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

To: kabar
Her heinous stated that she didn't see social security funding as a problem. That if we did nothing people would still be getting 70% of their benefits.

So, to her, a 30% cut in benefits is fine????????????????????

156 posted on 11/26/2006 2:03:11 PM PST by OldFriend (FALLEN HERO JEFFREY TOCZYLOWSKI, REST IN PEACE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies ]


To: OldFriend
Her heinous stated that she didn't see social security funding as a problem. That if we did nothing people would still be getting 70% of their benefits.

Don't believe what they say. First of all, the Dems like to say that the system doesn't go broke until 2042, but that is based on cashing in the IOUs in the SSTF, which means that the USG must come up with the money to redeem these non-market T-bills. There is a reason why almost half of the $9 trillion national debt includes the SSTF, which is listed as intra-governmental holdings. This is another word for liabilities.

SS is a pay as you go system. It starts going negative in 2017, which is why the problem will be addressed no matter who is in the WH or who controls Congress.

168 posted on 11/26/2006 2:35:58 PM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | 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