SI
SI
discoversearch

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: combjelly who wrote (214763)1/12/2005 7:15:06 PM
From: Road Walker  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1572953
 
CJ,

re: Even at 68%, the amount of money is not too bad.

And it's there for the rest of your life, regardless if you live to 67 or 100 years old. That's the nice part of insurance, it spreads the risk.

But I still say we strengthen the system. Minor adjustments, and it will be well funded. It's not a crisis, it's routine finance. It should have been done 4 years ago.

If we had a pragmatist instead of an ideologue in the WH there would be no problem.

John



To: combjelly who wrote (214763)1/12/2005 8:38:36 PM
From: Tenchusatsu  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1572953
 
CJ, Even at 68%, the amount of money is not too bad.

Tell that to the current generation of retirees. Or to the next generation of retirees. Or to the one after that.

Tenchusatsu



To: combjelly who wrote (214763)1/12/2005 10:23:42 PM
From: RetiredNow  Respond to of 1572953
 
The problem with all those statistics is that they are making choices between options that are all bad. We should be thinking about how to make the system better, not about choosing between options that pay out less.


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News