embark on another borrowing binge, this time in the name of increasing national savings.
|
That, according to The New York Times, is the method the administration has apparently settled upon to fund personal investment accounts as part of Social Security. Or, as Joshua B. Bolten, director of the Office of Management and Budget, told the Times: "I believe there's a strong case that this approach not only makes sense as a matter of savings policy but is also fiscally prudent."
There's a much stronger case that it isn't.
Granted, there's a certain first-glance appeal to the president's notion of allowing younger workers to invest some portion of their Social Security payroll tax in the market. But like much of what this administration proposes, that nostrum sounds better at first hearing than it turns out to be upon subsequent investigation.
|
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
You can see where this article is going. What these people want it to keep throwing good money after bad into a failing system, instead of giving people the freedom of using their money the way they want.
Myself, I would forgo all the money I have paid into the system if I could be exempt from paying anymore SS taxes.
FARAH STOCKMAN'S Nov. 29 news story about a presidential directive allowing a not-so-covert CIA operation to collect whomever the CIA decided needed collecting and fly them to countries that would torture them for us is further evidence that this president is not fit to represent America to the rest of the world ("Terror suspects' torture claims have Mass. link," Page A1).
|
How can we, the majority of the American people, possibly sit by and quietly condone such actions? This president is bereft of any human decency or ethical behavior when it comes to engaging with any entity that does not subscribe to his moral values. Where on the scale of moral values does this directive fall? Perhaps we are all consigned to be nothing but a collection of witnesses to the Nero-like destruction by the leader of the world's most powerful nation of every ethical, moral, and spiritual value to which we profess to subscribe. Or will we find a means of rallying ourselves to speak out against such egregious policies? I am looking for a bandwagon to jump on and a tub to thump that will say clearly, "This is not me or my America that would do this." JACK ZETTLER |
Heck, I have a very liberal daughter-in-law who calls it a Ponzi scheme. I think SS would disappear quickly if enough Americans knew what a screwy system it actually is. You have many Americans thinking that it's God's gift from heaven when it's actually money taken from them by the Feds and basically squandered. Liberals just can't get over the prospect that maybe one of their treasured creations is a dinosaur and should be dismantled. What libs create should, according to libs, never be destroyed whether it turns out to be a lemon or not.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.