internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/
List archive
- From: ron thigpen <ron AT fuzzsonic.com>
- To: "Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/" <internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [internetworkers] Erection (morality and law)
- Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 14:54:34 -0500
Tony Spencer wrote:
How can you set aside "overpayments" when your return on the investment is
approaching negative? Granted, I agree with you that both parties were
idiots when they dipped into the fund over the past few decades.
What investment are you referring to exactly? The gov't has kept out of the equity markets (for good reason!) and are sellers, not buyers of debt.
The trust fund is not invested assets but only a promissory note from the general fund. The return on investment is whatever is specified in those notes. If the rate of return unspecified, or below market rates, then this whole paper shell game has served as an accounting trick to let the gov't borrow from the future at reduced rates.
And if the general fund fails to pay back the SS trust fund, and the trust fund defaults on its obligations, then the whole system has been used as to steal from tomorrows' retirees to fund today's gov't. An Enron-style scandal on a federal scale.
IMHO, the real idea behind privitization is to starve the SS system and shut the whole thing down before the bills come due. Selling the idea that a failure of the system is inevitable is the first step to selling the concept of privitazation. It is up to the citizenry to cry foul and keep the politicians from getting away with this larceny.
--rt
-
Re: [internetworkers] Erection (morality and law)
, (continued)
- Re: [internetworkers] Erection (morality and law), James Dasher, 11/09/2004
- Re: [internetworkers] Erection (morality and law), David Minton, 11/09/2004
- RE: [internetworkers] Erection (morality and law), Tony Spencer, 11/09/2004
- Re: [internetworkers] Erection (morality and law), David Minton, 11/09/2004
- RE: [internetworkers] Erection (morality and law), Tony Spencer, 11/09/2004
- Re: [internetworkers] Erection (morality and law), Ian Meyer, 11/09/2004
- RE: [internetworkers] Erection (morality and law), Tony Spencer, 11/09/2004
- Re: [internetworkers] Erection (morality and law), ron thigpen, 11/09/2004
- Re: [internetworkers] Erection (morality and law), ron thigpen, 11/09/2004
- RE: [internetworkers] Erection (morality and law), Tony Spencer, 11/09/2004
- Re: [internetworkers] Erection (morality and law), ron thigpen, 11/09/2004
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.