On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 7:45 AM, Gar Lipow <[email protected]> wrote: > Does "universal" mean "completely free of restrictions". I assumed > it meant "for everyone" which would require some sort of subsidy. And > in the context of "Fixing" social security (and the assumption that > social security needs "fixing" is there" ) raiding social security > seems the obvious place to get that funding.
re: "I assumed", " seems obvious" etc, aren't you jumping to a lot of conclusions here? -raghu. -- "It is morally wrong to allow suckers to keep their money." _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
