>> If I understand you correctly, you would have created a government pension system along the lines of SS but with some different accounting?
Well, it was long before I was on the planet, and a lot of people who, at some point, believed government to be basically evil, didn't feel that way during the time of FDR. FDR was revered then, because he DID do the necessary things to spur the recovery in the early 30s. Even Milton Friedman supported that, and that is where FDR got the power to move toward fascism. I am not an FDR hater.
(I might well have been a Democrat had the party not gone sideways in later years starting with the McGovern effort and followed by Carter, who was a total disaster). I supported McGovern in 72, but that was before I had much understanding of politics.
To your point, I might have supported a SS program that made sense.
I generally don't support programs that can't be paid for. For example, as I'm sure you remember, it was clear ACA could not be paid for, so I opposed it. Looking back, I made the correct decision: It hasn't materially increased the percentage participation in comparison to the vast costs involved (including the ultimate, illegal writeoff of a half billion in student loans by a corrupt political party).
So, I would argue that a smaller program that covered the same people with less money for the well-to-do and not taking in other programs as stepchildren. While I think Medicare was needed, it should have been more limited in scope due to its larger economic effect and its obvious budgetary failure.
Bet that as it may, we're in this mess and we won't be getting out of it before China owns us. So, it is what is.
|
