Has George W. Bush ever said he was committed to do something sizable (not just a small percentage of the budget, but something over a few billion dollars) but decided he couldn't do it because of the cost? What's the meaning of money to this Administration in areas it really cares about?
Why'd he pick Social Security to use that argument? Rather than, say, a multi-billion dollar missile defence program that doesn't work and won't protect us against terrorists? Or a pork-barrel drug-benefit program? Or ....
If only Social Security could be changed so it would help pharmaceutical companies... or defense contractors ... or Wall Street. Then it would be affordable.
In part because benefits for millions of American seniors would be cut.
No comments:
Post a Comment