Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Middle-O-Road

Well, it's in the courts now. But even with the changes they want to make, my 'group' was excluded - it was new employees after a certain date. And it all comes down to how the courts interpret whether or not the plan I was hired under amounts to a contract.

But SS is NOT a contract, & it's reasonable to modify it. Particularly when we know the elderly are one of the most prosperous groups in the country right now. My mother's neighbor (age close to 80) was complaining about how 'Bush was planning to take away her SS'. This gal owns land that would probably sell for $1 million to a developer. I don't have much sympathy!!!


61 posted on 01/23/2005 7:07:00 PM PST by Twotone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies ]


To: Twotone
Particularly when we know the elderly are one of the most prosperous groups in the country right now. That's a generalization and not true in many cases.

Social Security was designed and implemented long before I was born - I have no say in the justice of the program. But, I suspect, there would be massive resistance to telling people they have to contribute but will get no benefit. SS is a VERY popular program.

We're stuck with the SS problem. All I want to do is find a 'fix' that won't break us financially. You can talk 'eliminate SS' all you want, but the likelihood that you can get Congress to look at that is nil. I'm realistic about what we can and can't do as a fix.

76 posted on 01/24/2005 10:04:56 AM PST by Middle-O-Road (In favor of blowing all terrorists to China, via other hotter places where they'll linger a while.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson