Yes, it should be eliminated completely.
Yes, I could handle a small level of program reduction.
No, its my money, and the government has no right to touch it.
I dont know and/or it depends on what is offered as a replacement program.
So this is Catawba's arguing point? That the Dems have placed the elderly in fear so much that the GOP "wants to take away their money", so they brainwash, delude, and bold-face lie about their counterpart in an effort to scaremonger the populist vote?
Wow. I'd brag about that.
Just curious, how have all you Greedsters and whiners making out getting social security abolished lol.....
Not our fault. Democrats do well at scaring the old farts into thinking their checks will go away when they won't.
My worry is that when all the Freds and Ethels die off, other ignorant old people will take their place.
If you want to save your precious program, you need to get it into your head that outlays MUST be reduced. Anything else is simple folly.
Enjoy your folly...
Perhaps you have never taken an accounting course, but there are two sides to a budget - INCOME - which is the money coming in and EXPENSES - the outlays your refer to. Your comment above seems to indicate you are only aware of one side.If you want to save your precious program, you need to get it into your head that outlays MUST be reduced.
Last edited by haymarket; 09-07-11 at 09:15 AM.
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers