Saving Social Security
This is definitely a great discussion to have. Why? Because it demonstrates the bankruptcy of the Left. (I'll leave it at that, because I like to believe that the ideas of Liberals and Democrats have not been entirely subsumed by the Left.)
The Crisis. Am I to understand that we are to relax until it's a crisis? Would you recommend the same approach to, say, global warming? Hmmmm?
The Choice. Since Bush's approach is to allow each citizen choose his route to retirement, i.e., all government controlled (current system) or partially owned and controlled by Everyman. What reasons can you think of that mandate no personal control (and no personal ownership of the portion one may choose)? I thought you were Pro-Choice?!
The Math. Don't tangle with me on this. Not even "economists" like Paul Krugman, columnist for the New York Times. It's simple: if few choose the ownership option, not much will change. If many do, it will be reflected in the pay-as-you-go system the government uses currently.
The Vision-thing. Once again, this president is proving he's way beyond his critics in seeing into the future and boldly going where, well, you know...
The Crisis. Am I to understand that we are to relax until it's a crisis? Would you recommend the same approach to, say, global warming? Hmmmm?
The Choice. Since Bush's approach is to allow each citizen choose his route to retirement, i.e., all government controlled (current system) or partially owned and controlled by Everyman. What reasons can you think of that mandate no personal control (and no personal ownership of the portion one may choose)? I thought you were Pro-Choice?!
The Math. Don't tangle with me on this. Not even "economists" like Paul Krugman, columnist for the New York Times. It's simple: if few choose the ownership option, not much will change. If many do, it will be reflected in the pay-as-you-go system the government uses currently.
The Vision-thing. Once again, this president is proving he's way beyond his critics in seeing into the future and boldly going where, well, you know...
posted by Rance Fasoldt at 9:31 AM
2 Comments:
It has been said that it will cost trillions of dollars to change the system to a partialy self ownership one. Why do they not just pump that money into our current system? Also bush said that he would now be looking to increasing taxes, if he did that, why couldn't he just put those raised taxes into our currently working system?
Well, you have nailed it. Here's why. The opposition to any partial privatization is only masked as being economically driven. Opponents want to keep control in the government's (read: bureaucracy's) hands. That way you will have to rely on the government for your welfare. Those for privatization want YOU to be in control. I just want you to be able to choose. Seems fair, eh?
Post a Comment
<< Home