Are you going to bother to thank him, or spank him?
oh- forgive me...him/her...
:-)
What did YOUR Senator do?
Are you going to bother to thank him, or spank him?
oh- forgive me...him/her...
:-)
Cochrane and Lott are not on the AYE list.
Good on them!
Stupid article.
"Raiding" the trust fund is better than letting it sit full of dollars doing nothing but losing their value.
Do you really think it's a good idea to let your money sit in a back without collecting interest? Maybe we should stuff SS money under a matress so it will be nice and safe from those raiders.
I think we're using the wrong language when discussing Social Security. We can start by calling "raiding" what it really is: the purchase of government bonds that earn interest.
Yes. The government is already investing social security money by buying bonds.
About 90% of those raiders are Democrats. How can this be? None of the raiders appear to be from TX, thank goodness!
(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie. Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")
Demon Rats and the RINOs need to be thrown to the wolves for this.
Looks like we have some ready-made campaign ads against incumbents out of this.
The Social Security "trust fund" is nothing but an IOU.
So these Senators voted to put an IOU on the IOU.
Mark
My senators are Boxer (D-CA) and Feinstein (D-CA). How do you think they voted?
Are you going to bother to thank him, or spank him?
I'm going to call them and cuss 'em out.
This is just wrong ... It's ok if they don't agree with W's ideas for Social Security but now, not only does the so-called "Cooling Saucer" NOT provide alternatives for saving an integral part of the New Deal, they vote to GUT it. I say a pox on all their houses.
I don't understand what the legislation is supposed to do.
The IOU's in the social security trust fund are Federal T-Bills, notes and bonds. That's all Social Security is allowed to invest in, so of course it's going to have IOU's in it.
Did the legislation require them just to sit on the money in Social Security and not invest it at all? Just let inflation eat away at it and not even draw interest?
Until someone explains what the bill was really supposed to do, I view this as just a publicity stunt and probably the 45 that voted against it are the worst kind of politicians.
looks like both of my little commies say one thing and do another.
Boxer and Feinswine are the senators for the state I am living in (they are NOT my senators!) Need I say how they voted?
Won't matter, though...the sheeple of California keep voting for the bloated ones.
Both of mine voted "Aye". Some of ya'll have work to do!
This is the lock-box scheme we derided Gore for.
all of a sudden it's a good idea ?
Buying bonds\notes aint the answer either, that's what we are doing now and they have to be paid some day...with what ?
Pres. Bush offered a viable option that is a good beginning, and it once again made SS the 3rd rail of politics.
I always heard there is NO Social Security trust fund. All taxes go into the general fund.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r109:1:./temp/~r109uL7oMb:e230497:
I believe if you scroll down this page, you will be able to read the debate pro/con on this---on the Senate floor.
I think it will clear some misconceptions up about this amendment...but, will also PROVE the mindset of the DEMS and the ones voting against it.
BTW..this was during a Budget debate..the actual change in Social Security would actually have to come out of the Finance committee and appropriations.
THOSE DIRTY RATS! I hope Republicans win control of the Senate this November.