SS funds should be placed where?????

Nor did I (make fun of, that is) It's one of the few things we agreed on, in principle.

Look, you're not gonna get me to defend Bush's spending habits.

But this statement insinuates that he, working alone in the dead of night, "stole" our SS. We both know that's not accurate. There's plenty of blame to go around.

 

Yeah, I'm sure Reagan stayed up at night, thinking: "Now...how can I defraud mr. billwald out of his money?" Please.

If a government rep came to my house and said, "Mister Rbell, we'll make this offer: You won't see a dime of your SS, ever. But in return, starting today, you don't have to contribute a dime, either."

Now, obviously, there's an age at which that becomes a terrible deal. But at this point, where I am...I'd take it in a New York minute.

Yep. In fact, if you tried to run a SS-type "program," you'd go to jail.

I'm preparing my future as if I'll never see a dime of SS. And frankly, I think I'll see a greatly reduced benefit, if anything.

 

All I'm saying is that if Gore had been elected I think less of the Soc. Sec. funds would have been spent on the war and there might be a surplus today to help with the retirement of the Baby Boomers. Do you agree that we'd be better off now if that had been done?

 

For all I know Gore could have been the same giddy spender that Obama is proving to be. Electing Gore would not have necessarily resulted in a surplus.

We would be better off if we were allowed to simply save the money - tax deferred - for ourselves.

 

That change would be disastrous to current retirees including my 93 year old mother.

 

How about allowing individuals to simply opt out if they so desire?

 

OK...first, I think that Congress wouldn't let it happen. They're too addicted to spending. They wouldn't let Bush do the privatization, and they wouldn't have let Gore do the "lockbox."

Second...I think Gore is so pathologically consumed with "climate change," that he would have foregone saving any money so that he could rescue his girlfriend, mother earth, from the clutches of evil Americans.

 

I don't think you should be using SS funds to buy a fishing boat. Sunday School offerings are supposed to be used for Sunday School. Are you robbing God?

 

Electing Clinton resulted in a surplus. I'd say his VP would have done the same. The really out of control spender was Bush. Obama is spending a lot of money to get the economy on its feet again after two deep Bush recessions.

 

Seriously? Bush's 8 year term ended with budget deficit of less than $500 Billion. Obama is 8 months in and we're staring at $1.85 Trillion Budget deficit. And you want to propose that, between the two, Bush was the one with out of control spending? Whatever happened to intellectual honesty?
One is as bad as the other.

 

Now, now Theolog...you are new here so I will explain. Alatide is a small child who only knows what she has been told by T.V., public education, and whatever rap album she had the money to buy. Money is out of the question; unless you want to talk about her allowance.:laugh:

 

Luckily for Bush, his depression didn't hit in full force until the fall of 2008. The entire world was impacted and he conveniently slipped out the back door. He left Obama holding the bag to get us out of that mess. Most of Obama's excess spending has been due to prevent an economic disaster.

 

Interesting phrase.

If Obama's spending is in excess than by definition it is not necessary.

 

A large majority of "the one's" spending is scheduled for the out years and has no impact on the current economy other than increasing the probability of high inflation and high interest rates in the near future which will in fact be an economic disaster.

 

Just curious... .would you say your church is a "Mosaic" church?