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

To: Second Amendment First

The twenty and out fell by the wayside long ago in most retirement places. I do not know about this particular one.

The problem is that many of us live in a manner that our wages accustom us to. Many people spend what they make and do not save a lot. Even when we save we get a 1% return on our money in today’s interest rates.

The story says substantial cuts. I suppose most retired people on a Government pension could stand a 10% reduction without a lot of undue pressure,and hardship but what is substantial?

Many young people who are paying into Social Security now and are afraid they will see nobenefits are ready and willing to hose down the older pensioners. They cannot see into their future when they get hosed down.

Many of us older pensioners are supporting our kids who are out of work, borrowing from us to pay their Union dues, and house payments. Trying to help them save what they have worked for. Having them move back in with us when they cannot.

It’s easy to say screw those pensioners, they have been on the gravy train too long, but we worked for the better part of our lives we bought, we saved,we paid our tax’s and paid into the pension.
Are we willing to help in this bad situation? If we have to yes, but will we have our pensions returned to us when it is done or will we continue being taxed. That’s really what this is. A tax on pensioners.


16 posted on 07/21/2011 7:23:52 AM PDT by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]


To: Venturer

The young workers are staring at the 15 trillion dollar debt that they didn’t run up and are saying “I should pay this why?”


21 posted on 07/21/2011 7:30:44 AM PDT by listenhillary (Social Justice is the epitome of injustice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

To: Venturer

“The story says substantial cuts. I suppose most retired people on a Government pension could stand a 10% reduction without a lot of undue pressure,and hardship but what is substantial?”

I realize this is completely off-topic, but I find not a single proposal to the budget/debt ceiling brouhaha acceptable.

A “balanced budget” amendment is useless posturing and should be taken off the table.

Why not freeze the debt ceiling, and instead pass legislation that requires that ALL government expenditures be reduced by, say, 8% for two years? This would include ANY and EVERY payment the government makes to ANYone (individual, organization, government agencey, corporation, etc.), with the exception of interest payment on the debt.

To include Social Security, Medicare, Defense - NO EXCEPTIONS. EVERYTHING GETS CUT.

The reduction must be small, but it must be UNIVERSAL. EVERYONE must “bear the burden”. ASIDE: perhaps an exception might be made for military personal on active duty in combat zones.

Just dreamin’....


52 posted on 07/21/2011 8:55:27 AM PDT by Grumplestiltskin (I may look new, but it's only deja vu!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | 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