>>>>You've missed the whole point of my idea, which is not necessarily surprising, since, as you pointed out, you are one of the main culprits in the attack line by line group. There are those on both sides of the privatize-or-not issue which use that method, so I am not singling out one group or the other. My point is not that criticism should not be directed at ideas, but rather that, instead of focusing on the ideas in differing points of view which (surprise!) may take longer than one paragraph to fully flesh out, individuals like yourself feel smugly confident in tearing down their proposals line by line, instead of looking for possibilities for agreement or, dare I say it, compromise.
I have no idea what you are talking about. If somebody proposes a plan than plainly will not work, am I just supposed to say 'you've given it a nice name' and move on. What BS. This board is filled with people criticizing every aspect of the current SS system, including a lot of things that are not true. In that environment, you need to subject their alternatives to the same scrutiny so that bystanders can make a rational decision on what makes sense. You imply that I am not willing to compromise. Not true at all. I am probably more willing than anybody whose plan I have criticized. Indeed, I don't have any plan I am committed to, but am looking for a plan that makes sense. They are rare.
>>>>While I am as suspicious of the "can't we all just get along" ideal as anyone else, the Social Security crisis is much more complex than either you or I can fix by ourselves, and to assume such is arrogance in its highest form.
Agreed, unless of course you are implying that I am the one with such arrogance. Actually, that belongs to the people whose plan I am criticizing, who resent such criticism of 'their' plan.
>>>>If those involved in this forum are going to be as unwilling to see ideas as possibilities for compromise, and instead focus on attacking vehemently what they disagree with, even if it is only a small part of the opposing view, this forum will become as deadlocked by personal arrogance and pride as the Congress that will be deciding the future of the Social Security system in the future. If the public cannot do it, they have no right to demand that their Representatives do it, either.
Again, I generally only get vehement against people who I suspect are deliberately 'fudging' after repeatedly being challenged, or people who insult me merely because I disagree with them. I am not the one who is convinced it can only be my way. I can accept minor or major reform if it makes sense. I have a problem with the stuff that makes no sense, and I point it out. It is not my style that causes any problems for Congress. Indeed, the Congressional plans are much better thought out than most alternatives, IMHO. Because they have to answer the tough questions that the other plans want to avoid.
If you could point out a specific message in which you have a problem with my style, and point out what would have been better, I'm willing to discuss it.
