* Dave Land ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > Actually, yes. People are receiving their checks.
.... > I'm sorry, Erik, but I refuse to call a 70-year history of trying to > destroy Social Security They succeeded really well in destroying SS, didn't they? 70 years of trying and it has done nothing but increase and increase in cost for those 70 years. Try living in the real world, instead of paranoid fantasy land, huh? > Once again, yes. People are receiving their checks. > > I couldn't agree with you more on this point: "let us keep it the way > it is." What do you mean about "continuously spending more and more on > it?" I would have thought it was pretty clear. What part of spending more and more do you have trouble understanding? How high a percentage of GDP does SS spending have to get before it can stabilize? 70 years of increases is apparently not enough for you. > Wouldn't that be what the President is planning to do? No. One of Bush's guidelines is that the payroll tax not be increased. That means not increasing the cost of SS. Also, by keeping some of the money out of the govt's hands with partial privatization, the govt will likely be forced towards less wasteful spending (and prevented from spending some of the "SS money" on non-SS items). -- Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/ _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
