CalJunket |
|
|
Campus personalities present and past Rebecca C. Brown and Tommaso Sciortino tackle the issues. This week on a very special CalJunket: Rebecca learns not to chew with her mouth open and Tommaso finds out his best friend is addicted to no-doze. Site feed: caljunket.blogspot.com/atom.xml
AIM Rebecca:
Archives
|
Sunday, December 19, 2004
(a rant by a man driven crazy by republican idiocy) I mean, if you take the “lock-box” seriously (it would be political suicide not to) then SS is good till 2055 and depending on the projections might not ever have a problem. If on the other hand you disregard the lock-box idea, than SS isn’t the problem, the general fund is. What’s the deal? Why are the Republicans so fixed on making sure politicians in 2055 won’t have to possibly put more money into social security or increase taxes? The federal government has that problem right now! Hell, compared to the general fund, or medicare, or anything else you can name, Social Security won’t need much maintenance at all. So why do they want to focus on social security? And how can we even take seriously a prediction about 2055? By that time, won’t we be able to just have our robot workers pay extra for social security? Won’t we be able to genetically de-age the elderly and have them continue to lead productive lives? Heck, couldn’t we pay for social security with the proceeds of the Martian real estate boom alone? Why did I grow up hearing horror stories about social security? Who stood to gain from dire predictions? Why is it that if we assume the republican stock market projections (the one’s they use to support their Social Security abolition plan) Social Security will be solvent FOREVER? And why is it that pretty much every other country that privatized their pension system found it to be a horrible failure? Why don’t the big news organizations cover it? Answer me this!
Comments:
|