Liberals Think We're Jerks For Wanting To Control Spending

[g5000]

We are living decades longer than our ancestors who established Social Security. We should be working longer than they did.

Common sense.

F*ck that idea in the ass with a freight train, back up, and do it again.
Number one - people are NOT living longer. That is a myth.

Sorry. It is a fact. Life expectancy is decades longer.

The truth is MORE people are living longer lives than before.
It isn't that our lifespan has increased, it is the number of people living longer.
Retire at 70, Jesus Christ! I will be 50 next month - you think I want to work another 20 f*cking years????? Oh hell no.

"Gimme gimme gimme, and make that guy over there pay for it." That's your attitude, and the attitude of most Americans these days. And it is bankrupting us.

5.4% of Americans were over 65 in 1935. Today, 13.1% of Americans are over 65. This is an unsustainable trend.

I want to be able to retire at an age, hopefully, I can enjoy some good years before old age becomes the disease it is, and I can't enjoy anything anymore.

Social Security was not intended for you to live for decades off the government treasury. It is INSURANCE meant to support those who lived beyond the mean. It was not intended to support everyone.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

We are living decades longer than our ancestors who established Social Security. We should be working longer than they did.

Common sense.

F*ck that idea in the ass with a freight train, back up, and do it again.
Number one - people are NOT living longer. That is a myth.
The truth is MORE people are living longer lives than before.
It isn't that our lifespan has increased, it is the number of people living longer.
Retire at 70, Jesus Christ! I will be 50 next month - you think I want to work another 20 f*cking years????? Oh hell no.
I want to be able to retire at an age, hopefully, I can enjoy some good years before old age becomes the disease it is, and I can't enjoy anything anymore.
Retire at 70?
F*ck that!!

It's already set at 70 in order to receive your full benefits.
You can retire earlier but you won't receive the full amount unless you wait till you're 70.

Yes it is but I am old enough, and fortunate enough to have worked the majority of my career when companies provided pensions.
I have 26 years of pension build up, 401k and other funds that will enable me to retire at 62. However, that is based on partial social security beginning at 65.
If SS was not available till beginning at age 70, I would not be able to make that work.
On a side note...there is a tsunami coming in another 30 years when people start wanting to retire and have no pensions. Americans cannot and will not save money as a whole. There will be an amazing percentage of screwed people.

 

[peach174]

It always amuses me to the point of tears whenever I hear someone articulate a belief that Republicans want to control spending.

That people actually say that out loud, in the face of reality, is a joke that never gets old.

Which party has refused to pass a budget?

 

[iamwhatiseem]

We are living decades longer than our ancestors who established Social Security. We should be working longer than they did.

Common sense.

F*ck that idea in the ass with a freight train, back up, and do it again.
Number one - people are NOT living longer. That is a myth.

Sorry. It is a fact. Life expectancy is decades longer.

The truth is MORE people are living longer lives than before.
It isn't that our lifespan has increased, it is the number of people living longer.
Retire at 70, Jesus Christ! I will be 50 next month - you think I want to work another 20 f*cking years????? Oh hell no.

"Gimme gimme gimme, and make that guy over there pay for it." That's your attitude, and the attitude of most Americans these days. And it is bankrupting us.

5.4% of Americans were over 65 in 1935. Today, 13.1% of Americans are over 65. This is an unsustainable trend.

I want to be able to retire at an age, hopefully, I can enjoy some good years before old age becomes the disease it is, and I can't enjoy anything anymore.

Social Security was not intended for you to live decades off the government treasury. It is INSURANCE. A SAFETY NET.

No life expectancy has not increased by decades as it relates to longer lives. Life expectancy has increased because more people are attaining higher ages.
In the past 75 years LENGTH OF LIFE averages have only increased by 5.8 years.
Life expectancy, the number you hear touted all the time has more to do with INFANT MORTALITY than people living longer.
More people are alive today at 60 than 75 years ago...like 20% more.
BUT - length of life average is still only 76.
So YAAAAYYY!!!!! You pay into Social Security for almost 50 years...and only draw for 2 or 3 on average..Your RIGHT,,,great idea!!!

 

[peach174]

We are living decades longer than our ancestors who established Social Security. We should be working longer than they did.

Common sense.

F*ck that idea in the ass with a freight train, back up, and do it again.
Number one - people are NOT living longer. That is a myth.
The truth is MORE people are living longer lives than before.
It isn't that our lifespan has increased, it is the number of people living longer.
Retire at 70, Jesus Christ! I will be 50 next month - you think I want to work another 20 f*cking years????? Oh hell no.
I want to be able to retire at an age, hopefully, I can enjoy some good years before old age becomes the disease it is, and I can't enjoy anything anymore.
Retire at 70?
F*ck that!!

It's already set at 70 in order to receive your full benefits.
You can retire earlier but you won't receive the full amount unless you wait till you're 70.

Yes it is but I am old enough, and fortunate enough to have worked the majority of my career when companies provided pensions.
I have 26 years of pension build up, 401k and other funds that will enable me to retire at 62. However, that is based on partial social security beginning at 65.
If SS was not available till beginning at age 70, I would not be able to make that work.
On a side note...there is a tsunami coming in another 30 years when people start wanting to retire and have no pensions. Americans cannot and will not save money as a whole. There will be an amazing percentage of screwed people.

I'm waiting till I'm 66 to get mine. I also am in a position to be able to do that.
I don't want it raised to 70 either.
The vast number of baby boomers have already done that. The tsunami will come much sooner that 30 years if it isn't fixed now.
Most baby boomers have squat for savings.

 

[mudwhistle]

Mention spending cuts or even controlling spending and it's like holding up a cross in front of a vampire. They react violently at times. Most of the time they claim that spending cuts will bring this country down.

On Monday, President Obama released his 2016 budget, which calls for increased spending and raising taxes, and on MSNBC’s The Cycle, so-called conservative co-host Abby Huntsman did her best to scold the GOP for opposing the tax-and-spend Obama budget. ​

Speaking to Lauren Fox of National Journal, Huntsman proclaimed that Republicans’ “big thing is we’ve got to cut spending, this is not something we’re going to approve and that’s often why they are considered the jerks here, because they aren’t talking about entitlements, they are talking about cuts.” ​

Think of it. In only a few years since Obama has become president, we've gone from clamoring for spending reform to you're a terrorist for wanting to control government spending.

Anyone with half a brain can see one of the biggest problems in government isn't that we don't have any money, it's that we spend too much. So Democrats invented a word for it to demonize the practice. Austerity. Anyone who starts talking about Austerity and recommending new investment is just pumping us for more tax increases. That's really all Democrats do. They try to think of new ways of taking our cash. Spending is now investment. Controlling spending is evil austerity. Anyone who falls for this line of bs can't be thinking. The answer to everything in Washington is always throwing more money at it, yet the problems never get solved. Obama wants to give the IRS $30 billion more to become more and more inefficient. Seems the more money he throws at a problem the worse it becomes. The IRS has massively increase their budget, hired thousands of new agents, yet if you have a question about your taxes, forget getting an answer. They warn about holding up refunds this year because they claim they need more money.

Notice how everything Obama touches turns to shit?




Remember this?

June 2013

Still mired in scandal for its mishandling of nonprofit political groups, the Internal Revenue Service is prepping for a new role: chief enforcement arm of the Affordable Care Act.

That task will require new agents — 6,700, the IRS figures — and more money — about $1 billion more than the current budget.

Confronted with the tax agency’s 9-percent increase in its 2014 budget, House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wisc., blasted Deputy IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel at a meeting of the House Committee on Ways and Means Thursday morning.

After reading off a long list of instances of waste, fraud, excess and abuse at the agency over the past several years, Ryan demanded to know how the IRS felt it had the “moral authority” to ask for more money. He actually sounded almost hurt by the request.​

Links

IRS requests thousands of new agents to enforce Obamacare Watchdog.org
Abby Huntsman GOP Considered the Jerks For Wanting Spending Cuts
D j vu Budget Obama Asks for Tax Hike on Evil Capitalists - Michael Schaus - Townhall Finance Conservative Columnists and Financial Commentary - Page 1
Obama Asks For 5 100 More IRS Agents Sweetness Light
IRS Does Not Follow Federal Requirements Asks For Money The Daily Caller

No, most conservatives are jerks due to how they want to control spending.

 

[mudwhistle]

We are living decades longer than our ancestors who established Social Security. We should be working longer than they did.

Common sense.

F*ck that idea in the ass with a freight train, back up, and do it again.
Number one - people are NOT living longer. That is a myth.

Sorry. It is a fact. Life expectancy is decades longer.

The truth is MORE people are living longer lives than before.
It isn't that our lifespan has increased, it is the number of people living longer.
Retire at 70, Jesus Christ! I will be 50 next month - you think I want to work another 20 f*cking years????? Oh hell no.

"Gimme gimme gimme, and make that guy over there pay for it." That's your attitude, and the attitude of most Americans these days. And it is bankrupting us.

5.4% of Americans were over 65 in 1935. Today, 13.1% of Americans are over 65. This is an unsustainable trend.

I want to be able to retire at an age, hopefully, I can enjoy some good years before old age becomes the disease it is, and I can't enjoy anything anymore.

Social Security was not intended for you to live for decades off the government treasury. It is INSURANCE meant to support those who lived beyond the mean. It was not intended to support everyone.

The treasury would have plenty of money if congress would just stop stealing from the fund.

 

[peach174]

Spending can be cut, start with the DOD. It's not the cutting, it's what you want to cut. The Fed budget is roughly 3,500 billion. Find that cash and tell us how much you are going to save?

And you can also grow the economy and raise taxes. You are off and running.

US Federal Budget Definition - Spending Breakdown Deficit Debt Pie Chart

The budget it 3 and half Trillion not billion.
This is insane spending.

3,500 billions is 3.5 trillion. Now you know.

You're the one who dropped the s.

 

[bripat9643]

Spending can be cut, start with the DOD. It's not the cutting, it's what you want to cut. The Fed budget is roughly 3,500 billion. Find that cash and tell us how much you are going to save?

And you can also grow the economy and raise taxes. You are off and running.

US Federal Budget Definition - Spending Breakdown Deficit Debt Pie Chart

Why start with the DOD? We've been cutting that ever since WW II. How about we remove a few parasites from the government tit?

 

[iamwhatiseem]

I'm waiting till I'm 66 to get mine. I also am in a position to be able to do that.
I don't want it raised to 70 either.
The vast number of baby boomers have already done that. The tsunami will come much sooner that 30 years if it isn't fixed now.
Most baby boomers have squat for savings.

It's amazing isn't it?
I was born in 1965, so I began my adult life in 1980's - right smack in the middle of the "I want it all, and I want it now" generation.
The number of people I have known over the years that had 5 digit credit card debt.
I would never sleep! People making only combined gross income of only $50- $60k - yet driving new cars and living in a $150k home!! How freaking crazy it was.
I knew people who couldn't pay off their debts in TEN YEARS if they put 100% of their earnings towards it! More in debt than 10 years of earnings. Wow.

 

[bripat9643]

• Bureau of Indian Affairs

Cut 500 billion and you'll have a roughly balanced budget. Cut one trillion and you can start paying down the debt. Post cuts below and make sure to do the math:

1.
2.
3.
etc.

Start by eliminating the Following:

Dept of Education.
Dept of Commerce.
Dept of Energy.
Dept of Transportation.
Dept of agriculture.
Small Business Administration.
Agency for International Development (USAID).
AmeriCorps
Amtrak
Army Corps of Engineers
Bureau of Indian Affairs
Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
Food and Drug Administration
Environmental Protection Agency
.
.
.
All farm subsidies.
All student loans and grants.
All funding for research on so-called AGW.
Sell off all government owned land.

And that's just up through to the 'E's.

 

[danielpalos]

Sure; let's start with our wars on crime, drugs, poverty, and terror; that is waste of money we can't afford.

 

[BluesLegend]

Mention spending cuts or even controlling spending and it's like holding up a cross in front of a vampire. They react violently at times. Most of the time they claim that spending cuts will bring this country down.

On Monday, President Obama released his 2016 budget, which calls for increased spending and raising taxes, and on MSNBC’s The Cycle, so-called conservative co-host Abby Huntsman did her best to scold the GOP for opposing the tax-and-spend Obama budget. ​

Speaking to Lauren Fox of National Journal, Huntsman proclaimed that Republicans’ “big thing is we’ve got to cut spending, this is not something we’re going to approve and that’s often why they are considered the jerks here, because they aren’t talking about entitlements, they are talking about cuts.” ​

Think of it. In only a few years since Obama has become president, we've gone from clamoring for spending reform to you're a terrorist for wanting to control government spending.

Anyone with half a brain can see one of the biggest problems in government isn't that we don't have any money, it's that we spend too much. So Democrats invented a word for it to demonize the practice. Austerity. Anyone who starts talking about Austerity and recommending new investment is just pumping us for more tax increases. That's really all Democrats do. They try to think of new ways of taking our cash. Spending is now investment. Controlling spending is evil austerity. Anyone who falls for this line of bs can't be thinking. The answer to everything in Washington is always throwing more money at it, yet the problems never get solved. Obama wants to give the IRS $30 billion more to become more and more inefficient. Seems the more money he throws at a problem the worse it becomes. The IRS has massively increase their budget, hired thousands of new agents, yet if you have a question about your taxes, forget getting an answer. They warn about holding up refunds this year because they claim they need more money.

Notice how everything Obama touches turns to shit?




Remember this?

June 2013

Still mired in scandal for its mishandling of nonprofit political groups, the Internal Revenue Service is prepping for a new role: chief enforcement arm of the Affordable Care Act.

That task will require new agents — 6,700, the IRS figures — and more money — about $1 billion more than the current budget.

Confronted with the tax agency’s 9-percent increase in its 2014 budget, House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wisc., blasted Deputy IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel at a meeting of the House Committee on Ways and Means Thursday morning.

After reading off a long list of instances of waste, fraud, excess and abuse at the agency over the past several years, Ryan demanded to know how the IRS felt it had the “moral authority” to ask for more money. He actually sounded almost hurt by the request.​

Links

IRS requests thousands of new agents to enforce Obamacare Watchdog.org
Abby Huntsman GOP Considered the Jerks For Wanting Spending Cuts
D j vu Budget Obama Asks for Tax Hike on Evil Capitalists - Michael Schaus - Townhall Finance Conservative Columnists and Financial Commentary - Page 1
Obama Asks For 5 100 More IRS Agents Sweetness Light
IRS Does Not Follow Federal Requirements Asks For Money The Daily Caller

Republicans don't want to cut spending. They want to shift spending out of social programs and into defense.

Ahahaha were you watching a news broadcast from 1971?

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Sure; let's start with our wars on crime, drugs, poverty, and terror; that is waste of money we can't afford.

You have to begin with entitlements. It is 70% of the budget, and 80% of our new additional debt piled on by this administration.
We have reopened the door for new multi-generational welfare neighborhoods; that we have not had since welfare reform.
We have record food stamp disbursement.
More people getting more tax refunds than they paid in (negative tax liability)
All this is great for the democrats to get votes, but it is terrible weight on the country as a whole.

 

[Carla_Danger]

Our military is larger than the next five combined.

Yeah?
If true, why is this surprising to you?
And why would that mean something is wrong?

If America's military only involved itself within our borders, then you would have a point. Fact is the entire free world is greatly dependent on the American military, and enjoys protections thereof whether they realize it or not.
Canada would damn near be a third world economy if they had to protect their borders on their own. They know someone so much as blinks at them and the U.S. will respond instantaneously. Same goes for all of Europe. And they know it.
You think France could afford it's social programs if there was no American protection?
And God help the those in impoverished nations when disasters happen without our military logistics to provide aid and security.

Scroll over to the two min mark and start there....

 

[candycorn]

Republicans don't want to cut spending. They want to shift spending out of social programs and into defense.

Nope. But thanks for playing.

Provide a link for that and we'll discuss.

Provide a link to the Republicans in the last election who ran on cutting defense.

that makes no sense at all. Why would anyone in their right mind cut defense with all of the new threats we have today.

ISIS taking Northern Iraq
Russian aggression
Chinese expansion
Al Qaeda is growing again
Talliban is growing

ISIS is nowhere near the supposed threat that Iraq was.
Russian Aggression in 2015 is a tenth what it was in 1980
Chinese Expansion is about the same as it always was
Al Queda is decimated as is the Taliban. It's growth is of little concern.

Lies, all lies.

But thank you for posting without any insults. Very commendable.

.

You have no credibility if you think the following

So...you think Russia today is stronger than the USSR was?
You think this ISIS bunch is more dangerous than the Republican guard?
China is our #1 trading partner....it would be suicide for them to jeopardize that favorable relationship. You think they are a threat to attack us?

 

[candycorn]

Republicans don't want to cut spending. They want to shift spending out of social programs and into defense.

Nope. But thanks for playing.

Provide a link for that and we'll discuss.

Provide a link to the Republicans in the last election who ran on cutting defense.

that makes no sense at all. Why would anyone in their right mind cut defense with all of the new threats we have today.

ISIS taking Northern Iraq
Russian aggression
Chinese expansion
Al Qaeda is growing again
Talliban is growing

ISIS is nowhere near the supposed threat that Iraq was.
Russian Aggression in 2015 is a tenth what it was in 1980
Chinese Expansion is about the same as it always was
Al Queda is decimated as is the Taliban. It's growth is of little concern.

And here are some Q tips so you can clean the sand out of your ears.
Look, go do whatever it is your do with yourself until such time as some cause which upsets your radical feminism is aroused.

Correcting right wing lies would be a full time job if they were not so easy to correct.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Our military is larger than the next five combined.

Yeah?
If true, why is this surprising to you?
And why would that mean something is wrong?

If America's military only involved itself within our borders, then you would have a point. Fact is the entire free world is greatly dependent on the American military, and enjoys protections thereof whether they realize it or not.
Canada would damn near be a third world economy if they had to protect their borders on their own. They know someone so much as blinks at them and the U.S. will respond instantaneously. Same goes for all of Europe. And they know it.
You think France could afford it's social programs if there was no American protection?
And God help the those in impoverished nations when disasters happen without our military logistics to provide aid and security.

Scroll over to the two min mark and start there....

I'm sorry, your point is...?
That there is waste and fraud in Afghanistan?? Nooooooo...your kidding???
You realize this is not the doing of the military? Right? You know that?
It is the meddling of politicians into the situation that creates fraud and waste.
Oh...and it is not just Republicans.

 

[mudwhistle]

Nope. But thanks for playing.

Provide a link for that and we'll discuss.

Provide a link to the Republicans in the last election who ran on cutting defense.

that makes no sense at all. Why would anyone in their right mind cut defense with all of the new threats we have today.

ISIS taking Northern Iraq
Russian aggression
Chinese expansion
Al Qaeda is growing again
Talliban is growing

ISIS is nowhere near the supposed threat that Iraq was.
Russian Aggression in 2015 is a tenth what it was in 1980
Chinese Expansion is about the same as it always was
Al Queda is decimated as is the Taliban. It's growth is of little concern.

Lies, all lies.

But thank you for posting without any insults. Very commendable.

.

You have no credibility if you think the following

So...you think Russia today is stronger than the USSR was?
You think this ISIS bunch is more dangerous than the Republican guard?
China is our #1 trading partner....it would be suicide for them to jeopardize that favorable relationship. You think they are a threat to attack us?

Russia is still a threat. I won't argue which was more of a threat. China is a military threat and an economic threat. Greater than in the past. And ISIS is a threat not only to us but Muslims. They are a rabid dog. If they get a nuke they are a worse threat than Saddam,....and you can thank your Messiah for that

 

[mudwhistle]

Nope. But thanks for playing.

Provide a link for that and we'll discuss.

Provide a link to the Republicans in the last election who ran on cutting defense.

that makes no sense at all. Why would anyone in their right mind cut defense with all of the new threats we have today.

ISIS taking Northern Iraq
Russian aggression
Chinese expansion
Al Qaeda is growing again
Talliban is growing

ISIS is nowhere near the supposed threat that Iraq was.
Russian Aggression in 2015 is a tenth what it was in 1980
Chinese Expansion is about the same as it always was
Al Queda is decimated as is the Taliban. It's growth is of little concern.

And here are some Q tips so you can clean the sand out of your ears.
Look, go do whatever it is your do with yourself until such time as some cause which upsets your radical feminism is aroused.

Correcting right wing lies would be a full time job if they were not so easy to correct.

Only in your twisted little mind.