2007-05-22 03:30:17 · 6 answers · asked by wildcat97544 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
There is not one member of congress who will take on Social Security. They do not have the balls. Why, you might ask? Because senior citizens vote in large numbers. However, as one of the members of this huge group of people known as baby boomers, I know that Social Security is in big trouble. Reason being, that Clinton said to use Social Security money to balance the budget. So now all Social Security has is a bunch of IOU"s from the federal government. What this means is when the boomers start to retire( the first ones will be eligible for early retirement next year) Social Security taxes will have to start climbing in order to fulfill the promised monies. Next, they will lower the amount of money a recipient gets, and then they will start raising the age of retirement again. All because they were afraid to do what was necessary to fix the problem. What they should have done is put the money into a good investment portfolio and watched it grow. With time and care the Social Security fund would be more than sufficient to fund the retirement of everyone who is qualified to receive it. I don't know if there is time to save it now or not. But, nothing will be done by this congress. It really is too bad the democrats do not respect a legacy from one of their truly great Presidents and do what is necessary to protect it.
2007-05-22 03:46:34 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
All Congress is doing right now is playing games. Sending the President legislation that they know he will veto... going on foreign policy junkets to negotiate with foreign heads of state... wasting time on non-binding resolutions. They haven't done anything they said they would. The immigration bill is a disaster... nothing at all on balancing the budget... threats to repeal tax breaks... they have done NOTHING that they said they would do during their campaigns.
2007-05-22 10:38:16 · answer #2 · answered by ItsJustMe 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Your grammar and punctuation need some work. That said, SS/Medicare are horrible wastes of money, I agree, but we can't eliminate them right off, there are many people that are depending on them. A statement like this should offer a solution.
2007-05-22 10:35:57 · answer #3 · answered by wrathinif 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Now just what have older or disabled people ever done to you? I guess you would rather waste money on rebuilding Lebanon? Your family must be rich and don't have to worry about bills or affording medication? Good for you but not all people are rich. I would rather give help to our own citizens than some one else's or spend billions putting a toy 4-wheeler on mars. This is what some people live on and all of it was not due to poor planning. The current administration wants to do away with it so the money they borrowed from it won't have to be paid back.
2007-05-22 10:40:08 · answer #4 · answered by grumpyoldman 7 · 0⤊ 3⤋
I agree. Bush tried to start something, but the do-nothing gutless congress just sticks their head in the sand and leaves the hard dicisions for someone else when it is much worse.
2007-05-22 10:38:18 · answer #5 · answered by GABY 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Why would they need to eliminate this? I would say make it stronger. We need to support our elderly.
2007-05-22 10:33:53 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋