On Mon, 02 May 2005 07:38:59 -0400, JDG wrote

> What's your source for this?   The plan the President presented last 
> week cut preserved benefits for the neediest, and reduced benefits 
> for the highest income earners.     

In a plan that creates a shortfall by moving money into private accounts,
progressive indexing means that the the most needy of the needy will be hurt
less than everyone else.  If we were actually solving the problems of hunger,
health care and education, then perhaps it would make sense to move our
investment in Social Security, which is an investment in today's needy people,
to private markets that might benefit future needy people if the investments
perform well.  But we're not; poverty, hunger and illiteracy are rising.

> As for privitization, I support it because I believe that if many Americans
> who earn enough to save enough themselves for their retirement do so,
>  then they won't *need* Social Security when they retire.   This reduces
> dependency ...

I don't see anything wrong with using our common wealth and our government to
provide assurance that there will be a dependable safety net.  Isn't that the
very purpose of government -- to band together for the common good?  What
greater measure of the common good is there than the willingness to sacrifice
for the neediest?  Do we want to offer our brothers and sisters an
undependendable safety net, in the name of ending dependence?

The war and Wes are on my mind today (just read a detailed account of
Fallujah) so I'll add this.  Our soldiers fight for America as a land of
opportunity, the freedom to make private investments in businesses that
produce wealth.  But they also fight for America, the land of freedom from
fear of poverty, hunger and treatable illnesses, the land of the dependable
safety net.

I am entirely willing to pay sufficient taxes that we, in our role of citizen,
*ensure* that other Americans who are elderly, handicapped, orphaned, etc. --
the weakest and most powerless people in our society -- have a safety net. 
Reduction of our commitment to this safety net, at a time when poverty is on
the rise, is an abrogation of responsibility and compassion for those who are
least able to help themselves.  

Do you want to share this responsibility and help ensure that our safety net
is dependable?

Nick


_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to