On Sat, 28 Apr 2007 06:02:44 GMT, Jose
wrote in :

You are using the fallacy of "all things being equal".
I am? I fail to infer your meaning as it relates to this discussion.

I explained that subsequently, he

The doling out of money =causes= people to
reach their hands out -

to which you reply:

If true, that is an inescapable side effect. It's a spurious argument
tantamount to refusing to take a life saving medication that may cause
nausea.

No, it's not spurious. It's tantamount to not taking a nausia
medication because it might be addictive.

So your choice is to expire rather than take the life saving
medication, because it's possibly addictive? That is what you are
saying. Is that what you mean?


Are you arguing that people shouldn't retire after thirty or
forth years of toil?

No. I'm arguing that they shouldn't retire on my dime. If they failed
to accumulate =their= dimes, they have no right coming to me.

Aren't you overlooking the fact that SSI recipients have paid into the
SSI fund, so it's not your dime?


Are you saying, that those retired workers who have
paid into SSI should not receive a SSI check commensurate with the
amount they contributed during the time they worked and paid into SSI?

No. I'm saying that those people who are getting SSI should not be
getting it from my dime. Or, in other words, I should not be required
to pay into SSI to begin with (and if I end up impoverished because I
failed to provide for my own retirement, say, by living too large while
I was working, then I am not entitled to =your= dime either.)

I still have trouble with your insistence that it is your dime given
the fact that the SSI recipient has contributed into the SSI program
over the life of his working career.

I also think that you would find the consequences of tens of millions
of additional poor homeless souls littering the pavement more
repugnant than the objections to SSI.

Aside from those issues, what sort of person abandons his aged
parents, because he doesn't want to fund their existence? Eliminating
SSI would be roughly equal to that to me.

Or are you saying, that we, as a country, are not big enough to show
compassion toward those who were created with less than optimal
mentality and manual skill, even when it is in our collective best
interest?

Compassion comes from individuals, not from laws. And I do not agree
that it is in our collective best interests.

So the way you see it, government should not provide for the
inevitable portion of its population that is unemployable? Isn't it
deliberate blindness to pretend the inevitable unemployable segment of
any population doesn't exist?

I don't necessarily
disagree either; there are many facets to this that are being
oversimplified here.

Guess what that encourages.
What what encourages?

Doling out money based on the recipient having made poor choices (not
saving for retirement, for example).

Jose

Is that being done? It seems to me, that recipients of SSI receive a
check commensurate with what they have paid in over their productive
life span. SSI isn't based on poor choices; it's based on how much
money was paid into it by the recipient.