About Us

December 21st 04, 10:30 AM

In article , (Steve
Robeson K4YZ) writes:

Subject: Problem for boaters and APRS?
From: PAMNO (N2EY)
Date: 12/20/2004 6:21 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article ,
(Steve
Robeson K4YZ) writes:

Par for the course, like his stupid notion of turning SS over to
Wall Street.

And the Federal Government has done shuch a good job with it...HOW...???

By investing it very conservatively, because high risk cannot be accepted in
a safety net.

I guess you missed that part where I said "...with federal government
oversight..."....?!?!

Not at all.

If the oversight makes sure the investment is very conservative, the end result
will be no more return than today.

If the oversight doesn't make sure the investment is very conservative, the end
result *may* be no more return than today, or it may be less, or even a loss.
Unacceptable risk in a safety net.

"Privatizing" SS is about as dumb as the idea that we don't need an energy
policy because hydrogen will solve all our energy problems.

I am only 15 1/2 years away from being able to draw it if I so choose,
yet
depending on who prognostications you believe, it won't be there for me to
draw upon.

Think about *why*:

Snipped...

I think you want to avoid the hard facts, Steve.

We know why Social Security was created...

What I wrote wasn't about why SS was created, but about why it could be in
trouble in the future. And as Hans, K0HB has pointed out, the 800 pound gorilla
problem is the borrowing of money from the SS trust fund. Such borrowing is
fine unless and until it's not paid back.

I don't thinnk FDR
ever imagined it being *******ized such as it has.

How is SS *******ized?

FDR's New Deal, like the Constitution, wasn't meant to be a static unchanging
entity. He said so himself - if a program didn't work, it was to be changed or
eliminated.

But the real solution is education and responsibility.

The real solution is to restore the program to what it was intended for,

Which is?

delete the drug abusers and lazy, and restore some basic civic
responsibilities.

How would you do that?

Here's a bit of history:

Once upon a time (up until about 40 years ago), there were lots of large state
mental hospitals. Such as portrayed in "One Flew Over The Cuckoos Nest". If
someone had serious mental illness, such as schizophrenia, they could be and
were involuntarily committed to one of them *indefinitely*. Drug addicts were
often committed to these institutions.

The care they got wasn't usually very good - they were essentially warehoused.
But they were off the street.

Then came a whole bunch of new pharmaceuticals that promised to control many
mental disorders. There also came investigations into the conditions at the
mental hospitals, showing how poor the treatment was in some of them. Most of
all, there came a bunch of politicians looking for ways to save money.

So we got new laws, new treatments and the end of open ended involuntary
commitments. And most of the state mental institutions closed or were radically
reduced in size, while the population grew. So a lot of the patients who used
to be inside those institutions are now outside, trying to survive.

Are they really better off? Are we saving any money?

Would it be any worse to let select Wall Streeters invest it with
Government oversight?

Much worse. Here's why:

It's a fundamental fact of investing that you don't get high return without
risk. Particularly in the long term. For every investor who made big bucks
quick by a good choice, there are plenty of others who lost big bucks by a
poor
one. But nobody has lost money by investing in safe things like US savings
bonds - at the price of a lower return.

Do you *really* think Shrub is concerned about your retirement, or mine? I
don't.

I do...More so than I ever thought Bill Clinton was...

Why? At least under Bill Clinton, the markets were rising, inflation was low
and the budget got balanced. Now Shrub is digging an enormous hole of debt and
yet giving the rich tax cuts.

Here's a hint: Do you think *his* retirement depends on SS?

I am not the least big concerned...There are hundreds of thousands of
Americans who have "retirement" packages that don't depend on SS...

Shrub is one of them. Are you?

15 years, 4 months, 11 days and the rest of today...but who's counting?

I'm counting backwards as of today!

73 de Jim, N2EY

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Problem for boaters and APRS?	KØHB	General	13	December 25th 04 10:52 PM
Problem for boaters and APRS?	KØHB	Policy	18	December 25th 04 10:52 PM
APRS Safety Question	peter berrett	Digital	34	February 19th 04 05:01 PM
APRS Safety Question	peter berrett	Digital	0	February 7th 04 10:17 AM
APRS Linked Repeaters	Dick	Digital	13	August 21st 03 01:52 AM

Menu

About Us