Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: lbryce

Regarding benefits, one of Ronald Reagan’s objections to social security was that the beneficiary could not choose who could receive payments after death. It was and is limited to a spouse. He believed that since it was your money, you paid for it you should be able to choose, especially if you were unmarried or widowed.


11 posted on 03/28/2013 4:57:31 AM PDT by xkaydet65
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: xkaydet65

the solution is to privatize the inheritance rights.

right now the government inherits the money.

so it goes automatically to the husband/wife intestate and if unmarried then? and then? and then? and then?


14 posted on 03/28/2013 10:18:24 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: xkaydet65

I agree, this is where the rubber meets the road. It was never about “hospital visitation” or other things. It was and always has been about money. When I asked a liberal “Christian” about who was paying for this new class of beneficiaries they just looked dumbfounded.
Most of the useful idiots I know just simply have failed to realize it’s gonna cost a lot of taxpayer money. I like Reagan’s thinking on this, very libertarian.
Does the CBO have numbers on the cost of this? I have not found them, but sometimes I miss things like that.


20 posted on 04/01/2013 11:01:10 AM PDT by momincombatboots (Back to West by G-d Virginia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson