Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!cca!ima!inmet!nrh
From: nrh@inmet.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.flame
Subject: Re: Orphaned Response
Message-ID: <1896@inmet.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 16-Jan-85 02:07:03 EST
Article-I.D.: inmet.1896
Posted: Wed Jan 16 02:07:03 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 19-Jan-85 10:35:01 EST
Lines: 47
Nf-ID: #R:ihuxe:-102700:inmet:3900158:177600:2129
Nf-From: inmet!nrh    Jan 14 21:37:00 1985

>***** inmet:net.flame / tpvax!ssc / 12:14 am  Jan 13, 1985
>> In 1980, the Libertarian Party had what sounds like a
>> workable way to get rid of Social Security:  shoot it
>> between the eyes.
>> 
>> People now on Social Security would receive whatever benefits
>> they would have received otherwise.  People who had not
>> yet started getting money back would received decreased
>> benefits based on their contributions to date, and would
>> be able to make up the difference by investing their
>> gains meanwhile.
>> 
>> The whole thing would be financed by selling off all the land
>> that the Federal Government owns and has not developed.
>> It turns out that the two numbers just about match.
>
>
>Hey, Folks! SS was invented to provide at least some minimal level of income
>for all. If it's not working, I say let's fix it. It's a good idea, one that
>I am convinced keeps people from starving to death after they've spent their
>life's earnings. If it were done away with or made voluntary, then you're
>going to have LOTS of people who don't know enough to save either living in
>abject poverty or on the welfare rolls, or more probably both.
>
>Sell undeveloped Federal lands? You must be joking! I like the idea that
>some of this country is held in trust, that we don't have unfettered
>"development" of the continent. I like wild areas. You sell off all the
>land, and you're going to wind up with even more snowmobile parks and
>K-Marts. 
>
>    SPECIAL OFFER::  OWN A PIECE OF THE GRAND CANYON!
>
>I've heard a lot of hare-brained nonsense on this network, but this idea is
>just such a piece of horse pucky I can't believe it.
>

Yessir, I forgot how reliable our government is.  On the other hand,
I heard yesterday on the radio that some environmental group had
protested to the news media that the government, in particular the
strip-mining control board (whatever it's called) had broken the 
law regarding preservation of historic sites and natural resources.
Not once, not twice, but 1600 times.  It's a good thing the
government owns that land, huh?  That means that it's in responsible
hands.

Right.