RE: More Responses/Questions.

[Javier Jimenez <jimenj@yahoo.com>]

>>>>>> James wrote:
>From: ridgeway 

>>>>You ask for a "legitimate" source on the double speak I said
"bureacrats and politicians" use --- tor example when Clinton (or
James Carevell, Paul Bagala, Gene Sperling, and other of that gang)
talk about using the budget "surplus" to pay down the debt, save
social security, yada, yada, yada...

>>>>Well if YOU consider Clinton (and his gang) to be "legitimate"
then there you go...however, since I don't consider the "1984"
doubletalk about the national debt and the surplus to be legitimate,
you're right I can't give you a source!!!! Very good, you got me
on that! Note: I'm not interested in selling you any snake oil,
but I suggest you check with Clinton and his group for that.

Talk about doubletalk. I think you just took the prize. You said
that it was THE 'LINGO' when I pointed out to you that Sowell was
WRONG when he wrote that the SSTF debt is not included in the
National debt. It was Sowell who said it, not Clinton, Carville,
Bagala or Sperling or any other gang. There is no doubletalk about
the National debt, except for Sowell's. But since you think it was
Clinton or his cronies, give me a link or a citation to one of them
saying it, whether you consider it legitimate or not. I don't think
you can.

Or better yet, why don't you just admit that your buddy Sowell is
engaging in a little bit of dishonesty about the current SS program.
It isn't Clinton who is trying to'sell' that snake oil, but Sowell.

<<<<<<<
Who gives a flying hoot whether the SS debt is included or not.
Both, the national debt and the debt to SS are large enough in
their own rights; however the debt to SS will become ever larger
when the $10T unfunded liability start becoming a material reality.
When that happens higher income taxes will be needed to payback
the debt, and higher payroll taxes will be needed to support
beneficiaries; what difference does it make that the debt to ss is
included in the other or not?