Quote:
Originally Posted by The Goat
I attended one of the most conservative schools in the country several years ago, was taught by profs who unabashedly expressed their devotion to the right, but at least had the intelligence and honesty to admit Social Security is arguably the most efficient government program not just here but anywhere in the world. It's operating cost is something like one-half of one percent of total "revenue" and basically if we didn't constantly have conservative presidents raiding the surpluses to 1) provide tax cuts to the richest people in the country (many of whom never contribute to SS btw because they never earn W-2 income) 2) fund truly inefficient gov programs like SDI (we've spent over a trillion on SDI and it's not even close to operational) social security would be financially stable for another century.
|
I"m curious to know what you consider to be a conservative school.
To your point, of course the operating cost is miniscule compared to the billions they collect. How much does it cost to take from Peter to give to Paul? Having said that, the operating costs were enough to make Ross Perot a billionaire.
And to claim that any particular spending item was a case of social security being "raided" is extremely misleading. One could just as easily say that Liberals "raided" social security to fund obscene art or overseas abortions.
And if SDI was such a miserable failure, why are the Russians wrapped around the axel about us deploying missile defense in Poland and the Czech Republic? And how were we able to shoot down Scud missiles like 18 years ago during the Gulf War? Admittedly it wasn't 100% effective, but THAT WAS LIKE, 18 YEARS AGO.