To: greenspirit who wrote (9213 ) 1/6/2002 3:29:57 PM From: jttmab Respond to ahhh, I see where your logic and sophistry falls apart. Your assumption is that because someone enjoys and finds an article excellent to read, they have completely bought into every spoken word of the article. And therefore a third party attack based on this assumption is warranted. might have been able to pull off that argument [or at least injected some doubt] if you hadn't responded with a laundry list of rhetoric to begin with. You certainly didn't respond to any of my points. So, it seems not only was my analysis [not assumption] correct and you subsequently confirmed it.As to your social security *rhetoric*. Let me let you in on a big secret. Given current demographic trends the social security system is going bankrupt. If we do nothing it will go bankrupt. Let me say this clearer so you don't miss the meaning. If we allow time to progress without reforming the system, it will not be self-sustaining unless we reform it, or take the money out of the treasury to support it. The rhetoric from mindless "I want to impeach Bush" lovers is that we will "let the elderly starve", or "cut off their benefits" "or bankrupt the treasury by partially privatizing the system". If we end the recession as rapidly as possible by cutting taxes, and creating a better business environment around which organizations may begin to grow again. Then limit the growth of federal spending to the inflation rate, (or just above it) a *suplus* will be created which will off-set the lost revenue from partial privatization. From Chile, to Australia, to Great Britain, partial privatization of previously controlled government retirement is proceeding with mostly positive results. The anti-change left wing "we can't make it work" Americans are holding up sound solutions. No answer is a panacea. And given our current situation we shouldn't expect one. But the forces of anti-change seem to believe in nirvana or nothing.
