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 (224488)	3/16/2005 8:00:04 PM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1571655

re: It is fundamentally wrong to beleive that this problem can be solved by raising taxes or cutting benefits. Crap. the "ponzi scheme" rhetoric is more Rove marketing (don't get me wrong, I have the deepest respect for Rove). It's a tax, it pays for benefits. It's no different than a tax that pays benefits for Vietnam vets. It's no different than a tax that pays for roads. It is different than the shell game that Bush is playing with the Medicare drug benefit, or not including the cost of Iraq/Afghanistan is the budget, and calling them "emergency" appropriations. re: Bush's either -- but he begins to do something to make less problematic. That's SOMETHING. Bush is making it more problematic (+++$4Trillion in debt)... you know that, we know that... you think we are idiots? Of course you do... that's what you say in almost every post. John

To: i-node who wrote (224488)	3/16/2005 8:13:21 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1571655

It is fundamentally wrong to beleive that this problem can be solved by raising taxes or cutting benefits. Why couldn't it be solved by cutting benefeits and putting a limitation on their future growth? Tim

To: i-node who wrote (224488)	3/16/2005 9:02:19 PM
From: SilentZ	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1571655

>It is fundamentally wrong to beleive that this problem can be solved by raising taxes or cutting benefits. No. It's absolutely not. It requires a certain amount of money to be paid in at any given period of time, and a certain amount to be paid out. It can be mathematically worked out. It's worked up until now, and if we can only overcome the baby boomers retiring (which is an anomaly -- usually a generation is much bigger than the generation before), than we can keep it going ad infinitum. -Z