From: Samantha Atkins (samantha@objectent.com)
Date: Fri Jun 22 2001 - 02:45:05 MDT
Spike Jones wrote:
>
> > > Spike Jones wrote: ...the candidate who favored paying
> > > down the debt was very nearly elected by his creditors,
> > > the Social Security hordes ...
>
> Samantha Atkins wrote:
>
> > Huh? It is not the Social Security receiving folks who the are
> > the creditors for the government's debt.
>
> My claim is that as soon as one retires, one becomes a creditor
> of the U.S. government, for that government *owes* the retirees
> their social security benefits. My case is simply that it is a mistake
> to think of social security benefits as anything other than entitlements.
> It is not welfare, it is not a gift. The money paid into social security
> during the working years should not be thought of as a tax, but
> rather a forced investment. The benefits collected after retirement
> is the payback. So retirees are creditors of the government as it
> pays them their money.
>
> It is in the best interest of the government to carry a debt to a
> large number of voters, to ensure its own survival. The debt would
> discourage revolutions against a government that owes a lot
> of voters money. spike
When said government spends most of the "investment" on its own
gluttony and still goes trillions into the hole then I would
think all the investors would have a large stake in revolution
to toss out such rascals or at least be able to take the money
to sounder investments. There are ways to phase out SS and pay
of the creditors and even do so much more handsomely. So the
existence of these creditors is not a prop to the existing
system.
Social security is an insult. I see it as reparations paid by
the government to those it has robbed and cheated for their
entire working lives.
- samantha
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:08:14 MST