Do Democrats know...

[DaGoose]

Thats why you prepare for the future. Thats the very definition of avoiding shit happening.

Only a young, inexperienced person would say that. I'm betting you're under 25 years old because anybody older would know better than to make a statement like that.

Wrong again.

But I bet you're used to that.

Then you've learned very little in your life, son. I almost feel sorry for you.

 

[asterism]

1) And the truth disagrees with you. As I've said, no politician will ever let SS die.

2) That will depend on how long you live. It's very likely you can collect more than you pay in.

3) No....hard truth my friend. I've seen it and again, it's easy to say you won't be a burden but in reality if you are old and broke you WILL be a burden.

1. Who said anything about letting it die? It's going to be broke.

2. Bullshit. Mathematical impossibility unless I live to well over 100.

3. Again, bullshit. Assuming facts not in evidence on your part. At this point, you're just making things up to reinforce your confirmation bias.

1) No it won't. Period. That's what you get for listening to Right Wing Radio.

2) If I'm wrong you'll have no problem proving it.

3) Facts are facts. And if you're going to try and tell me that if you end up old and no money that you'll not be a burden on SOMEBODY then you're only fooling yourself.

1. The only way it won't go broke is if benefits are cut or taxes are raised. The current structure is unsustainable.

2. You made the claim, you prove it.

3. Social Security should be returned to FDR's version. Welfare if you need it.

 

[RadiomanATL]

1) And the truth disagrees with you. As I've said, no politician will ever let SS die.

2) That will depend on how long you live. It's very likely you can collect more than you pay in.

3) No....hard truth my friend. I've seen it and again, it's easy to say you won't be a burden but in reality if you are old and broke you WILL be a burden.

1. Who said anything about letting it die? It's going to be broke.

2. Bullshit. Mathematical impossibility unless I live to well over 100.

3. Again, bullshit. Assuming facts not in evidence on your part. At this point, you're just making things up to reinforce your confirmation bias.

1) No it won't. Period. That's what you get for listening to Right Wing Radio.

2) If I'm wrong you'll have no problem proving it.

3) Facts are facts. And if you're going to try and tell me that if you end up old and no money that you'll not be a burden on SOMEBODY then you're only fooling yourself.

1. I don't listen to talk radio. When losing an argument, trot out the ole "Yeah, well yer just stoopid because you listen to talk radio".

2. Average life expectancy is around 75. 10 or so years of benefits versus 50 years of paying in? Are you this mathematically challenged?

3. Once again you're assuming that I'll end up with no money in my old age. This may be what is in your future because you do not know how to handle your wealth, but I assure you it's not in mine.

 

[RadiomanATL]

Only a young, inexperienced person would say that. I'm betting you're under 25 years old because anybody older would know better than to make a statement like that.

Wrong again.

But I bet you're used to that.

Then you've learned very little in your life, son. I almost feel sorry for you.

I've learned not to trust people who say "well, just cause I say so".

Maybe you're more gullible. Sorry for you.

 

[JBeukema]

It's gonna go broke!

No!

Yes!

Nuh-uh!

uh-huh!


does either side have any intention of presenting the numbers?

 

[DaGoose]

1. Who said anything about letting it die? It's going to be broke.

2. Bullshit. Mathematical impossibility unless I live to well over 100.

3. Again, bullshit. Assuming facts not in evidence on your part. At this point, you're just making things up to reinforce your confirmation bias.

1) No it won't. Period. That's what you get for listening to Right Wing Radio.

2) If I'm wrong you'll have no problem proving it.

3) Facts are facts. And if you're going to try and tell me that if you end up old and no money that you'll not be a burden on SOMEBODY then you're only fooling yourself.

1. I don't listen to talk radio. When losing an argument, trot out the ole "Yeah, well yer just stoopid because you listen to talk radio".

2. Average life expectancy is around 75. 10 or so years of benefits versus 50 years of paying in? Are you this mathematically challenged?

3. Once again you're assuming that I'll end up with no money in my old age. This may be what is in your future because you do not know how to handle your wealth, but I assure you it's not in mine.

1) You could have surprised me.

2) From Wiki...."Social Security benefits can exceed market returns of retirement investments under some circumstances, because as an insurance program it pays benefits not only for retirement, but for disability, as well as paying survivors and dependents (see FICA above), and this coverage begins shortly after a worker starts contributing. It can also be argued that part of Social Security's "return" is not only benefits actually paid, but the coverage against risk a worker and their family has in the event of loss of income from retirement, disability and death, even if disability and death occur at a relatively young age."

3) No, I'm not assuming anything. YOU said you would forego welfare in the event that your investments don't work out. I just pointed out that what you said was bullshit, that if you needed welfare you would apply for it like anyone else regardless of what you're saying now.

And it is because of point #3 that I can safely assume that you're pretty young, son. You put forth an aura of invincibility and while that's admirable it's also childish. I have seen better, harder working men than you beaten down. And anyone who's been around and seen what the market forces have done to 401k's knows what I'm talking about.

 

[glew]

And anyone who's been around and seen what the market forces have done to 401k's knows what I'm talking about.

Good thing Barry has a hardon for jacking the capital gains back up to 50%...Then 401k's will really be worth something

 

[DaGoose]

Wrong again.

But I bet you're used to that.

Then you've learned very little in your life, son. I almost feel sorry for you.

I've learned not to trust people who say "well, just cause I say so".

Maybe you're more gullible. Sorry for you.

Well you're obviously trusting somebody that's feeding you and millions of others a line of bullshit. Let's address YOUR gullibility, shall we?

Social Security going broke has frequently been used to argue for dismantling the system. And it's technically true, and assuming (as we shouldn't) that the federal government does nothing until the surplus that's been deliberately built is altogether depleted.

This surplus, often referred to as the trust fund, is currently about $2.5 trillion. As the New York Times reported in March, the trustees have projected that it will be down to zero in 2037. Even this doesn't mean the system will be broke. Workers and their employers will still be paying Social Security payroll taxes. Left unchanged, they'll be enough to cover about 78 percent of benefits.

Five Big Myths About Social Security | Poverty in America | Change.org

 

[DaGoose]

And anyone who's been around and seen what the market forces have done to 401k's knows what I'm talking about.

Good thing Barry has a hardon for jacking the capital gains back up to 50%...Then 401k's will really be worth something

Not until you cash them in and generally one would be in a lower income bracket.

 

[MaggieMae]

1. Reality disagrees with you.

2. It takes more from me than it will pay out. If it ever pays anything to me.

3. Bullshit. Complete fabrication on your part.

1) And the truth disagrees with you. As I've said, no politician will ever let SS die.

2) That will depend on how long you live. It's very likely you can collect more than you pay in.

3) No....hard truth my friend. I've seen it and again, it's easy to say you won't be a burden but in reality if you are old and broke you WILL be a burden.

About #2, do you have statistics on the likelihood of recipients getting out more than they pay in? If so, post them. If not, retract your point.

When Social Security was instituted, life expectancy was only estimated to reach 63, and beneficiaries would not be able to collect unless and until they reached 65. Today, life expectancy is 78 (varying a few points between men and women) due to huge medical and scientific advancements. Therefore, it is not unusual for a recipient to get far more out of their Social Security fund than they actually paid in.

 

[MaggieMae]

It's gonna go broke!

No!

Yes!

Nuh-uh!

uh-huh!


does either side have any intention of presenting the numbers?

This site tells more about the financial condition than the Social Security home page, which is directed more toward new recipients.

Social Security history Frequently Asked Questions

 

[MaggieMae]

And anyone who's been around and seen what the market forces have done to 401k's knows what I'm talking about.

Good thing Barry has a hardon for jacking the capital gains back up to 50%...Then 401k's will really be worth something

Hey, stupid, Obama proposed a 20% increase, not 50%. In any event, it isn't up to him.

News Headlines

 

[JBeukema]

2) From Wiki...."Social Security benefits can exceed market returns of retirement investments under some circumstances, because as an insurance program

The gov't went to court to argue that it's not insurance- despite their assurances to the contrary

Is Social Security Constitutional? by John Attarian

 

[RadiomanATL]

1) No it won't. Period. That's what you get for listening to Right Wing Radio.

2) If I'm wrong you'll have no problem proving it.

3) Facts are facts. And if you're going to try and tell me that if you end up old and no money that you'll not be a burden on SOMEBODY then you're only fooling yourself.

1. I don't listen to talk radio. When losing an argument, trot out the ole "Yeah, well yer just stoopid because you listen to talk radio".

2. Average life expectancy is around 75. 10 or so years of benefits versus 50 years of paying in? Are you this mathematically challenged?

3. Once again you're assuming that I'll end up with no money in my old age. This may be what is in your future because you do not know how to handle your wealth, but I assure you it's not in mine.

1) You could have surprised me.

2) From Wiki...."Social Security benefits can exceed market returns of retirement investments under some circumstances, because as an insurance program it pays benefits not only for retirement, but for disability, as well as paying survivors and dependents (see FICA above), and this coverage begins shortly after a worker starts contributing. It can also be argued that part of Social Security's "return" is not only benefits actually paid, but the coverage against risk a worker and their family has in the event of loss of income from retirement, disability and death, even if disability and death occur at a relatively young age."

3) No, I'm not assuming anything. YOU said you would forego welfare in the event that your investments don't work out. I just pointed out that what you said was bullshit, that if you needed welfare you would apply for it like anyone else regardless of what you're saying now.

And it is because of point #3 that I can safely assume that you're pretty young, son. You put forth an aura of invincibility and while that's admirable it's also childish. I have seen better, harder working men than you beaten down. And anyone who's been around and seen what the market forces have done to 401k's knows what I'm talking about.

1. I bet you're easily surprised.

2. Under some certain circumstances. So if I am disabled at a very young age, and then die, and my widow and children can continue to collect. Sounds highly unlikely to me. Quite a contrast to your original claim of:

2) That will depend on how long you live. It's very likely you can collect more than you pay in.

I don't allow people to move goalposts. So...epic fail on your part there.

3. So...another epic fail on your part? Appeal to authority logical fallacy combined with weak anecdotal evidence? Strike 3, yer out.

BTW: I've seen my 401k grow at a rate of about 8% over the course of the last 15 years. Some years were in double digits. Some years less than a percentage point. But over the long term, roughly 8%.

 

[RadiomanATL]

Then you've learned very little in your life, son. I almost feel sorry for you.

I've learned not to trust people who say "well, just cause I say so".

Maybe you're more gullible. Sorry for you.

Well you're obviously trusting somebody that's feeding you and millions of others a line of bullshit. Let's address YOUR gullibility, shall we?

Social Security going broke has frequently been used to argue for dismantling the system. And it's technically true, and assuming (as we shouldn't) that the federal government does nothing until the surplus that's been deliberately built is altogether depleted.

This surplus, often referred to as the trust fund, is currently about $2.5 trillion. As the New York Times reported in March, the trustees have projected that it will be down to zero in 2037. Even this doesn't mean the system will be broke. Workers and their employers will still be paying Social Security payroll taxes. Left unchanged, they'll be enough to cover about 78 percent of benefits.

Five Big Myths About Social Security | Poverty in America | Change.org

So...it'll run out of money, but don't worry cause there's gonna be a solution sometime, but we just don't know what? And pray you're not in the 22% of people who will receive nothing by a methodology to be determined later?

Come back when you got some game, son. You're getting eaten alive here.

 

[DaGoose]

I've learned not to trust people who say "well, just cause I say so".

Maybe you're more gullible. Sorry for you.

Well you're obviously trusting somebody that's feeding you and millions of others a line of bullshit. Let's address YOUR gullibility, shall we?

Social Security going broke has frequently been used to argue for dismantling the system. And it's technically true, and assuming (as we shouldn't) that the federal government does nothing until the surplus that's been deliberately built is altogether depleted.

This surplus, often referred to as the trust fund, is currently about $2.5 trillion. As the New York Times reported in March, the trustees have projected that it will be down to zero in 2037. Even this doesn't mean the system will be broke. Workers and their employers will still be paying Social Security payroll taxes. Left unchanged, they'll be enough to cover about 78 percent of benefits.

Five Big Myths About Social Security | Poverty in America | Change.org

So...it'll run out of money, but don't worry cause there's gonna be a solution sometime, but we just don't know what? And pray you're not in the 22% of people who will receive nothing by a methodology to be determined later?

Come back when you got some game, son. You're getting eaten alive here.

And for you it's a swing and a miss (as usual). You can continue to run around like all of your right wing buddies and cry "The sky is falling"!!!! When you finally learn who the biggest voting bloc is and which lobby is the most powerful in Washington you'll begin to open your eyes and see you're crying for nothing.

You also claim to have paid into a 401k for 15 years. Yet you argue politics like a teenager. For supposedly being at least in your 30's (which I highly doubt) you sure haven't learned much, have you?

You especially showed your immature ignorance when you implied that nothing bad can ever happen to anyone that they cannot overcome. You called them "idiots who had no idea how to prepare for the future". What a sheltered life you must lead!! Are you still living with mommy and daddy?

You have also shown you know about as much about unions as you do about how the SS system works, which sure isn't much.

Game? I've got plenty of it and will give you all you can handle. But I don't think you're old enough to waste my time with because you know so little about life. Come back when you've grown up a bit, son.

 

[RadiomanATL]

Well you're obviously trusting somebody that's feeding you and millions of others a line of bullshit. Let's address YOUR gullibility, shall we?

Social Security going broke has frequently been used to argue for dismantling the system. And it's technically true, and assuming (as we shouldn't) that the federal government does nothing until the surplus that's been deliberately built is altogether depleted.

This surplus, often referred to as the trust fund, is currently about $2.5 trillion. As the New York Times reported in March, the trustees have projected that it will be down to zero in 2037. Even this doesn't mean the system will be broke. Workers and their employers will still be paying Social Security payroll taxes. Left unchanged, they'll be enough to cover about 78 percent of benefits.

Five Big Myths About Social Security | Poverty in America | Change.org

So...it'll run out of money, but don't worry cause there's gonna be a solution sometime, but we just don't know what? And pray you're not in the 22% of people who will receive nothing by a methodology to be determined later?

Come back when you got some game, son. You're getting eaten alive here.

And for you it's a swing and a miss (as usual). You can continue to run around like all of your right wing buddies and cry "The sky is falling"!!!! When you finally learn who the biggest voting bloc is and which lobby is the most powerful in Washington you'll begin to open your eyes and see you're crying for nothing.

You also claim to have paid into a 401k for 15 years. Yet you argue politics like a teenager. For supposedly being at least in your 30's (which I highly doubt) you sure haven't learned much, have you?

You especially showed your immature ignorance when you implied that nothing bad can ever happen to anyone that they cannot overcome. You called them "idiots who had no idea how to prepare for the future". What a sheltered life you must lead!! Are you still living with mommy and daddy?

You have also shown you know about as much about unions as you do about how the SS system works, which sure isn't much.

Game? I've got plenty of it and will give you all you can handle. But I don't think you're old enough to waste my time with because you know so little about life. Come back when you've grown up a bit, son.

So....you got a lot of bluster and bluff, but no facts to counter anything I said? Figures.

I told you to bring your game. You didn't. You lost. I would have thought you would have learned to live with losing by now though.

 

[Annie]

Well you're obviously trusting somebody that's feeding you and millions of others a line of bullshit. Let's address YOUR gullibility, shall we?

Social Security going broke has frequently been used to argue for dismantling the system. And it's technically true, and assuming (as we shouldn't) that the federal government does nothing until the surplus that's been deliberately built is altogether depleted.

This surplus, often referred to as the trust fund, is currently about $2.5 trillion. As the New York Times reported in March, the trustees have projected that it will be down to zero in 2037. Even this doesn't mean the system will be broke. Workers and their employers will still be paying Social Security payroll taxes. Left unchanged, they'll be enough to cover about 78 percent of benefits.

Five Big Myths About Social Security | Poverty in America | Change.org

So...it'll run out of money, but don't worry cause there's gonna be a solution sometime, but we just don't know what? And pray you're not in the 22% of people who will receive nothing by a methodology to be determined later?

Come back when you got some game, son. You're getting eaten alive here.

And for you it's a swing and a miss (as usual). You can continue to run around like all of your right wing buddies and cry "The sky is falling"!!!! When you finally learn who the biggest voting bloc is and which lobby is the most powerful in Washington you'll begin to open your eyes and see you're crying for nothing.

You also claim to have paid into a 401k for 15 years. Yet you argue politics like a teenager. For supposedly being at least in your 30's (which I highly doubt) you sure haven't learned much, have you?

You especially showed your immature ignorance when you implied that nothing bad can ever happen to anyone that they cannot overcome. You called them "idiots who had no idea how to prepare for the future". What a sheltered life you must lead!! Are you still living with mommy and daddy?

You have also shown you know about as much about unions as you do about how the SS system works, which sure isn't much.

Game? I've got plenty of it and will give you all you can handle. But I don't think you're old enough to waste my time with because you know so little about life. Come back when you've grown up a bit, son.

OT, are you age obsessed or what? Are you 75 or something? Condescension has its place, but you are seriously over the top.

 

[RadiomanATL]

So...it'll run out of money, but don't worry cause there's gonna be a solution sometime, but we just don't know what? And pray you're not in the 22% of people who will receive nothing by a methodology to be determined later?

Come back when you got some game, son. You're getting eaten alive here.

And for you it's a swing and a miss (as usual). You can continue to run around like all of your right wing buddies and cry "The sky is falling"!!!! When you finally learn who the biggest voting bloc is and which lobby is the most powerful in Washington you'll begin to open your eyes and see you're crying for nothing.

You also claim to have paid into a 401k for 15 years. Yet you argue politics like a teenager. For supposedly being at least in your 30's (which I highly doubt) you sure haven't learned much, have you?

You especially showed your immature ignorance when you implied that nothing bad can ever happen to anyone that they cannot overcome. You called them "idiots who had no idea how to prepare for the future". What a sheltered life you must lead!! Are you still living with mommy and daddy?

You have also shown you know about as much about unions as you do about how the SS system works, which sure isn't much.

Game? I've got plenty of it and will give you all you can handle. But I don't think you're old enough to waste my time with because you know so little about life. Come back when you've grown up a bit, son.

OT, are you age obsessed or what? Are you 75 or something? Condescension has its place, but you are seriously over the top.

It's the only thing he's got. Let him have it.

 

[RadiomanATL]

It's gonna go broke!

No!

Yes!

Nuh-uh!

uh-huh!


does either side have any intention of presenting the numbers?

Why do numbers need to be posted.

We both agree that the model is unsustainable. He just says that it will be sustained 'cause.....something......is going to make it OK.