Can anyone justify NOT having the Wall?

Horn6721 said:
Lol I know it sounds like I want nanny government
But You know people just won't plan for retirement on their own and there will be millions
Heck they won't even plan for an emergency
So what will happen to them when they don't have a home? They will get SNAP but what else?
Click to expand...

I know the pure libertarian position is to not force people to save or invest and then tell grandma and grandpa to scrounge for private charity if they fail to save (or do save but run into some bad luck) and if they can't find any to basically f*ck off. Realistically, we're not going to do that. We're too generous, and the elderly are too powerful of a voting bloc to allow that to happen. That means there's going to be a social welfare program to keep the elderly from being destitute or homeless. The only issue is whether you want just a few who fall through the cracks to be getting it or want everybody to be getting it like they are now.
 
horninchicago said:
You mean like the last 90 years except people knew the money was deducted and then the politicians mismanaged and/or stole it.

Yes, that should work.
Click to expand...

To be fair, the politicians started spending the money when the program became "pay as you go" back in the late '30s. This allowed FICA taxes to be kept lower and to pay out benefits immediately. It was a cheap political trick that benefited both workers (in the immediate term) and retirees, but the public was all for it. And of course, it put us on the path to bankruptcy.
 
Mr. Deez said:
To be fair, the politicians started spending the money when the program became "pay as you go" back in the late '30s. This allowed FICA taxes to be kept lower and to pay out benefits immediately. It was a cheap political trick that benefited both workers (in the immediate term) and retirees, but the public was all for it. And of course, it put us on the path to bankruptcy.
Click to expand...
[Mack] And, that's fair. [/Brown]

A little markup nostalgia for the Horn Fans out there.
 
Horn6721 said:
hic
The difference as I understand it is it would be directly related to the taxpayer
Not a generic total fund
Click to expand...

Right. Though the government would require the savings and investment, the money would never go into government hands. It would belong entirely to the worker and would never be used to pay anyone but the retiree and/or his or her designated beneficiaries.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Back
Top