Letter writer: I am greatly concerned with politicians lumping Social Security and Medicare into a category referred to as entitlements.
Government should control Medicare
Steps toward privatizing Medicare and Social Security, whether through vouchers or other means of allowing private insurance companies to handle your retirement needs may leave you powerless. Some politicians are campaigning on the premise that your entitlements should not be handled by the bureaucracy of big government but rather it be wise to invest in insurance companies because you can shop for the best deal - “yeah, right!”
I would rather have the option of government handling of my retirement funds because we as Americans have some control on how our investments are managed through the power of our vote come the election cycle.
On the other hand, once you concede to privatization, there is no recourse and no means of expressing your financial grievances if you become dissatisfied.
– BILL PAUL, Chicopee
Romney’s success is at our expense
Republican presidential candidate, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney speaks during a campaign rally Friday in Orange City, Iowa. Usually, I turn off the TV when coverage of the RNC comes on for fear of stomach regurgitation. But this time I was unable to get to the remote in time. I happened to hear a male delegate’s voice saying something like, “We must vote for Mitt Romney. He’s so successful in the business world.”
Yeah, sure, he’s successful and he reaps in millions for himself at the cost of peoples’ jobs. Those fortunate not to be ousted face lower wages, less health benefits, less, if any, pension. Mitt Romney is successful when putting people out of work - not creating jobs.
Some think this rich white man is going to do something for them. They need to get it through their heads they are not of his social status.
Wake up! This is not a soap opera where the wealthy family up on the hill comes down to mingle with the commoners at the local pub or diner.
People of modest means and logical minds would not even consider voting for this man.
– JOYCE J. BISSELL, Erving
Social Security, Medicare different
I am greatly concerned with politicians lumping Social Security and Medicare into a category referred to as entitlements. These are programs that recipients have paid taxes for their entire lives.
Entitlements are programs that have been established to give things to people who have done nothing for them except to fill out paperwork to ask for them. These include welfare, food stamps, fuel assistance, Medicaid, and even free cell phones. The list goes on and on and the abuse is well known.
Why can’t we leave seniors who have worked their entire lives alone, and make small cuts to the real entitlements? Over a period of several years this would reduce the deficits and encourage the people who are living off the government to look to a job.
– DALE HASTINGS, Chicopee
Ameristar’s plan wins an advocate
As a homeowner in East Springfield, I was pleasantly surprised by the presentation that Ameristar gave about six months ago. I favor a casino with them because they are not a “one size fits all” resort. They adapt the casino to the location befitting the site (as presented in their slide presentation). They have already purchased the land and cleared it and it is ready to build upon. They also have designed a specific route off of 291 to enter and exit. It would be an excellent choice for Springfield.
Personally, I feel that if it is built in the South End, all the downtown bars and restaurants should close their doors because with many bars (free drinks) and restaurants under one roof why would patrons choose to go into outside venues. What about the traffic from Connecticut? When the Big E is in town there is already gridlock!
–AGGIE KELLY, Springfield
Police departments need diverse forces
This is regarding a recent letter to the editor, arguing that “police departments need educated cops.” To require degrees in policing as a condition of employment for Massachusetts police departments for hiring and promotion purposes would be discriminatory and disadvantageous for minority applicants and current minority police officers and supervisors. It would also contradict the current ethnicity quota system in place for civil-service-based police departments.
Attempts at this form of lobbying, either in part or in totality, as the letter writer states, would generate opposition from minority groups, the courts, police unions and police chiefs and community action groups.
–WALTER KRZEMINSKI, Easthampton