He's all yours, Dave. I can't put up with his deluge of ridiculous assertions.

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 08:49:01 -0500, Dave Hall wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2005 11:44:55 -0500, DSK wrote:


The problem with those in the lower end of the income spectrum is that they
don't have the extra money to save and invest wisely.

Speak for yourself.

Except for the very lowest rungs of the economic ladder, it is fully
possible to save & invest.

It does require the self discipline to live within (or even below) one's
means. Solid investment advice is available for free at the nearest
public library... again, though, that requires self-discipline.

Which many people lack.


I see that you mix your "conservatism" with socialism, not having the
guts to drink it straight. Or to put it another way, you are only
willing to apply your moral principles when it's convenient.


It's not socialism in the truest sense. Socialism relies on the
government to provide to the "needy". In this scenario, the government
would only be mandating individual savings. That way, when you retire,
YOU are providing your income and NOT the government.



Giving them a choice of where their SS money goes allows them the option of
saving and investing wisely.

So, you don't believe that people currently have a choice with their
money? Is this a capitalist country, or what?

Some people make poor choices. Then they cry to the government when
they fall on their faces. THose of us, who make good choices, are then
asked to dig deeper in our pockets to "help" those who can't or refuse
to plan wisely. This is an unfair burden to those who are responsible
in their affairs.

Mandating that people save their own money for retirement provides
money for them at no extra cost to the other taxpayers.

Dave

--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."