| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"dapra" |
| Date: |
11 Jan 2008 12:34:09 PM |
| Object: |
Social Security. |
Republicans attack it. They call it bankrupt, and want to privatize it.
My opinion; until they balance the budget TODAY, instead of piling up
deficit and debt on our children, they should just SHUT UP, and don't
scare the people what may happen 40 years from now.
There are some incentives for Wall Street to get their hands on
individual accounts, but the attacks by the Republicans on SSI is rooted
in 'divide and rule'. SSI recipients are a formidable voting block.
Of course, Blackwater could easily take care of them, but we are not yet
there. They only gas Iraqis and American soldiers for now. Blackwater
is well armed for any situations. Do they have nukes too?
.
|
|
| User: "Mike Flannigan" |
|
| Title: Re: Social Security. |
11 Jan 2008 12:44:02 PM |
|
|
"dapra" <dapra1@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:GOadnYVqY6o2KxranZ2dnUVZ_qqgnZ2d@comcast.com...
Republicans attack it. They call it bankrupt, and want to privatize it.
My opinion; until they balance the budget TODAY, instead of piling up
deficit and debt on our children, they should just SHUT UP, and don't
scare the people what may happen 40 years from now.
Ahem.. The democrats control the purse strings and the SS issue is NOTHING
to them but a political issue they can use to scare seniors.
Now STFU about it.
There are some incentives for Wall Street to get their hands on individual
accounts, but the attacks by the Republicans on SSI is rooted in 'divide
and rule'. SSI recipients are a formidable voting block.
Of course, Blackwater could easily take care of them, but we are not yet
there. They only gas Iraqis and American soldiers for now. Blackwater is
well armed for any situations. Do they have nukes too?
.
|
|
|
| User: "dapra" |
|
| Title: Re: Social Security. |
11 Jan 2008 02:14:02 PM |
|
|
Mike Flannigan wrote:
"dapra" <dapra1@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:GOadnYVqY6o2KxranZ2dnUVZ_qqgnZ2d@comcast.com...
Republicans attack it. They call it bankrupt, and want to privatize it.
My opinion; until they balance the budget TODAY, instead of piling up
deficit and debt on our children, they should just SHUT UP, and don't
scare the people what may happen 40 years from now.
Ahem.. The democrats control the purse strings and the SS issue is NOTHING
to them but a political issue they can use to scare seniors.
The Democrats control nothing, but the agenda of the House. In most of
the cases the Democratic leadership of the House are complicit to the
crimes of the Bush administration. Besides, the Republican senate can
veto anything by filibuster, than the President can veto it too.
Now STFU about it.
I Googled STFU. None of the definition made sense in this context.
There are some incentives for Wall Street to get their hands on individual
accounts, but the attacks by the Republicans on SSI is rooted in 'divide
and rule'. SSI recipients are a formidable voting block.
Of course, Blackwater could easily take care of them, but we are not yet
there. They only gas Iraqis and American soldiers for now. Blackwater is
well armed for any situations. Do they have nukes too?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Flannigan" |
|
| Title: Re: Social Security. |
11 Jan 2008 02:48:36 PM |
|
|
"dapra" <dapra1@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:4PGdneQwAIKJUxranZ2dnUVZ_s6mnZ2d@comcast.com...
Mike Flannigan wrote:
"dapra" <dapra1@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:GOadnYVqY6o2KxranZ2dnUVZ_qqgnZ2d@comcast.com...
Republicans attack it. They call it bankrupt, and want to privatize it.
My opinion; until they balance the budget TODAY, instead of piling up
deficit and debt on our children, they should just SHUT UP, and don't
scare the people what may happen 40 years from now.
Ahem.. The democrats control the purse strings and the SS issue is
NOTHING to them but a political issue they can use to scare seniors.
The Democrats control nothing
Huh?
, but the agenda of the House. In most of the cases the Democratic
leadership of the House are complicit to the crimes of the Bush
administration. Besides, the Republican senate
WTF.. "Republican senate"?
Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo!
can
veto anything by filibuster, than the President can veto it too.
Now STFU about it.
I Googled STFU. None of the definition made sense in this context.
You don't make sense in any context.
Now STFU about it.
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/gallery/silly/big_cup_of_STFU.jpg
There are some incentives for Wall Street to get their hands on
individual accounts, but the attacks by the Republicans on SSI is rooted
in 'divide and rule'. SSI recipients are a formidable voting block.
Of course, Blackwater could easily take care of them, but we are not yet
there. They only gas Iraqis and American soldiers for now. Blackwater is
well armed for any situations. Do they have nukes too?
.
|
|
|
| User: "dapra" |
|
| Title: Re: Social Security. |
11 Jan 2008 04:43:27 PM |
|
|
Mike Flannigan wrote:
"dapra" <dapra1@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:4PGdneQwAIKJUxranZ2dnUVZ_s6mnZ2d@comcast.com...
Mike Flannigan wrote:
"dapra" <dapra1@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:GOadnYVqY6o2KxranZ2dnUVZ_qqgnZ2d@comcast.com...
Republicans attack it. They call it bankrupt, and want to privatize it.
My opinion; until they balance the budget TODAY, instead of piling up
deficit and debt on our children, they should just SHUT UP, and don't
scare the people what may happen 40 years from now.
Ahem.. The democrats control the purse strings and the SS issue is
NOTHING to them but a political issue they can use to scare seniors.
The Democrats control nothing
Huh?
, but the agenda of the House. In most of the cases the Democratic
leadership of the House are complicit to the crimes of the Bush
administration. Besides, the Republican senate
WTF.. "Republican senate"?
Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo!
can
veto anything by filibuster, than the President can veto it too.
Now STFU about it.
I Googled STFU. None of the definition made sense in this context.
You don't make sense in any context.
Now STFU about it.
You deserve no comment. When you graduate to be able to write a full
paragraph or at least some sentences, come back. Until that, get lost.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: Social Security. |
11 Jan 2008 01:52:59 PM |
|
|
Mike Flannigan wrote:
"dapra" <dapra1@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:GOadnYVqY6o2KxranZ2dnUVZ_qqgnZ2d@comcast.com...
Republicans attack it. They call it bankrupt, and want to privatize it.
My opinion; until they balance the budget TODAY, instead of piling up
deficit and debt on our children, they should just SHUT UP, and don't
scare the people what may happen 40 years from now.
Ahem.. The democrats control the purse strings and the SS issue is NOTHING
to them but a political issue they can use to scare seniors.
Now STFU about it.
I hope you have a nice big corporate (non-government) pension building.
--
Uncle Vic
2011
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Flannigan" |
|
| Title: Re: Social Security. |
11 Jan 2008 02:43:08 PM |
|
|
"Uncle Vic" <address@withheld.com> wrote in message
news:jtadnQ1pp5qGVBranZ2dnUVZ_jSdnZ2d@inreach.com...
Mike Flannigan wrote:
"dapra" <dapra1@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:GOadnYVqY6o2KxranZ2dnUVZ_qqgnZ2d@comcast.com...
Republicans attack it. They call it bankrupt, and want to privatize it.
My opinion; until they balance the budget TODAY, instead of piling up
deficit and debt on our children, they should just SHUT UP, and don't
scare the people what may happen 40 years from now.
Ahem.. The democrats control the purse strings and the SS issue is
NOTHING to them but a political issue they can use to scare seniors.
Now STFU about it.
I hope you have a nice big corporate (non-government) pension building.
Well, hell yeah. SS is gonna go broke and there is nothing we can do about
it because the democrats are going to demagogue any solution for sheer
political gain.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Dukenfield" |
|
| Title: Re: Social Security. |
11 Jan 2008 04:54:49 PM |
|
|
Mike Flannigan wrote:
"Uncle Vic" <address@withheld.com> wrote in message
news:jtadnQ1pp5qGVBranZ2dnUVZ_jSdnZ2d@inreach.com...
Mike Flannigan wrote:
"dapra" <dapra1@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:GOadnYVqY6o2KxranZ2dnUVZ_qqgnZ2d@comcast.com...
Republicans attack it. They call it bankrupt, and want to privatize it.
My opinion; until they balance the budget TODAY, instead of piling up
deficit and debt on our children, they should just SHUT UP, and don't
scare the people what may happen 40 years from now.
Ahem.. The democrats control the purse strings and the SS issue is
NOTHING to them but a political issue they can use to scare seniors.
Now STFU about it.
I hope you have a nice big corporate (non-government) pension building.
Well, hell yeah. SS is gonna go broke and there is nothing we can do about
it because the democrats are going to demagogue any solution for sheer
political gain.
SS is viable and can be viable in the future with some changes. Raising
the income cap is one way to improve the SS system.
It's all reich-wing propaganda that has people thinking that SS will
cannot survive.
JAM
.
|
|
|
| User: "Justin Case" |
|
| Title: Re: Social Security. |
11 Jan 2008 08:17:27 PM |
|
|
"Bill Dukenfield" <BillDukenfield@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:4787F3B9.25E98B40@nospam.net...
Mike Flannigan wrote:
"Uncle Vic" <address@withheld.com> wrote in message
news:jtadnQ1pp5qGVBranZ2dnUVZ_jSdnZ2d@inreach.com...
Mike Flannigan wrote:
"dapra" <dapra1@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:GOadnYVqY6o2KxranZ2dnUVZ_qqgnZ2d@comcast.com...
Republicans attack it. They call it bankrupt, and want to privatize
it.
My opinion; until they balance the budget TODAY, instead of piling up
deficit and debt on our children, they should just SHUT UP, and don't
scare the people what may happen 40 years from now.
Ahem.. The democrats control the purse strings and the SS issue is
NOTHING to them but a political issue they can use to scare seniors.
Now STFU about it.
I hope you have a nice big corporate (non-government) pension building.
Well, hell yeah. SS is gonna go broke and there is nothing we can do
about
it because the democrats are going to demagogue any solution for sheer
political gain.
SS is viable and can be viable in the future with some changes. Raising
the income cap is one way to improve the SS system.
And the retirement age. Raising the income cap is unfair unless you
correspondingly raise the amount of payout. The age of elligibility should
be corrected to to the original date of creation of SS with allowance for
changes in life span. Perhaps a ten or fifteen year phase in would be
appropriate raising the age to, maybe 73 or 74. People could also be
encouraged to save by making all money saved and interest earned as non
taxable income.
Of course, the ccommmunist left would howl at that solution as it would
require people not to depend on the government.
It's all reich-wing propaganda that has people thinking that SS will
cannot survive.
Other than drastic coreections, the socialist propaganda that has people
thinking SS has unlimited resources will be a hugh disappointment.
JAM
.
|
|
|
| User: "Free Lunch" |
|
| Title: Re: Social Security. |
11 Jan 2008 08:57:28 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 12 Jan 2008 02:17:27 GMT, in alt.atheism
"Justin Case" <thinhthi@pacbell.net> wrote in
<XqVhj.35614$lD6.34559@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>:
"Bill Dukenfield" <BillDukenfield@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:4787F3B9.25E98B40@nospam.net...
Mike Flannigan wrote:
"Uncle Vic" <address@withheld.com> wrote in message
news:jtadnQ1pp5qGVBranZ2dnUVZ_jSdnZ2d@inreach.com...
Mike Flannigan wrote:
"dapra" <dapra1@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:GOadnYVqY6o2KxranZ2dnUVZ_qqgnZ2d@comcast.com...
Republicans attack it. They call it bankrupt, and want to privatize
it.
My opinion; until they balance the budget TODAY, instead of piling up
deficit and debt on our children, they should just SHUT UP, and don't
scare the people what may happen 40 years from now.
Ahem.. The democrats control the purse strings and the SS issue is
NOTHING to them but a political issue they can use to scare seniors.
Now STFU about it.
I hope you have a nice big corporate (non-government) pension building.
Well, hell yeah. SS is gonna go broke and there is nothing we can do
about
it because the democrats are going to demagogue any solution for sheer
political gain.
SS is viable and can be viable in the future with some changes. Raising
the income cap is one way to improve the SS system.
And the retirement age. Raising the income cap is unfair unless you
correspondingly raise the amount of payout. The age of elligibility should
be corrected to to the original date of creation of SS with allowance for
changes in life span. Perhaps a ten or fifteen year phase in would be
appropriate raising the age to, maybe 73 or 74. People could also be
encouraged to save by making all money saved and interest earned as non
taxable income.
Yes, changing the age to 72 for full retirement for Social Security
benefits is a very sensible idea, though it will also require a
modification to the way they handle disability, say for everyone over
55. Of course if we had universal health coverage, we wouldn't see small
employers discriminating against people who were in their late 50s or
early 60s because they don't want to destroy their access to health care
coverage for the rest of their employees.
Of course, the ccommmunist left would howl at that solution as it would
require people not to depend on the government.
Whenever businesses want to wean from the teat of government, I'll
consider encouraging citizens to do the same.
It's all reich-wing propaganda that has people thinking that SS will
cannot survive.
Other than drastic coreections, the socialist propaganda that has people
thinking SS has unlimited resources will be a hugh disappointment.
Social security will be adequate with no changes at all. It is not going
bankrupt and the propagandists who claim otherwise are either knowingly
lying or completely ignorant.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: Social Security. |
11 Jan 2008 03:08:22 PM |
|
|
Mike Flannigan wrote:
"Uncle Vic" <address@withheld.com> wrote in message
news:jtadnQ1pp5qGVBranZ2dnUVZ_jSdnZ2d@inreach.com...
Mike Flannigan wrote:
"dapra" <dapra1@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:GOadnYVqY6o2KxranZ2dnUVZ_qqgnZ2d@comcast.com...
Republicans attack it. They call it bankrupt, and want to privatize it.
My opinion; until they balance the budget TODAY, instead of piling up
deficit and debt on our children, they should just SHUT UP, and don't
scare the people what may happen 40 years from now.
Ahem.. The democrats control the purse strings and the SS issue is
NOTHING to them but a political issue they can use to scare seniors.
Now STFU about it.
I hope you have a nice big corporate (non-government) pension building.
Well, hell yeah. SS is gonna go broke and there is nothing we can do about
it because the democrats are going to demagogue any solution for sheer
political gain.
May I remind you that SS was nice and healthy the last time the Dems
were in control. We even had a budget surplus. Now we're trillions in
debt again, and the government is printing money, making it worthless.
This alone will make SS go bankrupt, but it was W's idea (more likely
Cheney's since W doesn't seem like the kind of guy who gets a lot of
ideas) that SS should be privatized. Hey, that idea works, too. If
you're rich. And that makes sense. The Bush Administration doesn't
care about you if you're not making at least 8 figures.
What is bringing SS down right now, not to mention inflation, is the
Baby Boom generation, as they are all entering retirement.
--
Uncle Vic
2011
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Flannigan" |
|
| Title: Re: Social Security. |
11 Jan 2008 04:21:31 PM |
|
|
"Uncle Vic" <address@withheld.com> wrote in message
news:XL2dnZKkPNdaRxranZ2dnUVZ_sCtnZ2d@inreach.com...
Mike Flannigan wrote:
"Uncle Vic" <address@withheld.com> wrote in message
news:jtadnQ1pp5qGVBranZ2dnUVZ_jSdnZ2d@inreach.com...
Mike Flannigan wrote:
"dapra" <dapra1@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:GOadnYVqY6o2KxranZ2dnUVZ_qqgnZ2d@comcast.com...
Republicans attack it. They call it bankrupt, and want to privatize
it.
My opinion; until they balance the budget TODAY, instead of piling up
deficit and debt on our children, they should just SHUT UP, and don't
scare the people what may happen 40 years from now.
Ahem.. The democrats control the purse strings and the SS issue is
NOTHING to them but a political issue they can use to scare seniors.
Now STFU about it.
I hope you have a nice big corporate (non-government) pension building.
Well, hell yeah. SS is gonna go broke and there is nothing we can do
about it because the democrats are going to demagogue any solution for
sheer political gain.
May I remind you that SS was nice and healthy the last time the Dems were
in control.
It's healthy now, nim-rod. But it won't be as the baby boomers start
retiring.
Clearly, you have no understanding of the nature of the problem.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Glenn Smith" |
|
| Title: Re: Social Security. |
13 Jan 2008 06:22:10 PM |
|
|
"Uncle Vic" <address@withheld.com> wrote in message
news:XL2dnZKkPNdaRxranZ2dnUVZ_sCtnZ2d@inreach.com...
May I remind you that SS was nice and healthy the last time the Dems were
in control.
This is incredible *****! Politicians for decades argued over a 'locked
box', and
it turns out all that money owed to SS is IOU's in a filing cabinet!
We even had a budget surplus. Now we're trillions in debt again,
Where on Earth do you get your information? There was no budget surplus.
There were accountants crunching numbers, giving estimates on current budget
deficit or surplus (year to year). We were already trillions in debt
before, but you speak as if
there was no debt untill Republicans came along. And now Democrats want to
expand
current hand outs, and even create brand new 'New Deal' entitlements that
our
grandchildren will never be able to afford.
and the government is printing money, making it worthless.
I agree with this. Our method of introducing new money into the system is
obsolete.
This alone will make SS go bankrupt, but it was W's idea (more likely
Cheney's since W doesn't seem like the kind of guy who gets a lot of
ideas) that SS should be privatized.
*****, you are ignorant. It was many different people toying with the idea
of taking a small percentage
of your monthly contribution to SS, and investing it. They brought it to
the attention of the President,
who thought the idea might have some merit, and shared it with the general
public to see what the
response would be. People with your mindset blew everything out of
proportion,
scaring elderly people. Was that your original intent, or are you just a
tool?
What is bringing SS down right now, not to mention inflation, is the Baby
Boom generation, as they are all entering retirement.
I agree SS is ready to die, but for different reasons that you have stated.
Everyone moans
about the sheer numbers of the Baby Boomers, and how the system will strain
and then
break. Well...SS is a poor design, and any accountant that was involved in
it's creation
should have been indicted for a pyramid scheme. To pretend anything
otherwise
is just sticking your head in the sand and crying: Mommy, its not fair!
zach #33 the ultimate nonbeliever
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "dapra" |
|
| Title: Re: Social Security. |
11 Jan 2008 04:32:50 PM |
|
|
Uncle Vic wrote:
Mike Flannigan wrote:
"Uncle Vic" <address@withheld.com> wrote in message
news:jtadnQ1pp5qGVBranZ2dnUVZ_jSdnZ2d@inreach.com...
Mike Flannigan wrote:
"dapra" <dapra1@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:GOadnYVqY6o2KxranZ2dnUVZ_qqgnZ2d@comcast.com...
Republicans attack it. They call it bankrupt, and want to privatize
it.
My opinion; until they balance the budget TODAY, instead of piling
up deficit and debt on our children, they should just SHUT UP, and
don't scare the people what may happen 40 years from now.
Ahem.. The democrats control the purse strings and the SS issue is
NOTHING to them but a political issue they can use to scare seniors.
Now STFU about it.
I hope you have a nice big corporate (non-government) pension building.
Well, hell yeah. SS is gonna go broke and there is nothing we can do
about it because the democrats are going to demagogue any solution for
sheer political gain.
May I remind you that SS was nice and healthy the last time the Dems
were in control. We even had a budget surplus. Now we're trillions in
debt again, and the government is printing money, making it worthless.
This alone will make SS go bankrupt, but it was W's idea (more likely
Cheney's since W doesn't seem like the kind of guy who gets a lot of
ideas) that SS should be privatized. Hey, that idea works, too. If
you're rich. And that makes sense. The Bush Administration doesn't
care about you if you're not making at least 8 figures.
What is bringing SS down right now, not to mention inflation, is the
Baby Boom generation, as they are all entering retirement.
Well, actually the problem is health care, medicare, Medicaid. IF and
this is a big IF, if we follow the 'free market', otherwise known as
crony capitalism, and pay twice as much for health care as the rest of
the industrialized nations, it will not be sustainable for long.
Crony capitalism has its limits. Globalization, the idea of
manufacturing by using cheep labor oversees and sell it to 'rich'
nations, has run its course already. No matter how cheep the products
are, a hollowed out labor force, population will not be able to afford
to buy it.
We are getting into the second phase. Devaluing the dollar, coupled by
inflation. That will take care of the old ones net eggs.
When will the downward spiral stop? Not as long as the Corporate
Oligarchy makes money, own the Congress, have their private army.
--
Uncle Vic
2011
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Dukenfield" |
|
| Title: Re: Social Security. |
11 Jan 2008 04:57:06 PM |
|
|
Uncle Vic wrote:
Mike Flannigan wrote:
"Uncle Vic" <address@withheld.com> wrote in message
news:jtadnQ1pp5qGVBranZ2dnUVZ_jSdnZ2d@inreach.com...
Mike Flannigan wrote:
"dapra" <dapra1@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:GOadnYVqY6o2KxranZ2dnUVZ_qqgnZ2d@comcast.com...
Republicans attack it. They call it bankrupt, and want to privatize it.
My opinion; until they balance the budget TODAY, instead of piling up
deficit and debt on our children, they should just SHUT UP, and don't
scare the people what may happen 40 years from now.
Ahem.. The democrats control the purse strings and the SS issue is
NOTHING to them but a political issue they can use to scare seniors.
Now STFU about it.
I hope you have a nice big corporate (non-government) pension building.
Well, hell yeah. SS is gonna go broke and there is nothing we can do about
it because the democrats are going to demagogue any solution for sheer
political gain.
May I remind you that SS was nice and healthy the last time the Dems
were in control. We even had a budget surplus. Now we're trillions in
debt again, and the government is printing money, making it worthless.
This alone will make SS go bankrupt, but it was W's idea (more likely
Cheney's since W doesn't seem like the kind of guy who gets a lot of
ideas) that SS should be privatized. Hey, that idea works, too. If
you're rich. And that makes sense. The Bush Administration doesn't
care about you if you're not making at least 8 figures.
What is bringing SS down right now, not to mention inflation, is the
Baby Boom generation, as they are all entering retirement.
--
Uncle Vic
2011
I hear politicians on both sides talking about the "middle class". I
hear no one talking about the "working class".
Does anyone have a definition of working class or middle class?
JAM
.
|
|
|
| User: "dapra" |
|
| Title: Re: Social Security. |
11 Jan 2008 05:21:04 PM |
|
|
Bill Dukenfield wrote:
[...]
Does anyone have a definition of working class or middle class?
JAM
Not to my knowledge. The political establishment keeps the definition of
'middle class' very loose. They probably include 90% of the population.
The definition should be the middle fifth, middle third of the
population. But that would disclose that the 'middle class' is quite
poor, because of the exponential distribution of income and wealth.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Starkiller" |
|
| Title: Re: Social Security. |
11 Jan 2008 05:40:25 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 17:57:06 -0500, Bill Dukenfield
<BillDukenfield@nospam.net> wrote:
Uncle Vic wrote:
Mike Flannigan wrote:
"Uncle Vic" <address@withheld.com> wrote in message
news:jtadnQ1pp5qGVBranZ2dnUVZ_jSdnZ2d@inreach.com...
Mike Flannigan wrote:
"dapra" <dapra1@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:GOadnYVqY6o2KxranZ2dnUVZ_qqgnZ2d@comcast.com...
Republicans attack it. They call it bankrupt, and want to privatize it.
My opinion; until they balance the budget TODAY, instead of piling up
deficit and debt on our children, they should just SHUT UP, and don't
scare the people what may happen 40 years from now.
Ahem.. The democrats control the purse strings and the SS issue is
NOTHING to them but a political issue they can use to scare seniors.
Now STFU about it.
I hope you have a nice big corporate (non-government) pension building.
Well, hell yeah. SS is gonna go broke and there is nothing we can do about
it because the democrats are going to demagogue any solution for sheer
political gain.
May I remind you that SS was nice and healthy the last time the Dems
were in control. We even had a budget surplus. Now we're trillions in
debt again, and the government is printing money, making it worthless.
This alone will make SS go bankrupt, but it was W's idea (more likely
Cheney's since W doesn't seem like the kind of guy who gets a lot of
ideas) that SS should be privatized. Hey, that idea works, too. If
you're rich. And that makes sense. The Bush Administration doesn't
care about you if you're not making at least 8 figures.
What is bringing SS down right now, not to mention inflation, is the
Baby Boom generation, as they are all entering retirement.
--
Uncle Vic
2011
I hear politicians on both sides talking about the "middle class". I
hear no one talking about the "working class".
Does anyone have a definition of working class or middle class?
JAM
The middle class, in colloquial usage, consists of those people who
have a degree of economic independence, but not a great deal of social
influence or power. The term often encompasses merchants and
professionals, bureaucrats, and some farmers and skilled workers.
Working class, well it depends on who you ask and their political
outlook so there are literally a dozen different definitions.
I think in America "working class" refers to folks that put in
standard scheduled work days for a salary or hourly wage under the
employment of others. This would probably encompass everyone from the
lower half of the "middle class" down. I would guess that it would be
anyone making under around $80K a year on average give or take?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "dapra" |
|
| Title: Re: Social Security. |
11 Jan 2008 02:25:56 PM |
|
|
Uncle Vic wrote:
Mike Flannigan wrote:
"dapra" <dapra1@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:GOadnYVqY6o2KxranZ2dnUVZ_qqgnZ2d@comcast.com...
Republicans attack it. They call it bankrupt, and want to privatize it.
My opinion; until they balance the budget TODAY, instead of piling up
deficit and debt on our children, they should just SHUT UP, and don't
scare the people what may happen 40 years from now.
Ahem.. The democrats control the purse strings and the SS issue is
NOTHING to them but a political issue they can use to scare seniors.
Now STFU about it.
I hope you have a nice big corporate (non-government) pension building.
At Enron, Adelphia, Worldcom?
--
Uncle Vic
2011
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Net Watcher" |
|
| Title: Re: Social Security. |
11 Jan 2008 07:52:37 PM |
|
|
In <GOadnYVqY6o2KxranZ2dnUVZ_qqgnZ2d@comcast.com>, dapra
<dapra1@comcast.net> wrote:
Republicans attack it. They call it bankrupt, and want to privatize it.
My opinion;
.... isn't worth a warm bucket of spit.
.
|
|
|
| User: "dapra" |
|
| Title: Re: Social Security. |
11 Jan 2008 08:14:55 PM |
|
|
Net Watcher wrote:
In <GOadnYVqY6o2KxranZ2dnUVZ_qqgnZ2d@comcast.com>, dapra
<dapra1@comcast.net> wrote:
Republicans attack it. They call it bankrupt, and want to privatize it.
My opinion;
... isn't worth a warm bucket of spit.
Delete most of the post, insert some stupid banality. That's a standard
right wingers reply. Good luck. You need it to supplement the lack of
your brain.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Net Watcher" |
|
| Title: Re: Social Security. |
13 Jan 2008 12:49:07 PM |
|
|
In <WYmdnTLK4_sxvxXanZ2dnUVZ_jGdnZ2d@comcast.com>, dapra
<dapra1@comcast.net> wrote:
Net Watcher wrote:
In <GOadnYVqY6o2KxranZ2dnUVZ_qqgnZ2d@comcast.com>, dapra
<dapra1@comcast.net> wrote:
Republicans attack it. They call it bankrupt, and want to privatize it.
My opinion;
... isn't worth a warm bucket of spit.
Delete most of the post, insert some stupid banality.
As usual you misunderstood what I did. I REMOVED the banality, and inserted
an accurate description of the importance of your nearly constant whining.
That's a standard
right wingers reply. Good luck. You need it to supplement the lack of
your brain.
This from the person who constantly complains about ad hominems aimed at him
by others.
You're burying yourself under PKBs, sonny.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "tankfixer" |
|
| Title: Re: Social Security. |
12 Jan 2008 10:46:26 AM |
|
|
In article <GOadnYVqY6o2KxranZ2dnUVZ_qqgnZ2d@comcast.com>, dapra1
@comcast.net says...
Republicans attack it. They call it bankrupt, and want to privatize it.
My opinion; until they balance the budget TODAY, instead of piling up
deficit and debt on our children, they should just SHUT UP, and don't
scare the people what may happen 40 years from now.
There are some incentives for Wall Street to get their hands on
individual accounts, but the attacks by the Republicans on SSI is rooted
in 'divide and rule'. SSI recipients are a formidable voting block.
Of course, Blackwater could easily take care of them, but we are not yet
there. They only gas Iraqis and American soldiers for now. Blackwater
is well armed for any situations. Do they have nukes too?
I see the drugs have kicked in.
.
|
|
|
| User: "dapra" |
|
| Title: Re: Social Security. |
12 Jan 2008 08:22:13 PM |
|
|
tankfixer wrote:
In article <GOadnYVqY6o2KxranZ2dnUVZ_qqgnZ2d@comcast.com>, dapra1
@comcast.net says...
Republicans attack it. They call it bankrupt, and want to privatize it.
My opinion; until they balance the budget TODAY, instead of piling up
deficit and debt on our children, they should just SHUT UP, and don't
scare the people what may happen 40 years from now.
There are some incentives for Wall Street to get their hands on
individual accounts, but the attacks by the Republicans on SSI is rooted
in 'divide and rule'. SSI recipients are a formidable voting block.
Of course, Blackwater could easily take care of them, but we are not yet
there. They only gas Iraqis and American soldiers for now. Blackwater
is well armed for any situations. Do they have nukes too?
I see the drugs have kicked in.
Your brain may never kick in.
So, how do you like Blackwater using CS gas on US soldiers?
I'd guess you would consider it a little collateral damage by an elite
private military force, not seen since the SS.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "MasterChief" |
|
| Title: Re: Social Security. |
11 Jan 2008 08:21:30 PM |
|
|
Why not privatize?
It has worked ,very well I may say, in other countries.Inquire about the
social security system on Chile and you will receive a pleasant surprise.
"dapra" <dapra1@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:GOadnYVqY6o2KxranZ2dnUVZ_qqgnZ2d@comcast.com...
Republicans attack it. They call it bankrupt, and want to privatize it.
My opinion; until they balance the budget TODAY, instead of piling up
deficit and debt on our children, they should just SHUT UP, and don't
scare the people what may happen 40 years from now.
There are some incentives for Wall Street to get their hands on individual
accounts, but the attacks by the Republicans on SSI is rooted in 'divide
and rule'. SSI recipients are a formidable voting block.
Of course, Blackwater could easily take care of them, but we are not yet
there. They only gas Iraqis and American soldiers for now. Blackwater is
well armed for any situations. Do they have nukes too?
.
|
|
|
| User: "dapra" |
|
| Title: Re: Social Security. |
11 Jan 2008 08:59:41 PM |
|
|
MasterChief wrote:
Why not privatize?
It has worked ,very well I may say, in other countries.Inquire about the
social security system on Chile and you will receive a pleasant surprise.
I don't think it worked very well. But you may want to convince me, that
Pinochet was a shining light of democracy, who privatized their pensions.
A hint;
"The junta protected one class of Chileans from privatization. The
military continues to this day to receive pensions under the old
governmental system." (1999)
Pinochet have known, that he should not mess with his base of power, and
rob, torture them as he did to the rest of the Chileans.
.
|
|
|
| User: "MasterChief" |
|
| Title: Re: Social Security. |
13 Jan 2008 10:45:25 AM |
|
|
Social security fund stolen by big government sound better for you? An open
discussion with someone so far sucked into Socialism`s machine is a waste
of time,Bye.
"dapra" <dapra1@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:iLKdnb_3E6m3sBXanZ2dnUVZ_rWtnZ2d@comcast.com...
MasterChief wrote:
Why not privatize?
It has worked ,very well I may say, in other countries.Inquire about the
social security system on Chile and you will receive a pleasant surprise.
I don't think it worked very well. But you may want to convince me, that
Pinochet was a shining light of democracy, who privatized their pensions.
A hint;
"The junta protected one class of Chileans from privatization. The
military continues to this day to receive pensions under the old
governmental system." (1999)
Pinochet have known, that he should not mess with his base of power, and
rob, torture them as he did to the rest of the Chileans.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Free Lunch" |
|
| Title: Re: Social Security. |
11 Jan 2008 08:59:52 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 21:21:30 -0500, in alt.atheism
"MasterChief" <1@nowhere.com> wrote in
<pdednS3HgK3GvhXanZ2dnUVZ_jOdnZ2d@comcast.com>:
Why not privatize?
Because it is too big to work properly in the United States in that way.
It is also a mix of pay as you go and accrual. None of the people
offering privatization have offered any method of dealing with the pay
as you go portion of the program. They also ignore the pure insurance
portion of the program (survivors and disability) when they calculate
benefits.
It has worked ,very well I may say, in other countries.Inquire about the
social security system on Chile and you will receive a pleasant surprise.
That was a special case and is not comparable to the US.
"dapra" <dapra1@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:GOadnYVqY6o2KxranZ2dnUVZ_qqgnZ2d@comcast.com...
Republicans attack it. They call it bankrupt, and want to privatize it.
My opinion; until they balance the budget TODAY, instead of piling up
deficit and debt on our children, they should just SHUT UP, and don't
scare the people what may happen 40 years from now.
There are some incentives for Wall Street to get their hands on individual
accounts, but the attacks by the Republicans on SSI is rooted in 'divide
and rule'. SSI recipients are a formidable voting block.
Of course, Blackwater could easily take care of them, but we are not yet
there. They only gas Iraqis and American soldiers for now. Blackwater is
well armed for any situations. Do they have nukes too?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
