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 : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: sea_biscuit who wrote (28790)1/20/1999 2:34:00 PM
From: DMaA  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 67261
 
I don't understand ( or maybe you don't ). If you delink Social Security funds from the rest of the general budget there is no surplus.



To: sea_biscuit who wrote (28790)1/20/1999 2:35:00 PM
From: Ish  Respond to of 67261
 
<<Not necessarily. It could mean that we begin de-linking Social Security funds from the rest of the general budget. In other words, account for both of them separately, and let each of them stand on its own. And that is a step in the right direction, IMO.>>

We actually agree on something???



To: sea_biscuit who wrote (28790)1/20/1999 3:47:00 PM
From: cody andre  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 67261
 
That's how it was set up back in the 30's. In fact, it was illegal to use one's SS number for anything but SS purposes.

If a private insurance company or mutual fund commingles individual funds like the government does, where do you think the robbers will end ? Give me a break from all this stupid official propaganda ...


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News