ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1997, Roanoke Times
DATE: Wednesday, January 15, 1997 TAG: 9701150089
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-8 EDITION: METRO
Wall Street is no place for pension funds
A BASIC rule of investing is ``never invest more than you can afford to lose.'' And Congress wants to put our Social Security monies into the stock market? I trust our fiscally wise Virginia representatives will fight this cockamamie idea to the last breath.
Twenty years ago I thought Social Security should be changed - privatized probably is the description that fits my idea. I wanted to keep it compulsory, but turn it over to banks. You choose a bank when you get your first job. And then wherever you go, whatever you do, the bank gets a piece of every paycheck - sort of like a very long-term certificate of deposit.
Two serious problems with my idea:
What happens to a person who becomes disabled at a young age? (The government would still have to maintain a disability fund or cut these people loose to private charity.)
What about the person in his or her 50s? What happens to their past contributions? (I know, they're gone, supporting current recipients.) And how would their bank accounts provide necessary sums for a reasonably decent retirement?
Social Security's future needs study, creative thought and probably change. But it doesn't need to be subjected to the vagaries of the stock exchanges!
MARILYN D. FRY
HARDY
Paying more for slower mail service
I READ where the U.S. Postal Service wants to increase the price of stamps again. It seems that whenever stamps go up, it takes longer for the mail to be delivered.
I received a letter postmarked Dec. 23 from Church Avenue in Roanoke on Jan. 3. That is nine working days.
EVA GIBSON
ROANOKE
The first drink may invite addiction
IN RESPONSE to Kat McClinton's Jan. 2 letter to the editor, ``Alcoholics do not suffer by choice'':
I beg to differ. Anyone who chooses to drink alcoholic beverages chooses to be addicted, homeless, incarcerated, to lose his or her job or his or her family, and sometimes even chooses to die. The choice lies with the individual. I've never known of anyone being forced to drink alcoholic beverages against his or her wishes.
A good example is the story of the teen-ager who illegally purchased alcoholic beverages and then, while driving drunk, struck and killed a Roanoke County schoolteacher as she innocently walked in her neighborhood. (No. 1 story of 1996.) Sober, this teen-ager would have never thought of killing someone. But because he chose to pollute his system with alcohol, his life will never be the same - and neither will the lives of the victim's family, her friends or her students. He made the choice!
McClinton also stated that alcoholism is a disease. Rather, I submit that it's an addiction. Webster's dictionary defines ``alcoholism'' as ``the habitual excessive drinking of alcoholic liquor'' and defines ``addiction'' as ``giving oneself up to a strong habit.''
The letter writer said ``there comes a point in the alcoholic's life when he or she does not have a choice.'' And with this statement, I agree. The only way to be sure one will not become an alcoholic is to make the choice to never take the first drink.
MILDRED G. ROLAND
ROANOKE
Do unto Clinton as is done unto Newt
EVERYONE believes President Bill Clinton, Vice President Al Gore or House Speaker Newt Gingrich should resign if found guilty of a crime. But what should happen if any one of them is guilty of something less than a crime?
When Gingrich was recently elected speaker of the House, the Republicans and Democrats agreed that he had committed two wrongs: He had given some wrong information to a congressional committee, and he had done something that is legally questionable. They disagreed about whether he had done anything else that was wrong.
The Republicans and Democrats also disagreed about what should happen to Gingrich. The Republicans said he should receive a reprimand but should continue as speaker. The Democrats said he should step down. Thus, two very different standards of ethics were applied.
We, the American people, ought to expect the Republicans and Democrats to be consistent with their differing ethical standards. And they should apply their standards to Clinton and Gore, too.
Anytime the congressional Republicans and Democrats agree that Clinton or Gore has given Congress any information that is wrong and has done anything that is legally questionable, then the Republicans should insist that the president or vice president deserve nothing more than a reprimand, and the Democrats should demand that the president or vice president step down.
That is a consistency the people would surely applaud.
LEWIS R. SHECKLER
RADFORD
LENGTH: Medium: 96 linesby CNB