I just know that even if they were sick, or grow old, or are unfortunate, no Con would accept a nickel, they would live in a tent first, right?
So we can cut that much from the budget without qualm?
Reagan would be proud!
2006-10-24 03:27:50 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
When the anti-SS answers start pouring in, this should get interesting.
Montavious:
"So while social security is a disaster, you have no problem supporting your party when they vote to block access to cheaper medicine from Canada, give tax cuts to the top 1%, and god forbid you allow any medical scientific studies that may even one day eliminate the need for SS. I'm not defending what's happened to it, but Cons at least now a days have no one new to blame but themselves."
Just nitpicking here, but the cheap Canadian medecine is a product of our socialized health care system and *it is meant for us Canadians only*. Allowing Americans to continue to take advantage is exploitative and immoral.
2006-10-24 03:55:57 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
So while social security is a disaster, you have no problem supporting your party when they vote to block access to cheaper medicine from Canada, give tax cuts to the top 1%, and god forbid you allow any medical scientific studies that may even one day eliminate the need for SS. I'm not defending what's happened to it, but Cons at least now a days have no one new to blame but themselves.
2006-10-24 10:43:14 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
My dad will be on it soon. Luckily, he has retirement benefits from his former job, and he's got a 401K from his current job. I have no worries for my parents when they are retirement age. Also, I have a 401K started already. Even if social security were to crash, I think I would still be ok. The people who didn't plan ahead for retirement are kinda screwed though I think.
2006-10-24 10:43:31 · answer #3 · answered by sethle99 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Social security is a nightmare.
That's what my mom survives on.
She's below the poverty line. Her income is less than $15,000 a year.
She's on it because she's sixty-eight years old, and is just not energetic enough to work.
2006-10-24 10:34:42 · answer #4 · answered by The_Cricket: Thinking Pink! 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yeah we should, my neighbor is a lazt sack of shi* livin' off S.C. I know he could work, he can drive, mow his yard, work in his garage, pretty much anything....yet he says he's disabled???
2006-10-24 10:33:33 · answer #5 · answered by Cal0507 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋