Mike Ballard wrote: > The way I see SS [social security, i.e., OASI] is that the working class > produces all the wealth outside of nature. Its entitlement to retiring from > wage-slaving away for their whole lives is shored up by having some of that > wealth invested in government bonds. That's what has happened. We worked. > We put the money away via taxes. We're entitled to all the wealth we > produce; but of course, the cappos disagree because they took risks with the > wealth we produced in the first place. Are we that dumb? If some cappos, > like say this Petersen fool, whine that we aren't 'entitled' to the funds in > SS because they ain't there because in turn, the cappos had to spend $12 > trillion to 'save the economy' during the GFC, I say, "Fuck you assholes." <
I think that the discussion was not about whether oldsters are entitled to SS benefits, since I'd guess that (with one possible exception) everyone on pen-l would agree that they are entitled. Rather, it's about whether or not it's feasible to pay them. If I understand him correctly, John V. is suggesting that the trust fund does not help with feasibility at all. I disagree. By the way, I don't think Peterson is a "fool." Rather, he's a knave (or worse). -- Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
