In response to:

What Handouts To Cut

/ Wrote: Aug 11, 2010 9:55 PM
SS was never intended to be a retirement account. When SS was enacted, the retirement age was 65, but life expectancy was 61.7 years. SS was to act as insurance, if you survived the retirement age unlike your friends. In 1940, there were 23 workers contributing for every retiree. In 1960, there were 5 workers for every retiree. In 2005, there were 3.2 workers for every retiree. Next year, 78 million Baby Boomers will begin to retire. In 20 years, SS will cost the Federal government $4 trillion a year. Our population is not keeping up with the demands put upon the younger workers to pay for the retired. I understand that the government promised workers something, but the government also once promised that FICA would only be 3%...
Join the Debate!
stan426 Wrote: Aug 11, 2010 11:08 PM
sounds like health care doesn't it

Because of failure to heed the limitations of the U.S. Constitution, which has produced runaway federal spending, our nation sits on the precipice of disaster. Former Senator Alan Simpson of Wyoming and Erskine Bowles, White House chief of staff under President Bill Clinton, co-chairmen of President Obama's debt and deficit commission, in a Washington Post article "Obama's Debt Commission Warns of Fiscal 'Cancer'" (July 12, 2010) said that "(A)t present, federal revenue is fully consumed by three programs: Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. The rest of the federal government, including fighting two wars, homeland security, education, art, culture, you name it,...

Friday, June 01 | 10:35 AM ET
Friday, June 01 | 10:35 AM ET
Friday, June 01 | 10:35 AM ET
Friday, June 01 | 10:35 AM ET