Homestead mailing list

["Melody O." <melody AT crecon.com>]

>Women and Children First
>
>By MICHAEL C. LARACY
>
>Published: January 8, 2005
<snip>
>According to government actuaries, a young worker with average earnings, a 
>young spouse and two young children has Social Security protection equal to 
>a life insurance policy with a face value of $400,000 and a disability 
>policy of about $350,000. For the surviving children and their widowed 
>parent, Social Security represents the difference between getting by and 
>dropping into poverty and reliance on welfare.
<snip>
>It was only a decade ago that Congress enacted legislation to "end welfare 
>as we know it." It would be a disaster if Congress were to reform Social 
>Security in a way that would slowly swell the ranks of the poor and 
>welfare-dependent with an army of "widows and orphans."
>
>Michael C. Laracy is a senior associate at the Annie E. Casey Foundation.

This is a logical fallacy.  It tears at the heartstrings and accomplishes
its purposes well, but it is still a fallacy.

If I believed that the government owed my children and me a living, and
that it is their place to be a life insurance company with whom I have a
policy, I might agree.

But as it is, the government steals my money from every paycheck and tells
me to trust them.  Why would I trust someone who takes my money without my
permission?  Why would I feel that they were a valid organization worthy of
my respect and trust?  I don't.  That is why I ask my husband to keep a
life insurance policy on himself which will take care of my children and me
in case of his death.  It is *my* responsibility to make hay while the sun
shines, not the thieving Social Security Systems.

Best wishes,
Melody