Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Impeach George W. Bush -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (17049)	11/20/2002 12:20:13 PM
From: Kenneth E. Phillipps	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93284

Neocon, I am glad to hear you consider the obligation to repay those notes a solemn obligation of the United States Treasury. By the way, you are not for reducing the social security entitlement or raising the retirement age, are you?

To: Neocon who wrote (17049)	11/20/2002 4:26:51 PM
From: dave rose	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93284

<<<The point is that as long as the government pays off on the Treasury notes, it does nothing to harm Social Security, regardless of what it is using the money for.>>> Did you mean to say "what it is using the money FOR" or "what it is using FOR money"?

To: Neocon who wrote (17049)	11/20/2002 10:14:13 PM
From: Kenneth E. Phillipps	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93284

It is not only the Social Security fund which holds IOUs from the Treasury. The Highway Trust Fund has also been running a surplus for many years and holds IOUs.

To: Neocon who wrote (17049)	11/21/2002 1:23:03 AM
From: Steve Dietrich	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93284

When Bush was promoting his tax cut he repeatedly said that we had a 5.6 trillion dollar surplus projected over the next 10 years. But half of that projected surplus was due to SS surpluses. Still he used them to justify a cut not in payroll taxes but in income and estate taxes. That's appropriation. In the Presidential Commission on Social Security's preliminary report they declared that SS was in trouble in 2006, as soon as SS would begin to rely on the interest and principal from the Treasury notes they hold. That report was endorsed by the administration. They explained that that money "isn't really there." If that money can't be counted on, if the SS surpluses are used to justify and ultimately finance (as we are now running deficits) cuts in income and estate taxes, isn't the word "appropriate" appropriate? Steve