« "I am not afraid of Qadhafi, if I were to see his face I would strangle him": The mother of Iman al-Obeidi stands up for her daughter, who has yet to be seen since being taken away by pro-regime "minders" after alleging to be raped by Qadhafi loyalists | Main | John Boehner calls for renewal of DC schools voucher program »



Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Bill Stanley

Social Security is a giant redistribution of income/wealth and a terrible retirement plan. If my Social Security taxes had been placed in a private account and earned only 4.38% per year, the current annual interest would be equal to the annual amount I receive. When I die, my heirs would receive $348,000. Instead, they will receive nothing from Social Security. www.newsandopinions.net

Ash Faulkner

Thom Hartmann is absolutely right: spending too much relative to what? Relative to revenue of course. Unless you say that further public income cannot or should not be raised, the problem is indeed one of revenue. Ruling out raising taxes is an ideological decision, not a law of nature.

Why not combine both of these recommendations? Bill Gates can pay more in social security, but he doesn't need to receive it.

To anyone who whines about how unfair that would be, just ask yourself how rich Bill Gates would be today had he been born in India or Malawi.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Search ConHome

  • Only search ConHomeUSA