I have not previously responded to the opinions of others who have submitted letters. And everyone does have their right to voice their opinion, but, they do not have a right to their own set of facts.
For example, Mr. Smith wrote that corporations are people and have a right to have an opinion. However, there is a difference between having an opinion and buying an opinion.
Let me give you an example: After the great depression many laws were passed to prevent another financial debacle. One of those laws, passed in the mid-”30s, separated commercial banks from the much riskier investment banks.
In the late ”90s, Congress repealed that act, known as Glass-Steagall. Why would 90 senators vote for the repeal of this safeguard legislation and pave the way for the current debacle?
The act was repealed because the financial sector, through lobbyists, paid to have it repealed. The economy was dealt a near deathblow. Mr. Smith is on the wrong side of this question. But, there is more to this story?
The government saved the financial sector by bailing them out, in part, with TARP (Toxic Assets Relief) money.
One of the conditions of TARP was that if you were a corporation that accepted money, no employee could be paid more than $500,000. But, the financial sector had an opinion. Their opinion was the many of these employees could not meet their expenses with a measly half million dollars, what with the two kids in private school, and the Ferrari needing repairs.
So, the government is allowing the companies that received TARP funds to pay 49 of their employees a yearly salary of $1 million! If you continue to believe corporations are people and entitled to their opinion, then you choose to take part in your own demise.
Other folks have attacked Social Security.
Social Security is perhaps the most successful government program ever devised. Social Security has taken millions of elderly out of poverty. If the government had not raided its funds and the contribution was not capped, it would be in great shape.
It may be true that if people invested privately, their contributions would have exceeded their Social Security. However, some people don”t have extra money for savings and would never have been able to save for their future without Social Security.
Additionally, many people who invested privately have nothing left or took a big hit when the economy tanked. Without Social Security, America would look like a third-world country, with the elderly begging for alms in the streets.
And, by the way, some letters have called Social Security a Ponzi scheme. An example of a Ponzi scheme was Jack Madoff?s operation: he continually took in money from the new investors and gave some to the old investors while skimming off the rest and never really investing much.
If Social Security is a Ponzi scheme, then any government program, by definition, is a Ponzi scheme.
As the old folk songs says, “which side are you on?”
Nelson Strasser
Lakeport
