redblack
was that sarcasm, rich?
because if it wasn’t, you have some mighty thin skin. i haven’t read hateful language from any of us socialist freeloaders here on WSB forums.
see what i did there?
because saying that cutting SS benefits for the poors will lead them to a diet of cat food isn’t hateful or divisive. it’s a fact. we’ve seen it before.
and, as others have pointed out, the (future) SS revenue problem does not affect the deficit. however, it would be far more stable and solvent if congress would quit using the trust fund to finance the debt. i know plenty of democrats who would get behind that idea. but in the interest of unity, do you think you can get republican leadership on board with it?
or does that not make sense? because i have yet to read a single conservative-leaning WSB commenter get behind that idea.
let’s be honest here, and quit playing footsie. lay it out on the table even if you know that your admissions are unpopular. do you guys support privatization of the largest earned benefit program in the world? or eliminating it altogether?
because that is exactly what cutting benefits will lead to. it will make the program inequitable and ineffective. the next logical question is, “why have it at all?”
but i have to say that i like republicans’ new-found ability to plan for the future of social security. i can only believe that they really care about its solvency, and that they want to actually help people. because going after SS benefits as some political ploy to keep our eye off of defense cuts or tax brackets would be craven, and i know that republicans are nothing if they’re not altruistic. (but i do wish that they had thought that way when they were running up the first $10 trillion in debt…)
am i right, rich, or are those facts too divisive?
and right back atcha with a “season’s greetings,” sir. and, yes, i do mean it.