Posted on 02/09/2005 7:35:55 AM PST by ceoinva
USA Next's Charlie Jarvis is on The O'Reilly Factor Thursday night at 8 and 11 P.M. (Eastern time). He will launch a new line of attack on the liberal AARP. Check it out! Tell your family and friends to tune in!
Okay: I see you've out up your warlike shield. What,pray tell,makes AARP "liberal" ?
(They had a VERY illuminating article on how the Brits set up a private account system-and how they came to REGRET it.)
The AARP derives its power from its ability to herd old people into the polls to vote DemocRAT.
Have you studied the causes the AARP supports? If so, you can't be serious asking that question. They've been for gun control, for Bill Clinton, and now against SS reforms--that just to name a few. We are the right age for AARP, but we've never joined. All it took was reading their "magazine" in the doctor's office one day over 10 years ago to realize this wasn't the group for us.
There have been several articles/threads about liberal AARP already here on FR. I'll be watching on Thurs; it's been discussed on the O'Reilly Factor before.
There's where we differ.
From NJ too, BTW. I guess you're referring to O'Reilly. I watch segments of his show depending on the guest(s)/topic. Just saw a post on our topic.
I look at the problem this way (being an old farm boy).
When SS was initiated,it was done so without "start-up" funding. This was the equivalent of a farmer feeding next year's seed corn to his cows.
The cows NEEDED fattening up,but popular perception did not permit withdrawal of corn from the "national granary"-because that would have been "welfare"...especially when the nation was in the grip of a major depression.If there were to be withdrawals from the granary,they would have to benefit younger,more at risk people.
Consequently,the cattle flourished.They even started giving milk later in life,having more calves,and...needing more corn.
The problem was the seed corn. Every year,there was less and less of it to plant,and you didn't have to be a genius to figure out the cornfields would soon be more brown than green.
I think we should rectify the original mistake;that we should "plant" a hefty sum of tax dollars now,by buying securities,holding them,and re-investing the proceeds.
I'm told money so invested-if tax free during the "growing cycle" will double in 10-12 years-just in time to "rescue" SS from bankruptcy.
Whether such an idea is "liberal" or "conservative" I don't claim to know,but is does seem worth discussing.
Well, the Dems were for private accounts & the term "crisis" when Clinton said both, but now that Pres. Bush says so they're against it. Chile, as well as 3 cities in Texas (that opted out of the SS system) have done well with "privatization".
Before anybody gets TOO excited over privatization,it might be helpful to examine another country's experience with it:
http://www.aarp.org/bulletin/socialsec/ss_britain.html
Please FReepmail me if you want on or off my FoxFan list. *Warning: This can be a high-volume ping list at times.
Thanks for the ping!
Your post suggests-but does not say-you are opposed to SS to begin with. A lot of my Libertarian friends are...BUT,I can't help notice,when they reach eligibility for the program,they are not bashful about reaching out with both hands for their checks !
Apart from that,I hardly think it is "liberal propaganda" to suggest the world's largest retirement insurance program should have cash reserves.
Even in Texas-which was once notorious for under-funded insurance companies-you have to be able to show the regulators you have enough cash reserves to pay out claims...BEFORE you get a license to operate.
SS NEVER met that test,and I think it is time that situation was remedied.
I'd love to see an explanation of how diverting funds from an increasingly cash-strapped program,and undertaking a monstrously complicated "private account" system,will do anything but grease some campaign contributors' palms,and hasten the destruction of the program.
Like millions of Americans, I voted for GWB,but that does NOT mean I support each and every idea he proposes,and am going to march in lock-step (the way the "Liberals" do with their "heroes".)
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.