This page was last updated on May 15, 2011.
Seniors agree that retirement is great; Gino Piroli; Beaver County Times; May 15, 2011.
Below is a detailed critique of the relevant section of the subject column.
“I’m surprised when some citizens are taken aback by the actions of those who were elected in November 2010. My firm belief is that when you vote on a national or state level, you should be aware of the ideologies of those seeking office.”
[RWC] Given his column-writing body of work, I’ll go out on a limb and assume by “those who were elected in November 2010” Mr. Piroli means non-leftists. Why shouldn’t we care about ideology at the local level?
“Those who campaigned on certain subjects have been rather true to what they ran on. Those who now disagree with certain policy decisions should’ve been more thorough when assessing the positions of the candidates.”
[RWC] Using his euphemisms, I’m sure Mr. Piroli knows “Those who now disagree with certain policy decisions” didn’t vote for “those who were elected in November 2010.” I wonder if Mr. Piroli got the “hope and change” I assume he voted for in November 2008.
“Despite the pros and cons on the federal entitlement packages, especially Medicare and Social Security, I don’t think either party is going to make any drastic changes in the programs.”
[RWC] If history is a guide, Mr. Piroli may be correct, but we are in big trouble if he is. I cover the reasons why in my critique of a previous Piroli column.
“Regardless of party affiliation, most senior citizens are satisfied that those two programs have made better lives for them, and have the desire that those who follow will have the same quality of life.”
[RWC] All Ponzi schemes eventually fail. Finally, how sad is it so many people depend on others’ paychecks for their “quality of life?”
© 2004-2011 Robert W. Cox, all rights reserved.