On Thursday 2005-01-06 23:56, Warren Ockrassa wrote: > On Jan 6, 2005, at 10:15 PM, Dave Land wrote: > > On Jan 6, 2005, at 5:03 PM, JDG wrote: > >> At 09:25 PM 1/5/2005 -0800 Doug Pensinger wrote: > >>>> Why should it? > >>> > >>> Because it is obligated to, maybe? This strikes me as a very bizarre > >>> question somewhere along the lines of why should I pay on a loan the > >>> bank > >>> gave me, but perhaps I misunderstand you. > >> > >> The difference is that a bank is another entity. Thus, you have a > >> moral > >> responsibility to fulfill your agreement with them. If you borrow > >> money > >> from yourself, however, you have no real obligation to pay it back. > > > > D'you remember way back during the election a certain candidate jawing > > on and > > on about how the gummint should let YOU keep YOUR money? Well, that's > > exactly > > what the Social Security funds are: YOUR money (and MY money) and not > > the > > government's. When the government spends itself so silly that it has > > to dip > > its hands into MY money to stay afloat, you had better believe I > > expect it to > > put it back. > > > > Remember the lockbox? It was featured in *another* election starring > > that > > certain candidate. You know what's in the lockbox? IOUs. And the U is > > YOU. > > Yeah, that's a concern I have with "reform" too. I want my damned money > back. I never wanted it taken from my checks to begin with, but I > didn't have any choice. So if there's going to be a retooling, I fully > expect the Fed to return to me every cent it took from me in the name > of "putting it away" on my behalf.
<rant> OK one more time. We the people in commonwealth, decided to form a government. In the 1930's, amidst great suffering, our ancestors decided to fund a pay-as-you-go welfare system (not a pension system, but a welfare system) out of charity toward respect for elders so that they could enjoy a minimal amount of economic dignity in what was then extreme old age. The system was called Social Security. (It should have been called Social-Economic Security, but the name was too long.) Some people have always been opposed to the forced transfer of personal funds to communal funds for the succor of our elders from before the enabling legislation was passed. The rest of us in the commonwealth did not want our old folks begging in the streets, its bad for the retail trade at the very least. So the individuals, via their republic, decided to keep the welfare-for-old-folks policy and associated tax. Take-care-of-old-folks party, a score or two of wins during and since the New Deal. Score for the screw-the-old-folks, up with capitalism, red in tooth and claw party, more-or-less nil. Too bad for the screw-the-old-folks party. As for the distinction between the 'Gummint' and the people, in a functioning or semi-functioning democratic republic, the distinction is invidious. Ultimately We the People *ARE* the republic, are the government. The government is merely a tool for commonweal. We gave our government the power to tax on the theory that if you are benefiting from the commonwealth, then you OWE something to the commonwealth. Is life in America Hobbsian? Is the general political-economic expectation for a life that is poor, solitary, nasty, brutish, and short? It most certainly is not! American life is Lockean, the contract works. Ante up. Take pride you live in a free republic that can afford substantial collective expenditures for the commonweal. And while you're at it, quit talking about the "damn government" as if it were some occupying force. It's OUR Republic, and OUR government, and I am responsible for it. So let's be clear, it's not my money, its not your money, it is OUR money, and that is because WE decided to spend it corporately in OUR common interest. If OUR government spends OUR money excessively or unwisely, then it is OUR fault. ============ As for a Social Security "lock-box", there is no lock-box and there never has been a lock-box. Despite propaganda to the contrary, the least amount of attention--even to network TV news--quickly reveals that there is no national old-folks pension and that there is no lock-box. Nevertheless, any good citizens of the Republic believe in one, the other or both. To avoid speaking ill of fellow citizens I will now refrain from further exploring why so many American citizens persist in such shallow folly. Despite there being no Social Security "lock-box" there are accounting entries for Social Security in the budget of the Republic's government. It is true, in the arcana of accounting the ledger for Social Security says we owe ourselves money. There are lots of IOUs. Do not, however, worry about them being "paid back". We also print the money. Then money is fiat money, we can print as much as we want. All of our money effectively consists of more IOUs. We have promised to pay the IOUs with NOTHING. (There is that nagging little problem with hyper-inflation, but money for current Social Security obligations there will be, come hell or high water.) As for getting "your share" of OUR Social Security money back, it is not, and never was a pension plan or business contract. It was a Lockean contract. We are A People, and WE take care of OUR Elders. Some propagandists might have given you the false impression that Social Security funds were being put away on your behalf. I do not know why anyone of passing awareness and modest intelligence would belive such facile false propaganda, but rest assured no funds are now or have ever been "put away", and certainly not on your behalf as an individual _per se_. You might die the day before your benefits were due to start. Sorry, no money back (you selfish anarchist). WE might decide to abruptly close the program to new beneficiaries. No money for you. (Remember, hermits belong to no commonwealth and pay no taxes. They are also notoriously poor, by definition solitary, and not infrequently brutish or nasty.) Alternatively, you might have the ill luck to suffer a painful and crippling disability well before normal retirement age, then live a very, very long life. Lucky you. You get to collect more than "your share". </rant> _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
