Replies

It's babies or immigrants, folks. Take your pick. We cannot arrive at 2025 with two workers per retiree.

Jeez. Another republican so-called conservative recommending that our government continue to allow America to be invaded by millions of 3rd world peasants every year so we can “maybe” float the actuarially bankrupt democrat welfare programs (SS/Medicaid/Medicare) for another generation. Forget about Reforming these programs. It is so much more politically expedient to put a happy face on the unmitigated disaster of illegal immigration.

Hey Smart Guy, what happens in 2030 when the next MUCH larger generation starts to retire? Are we going to import China, India along with whoever is left in Mexico so there are enough workers to make good on FDR's and LBJ's old Ponzi Schemes.

I have an idea: how about we FIX those GD Democrat fraud ridden fiascoes so they don't require a perpetual increase in our population to work. A fix that is actuarially sound and does not necessitate that America surrender its sovereignty to the 3rd World to pay off the Grampas and Grannies of the future.

If only democrats fought for the republican agenda like many republicans do for the democrats' agenda.

Forget about Reforming these programs.

That's right: forget about it. Because it's not about "programs." It's about how many people are working vs how many people, young and old, there are to support, who are not working.

And forget about all your rhetoric concerning Democrats and Social Security and FDR and LBJ. That's all noise. Money is not the issue. Money is just a symbol. What matters is the quantity of actual goods and services in the economy at the time, and that is a function of how many people are working, not how many "dollars" somebody might have in a vault somewhere.

There is no such thing as "fixing the programs so that they work." That's a financial illusion. People can't eat money. They can only eat food, and that has to be produced by people who work. If the workers aren't there because they were never born, no amount of money fixes that. No "program" can fix that. The only thing that could have fixed it was having more children 20 years previously.

Setting the country up for a culture that euthanizes its old to get them out of the way is hardly a "conservative" position. But that's what you're doing, calling yourself a conservative the whole way. You'd multiply the Culture of Death, and call it "actuarially sound." And maybe it is. But it's not how I want to do it. Killing people to get them out of the way is not on my conservative agenda.

Hey Smart Guy, what happens in 2030 when the next MUCH larger generation starts to retire?

I'll bet you thought that was a conundrum for which there is no answer. But there is one, and Bush found it. By diverting money out of the useless Social Security "trust fund," which Congress just pisses away as fast as it comes in, and into the capital markets, it becomes possible for business to invest more heavily in things that make people more productive. If productivity rises enough, it won't matter that there are only 2 people per retiree, because they will be producing the output that required 4 people in our day. Or at least, we'd better hope it turns out that way. If it doesn't... well, there's always euthanasia. But we ought to try Bush's method first.

Hey Smart Guy, what happens in 2030 when the next MUCH larger generation starts to retire? Are we going to import China, India along with whoever is left in Mexico so there are enough workers to make good on FDR's and LBJ's old Ponzi Schemes.

I say we plant 40,000 50-story apartment buildings around Bush's place in Texas. Let him experience this lunatic plan close up.