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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (195716)	7/24/2004 8:16:29 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1572965

Do your homework if you want to discuss it with me. I'm not tejek; I don't shoot off my mouth without knowing WTF I'm talking about. Hey, POS.....how many times have I caught you in a lie. It wasn't done privately; it was done on this board. And everyone who posts here knows that you have a tendency to play hard and fast with the truth. So instead of shooting your mouth off about SS, you best come up with some facts and links to back up your argument before you become a complete laughing stock. LMAO!

To: i-node who wrote (195716)	7/25/2004 2:59:51 PM
From: Thomas M.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572965

<<< ... To avoid having to raise contribution rates or reduce benefits when that happens, the Boomers' work-life surplus contributions are going into the SS Trust Fund and being invested in earning assets, much as in private pension funds. But since the U.S. government doesn't risk private-business failure or outsource closings, SS doesn't need to "fully-fund" its total future pension obligations, as private companies are required to do. Only the Baby Boom bulge requires full-funding. Thus, privatizers who say that the SS system is "a Ponzi scheme with huge unfunded pension liabilities" are either ignorant of the facts or intentionally falsifying them ... >>> iea-macro-economics.org Tom