Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
How fortunate for you that you have the business sense to be able to do much better than the present system. But let me ask you - what about those who do not have your ability to handle money? These people are in the vast majority, you know. What happens to those folks when they turn 65 or whatever and, golly gee, they DIDN'T make "smarter decisions" during their working years and now they have . . . nothing.
What about those folks? And don't say you don't care, that if they can't fend for themselves, they deserve whatever they get. Because guess who is going to have to bear the burden of "whatever they get" - that would be YOU, brother.
Giving it to the gubment and hoping you get it returned is a "smart decision"?.....
Perhaps not. But a damn sight smarter than forcing people who are totally incapable of doing so, to manage their own funds in order to sustain themselves in retirement.
Frank, I am a Pub, who is unhappy with the Tea Party's corporatist fascist wing. No one wants to give Obama a blank check, and the conservative wing of the party is banging McConnell about. Serious cuts in spending, raise the limit, make all Americans share the burden equitably of the social compact.
You understand that as the TP moves further to the right, that allows Obama to move far more toward the center, and his liberal base can't stop it. BHO is making the hard righties look as stupid as did Clinton.
I'd much rather have that money they're supposedly taking for 'my retirement' in my own pocket to invest it how I see fit. I can make much smarter decisions with it than they ever will on my behalf. My rate of return would be much higher than theirs is, if there even is a ROR on it at all anymore.
How fortunate for you that you have the business sense to be able to do much better than the present system. But let me ask you - what about those who do not have your ability to handle money? These people are in the vast majority, you know. What happens to those folks when they turn 65 or whatever and, golly gee, they DIDN'T make "smarter decisions" during their working years and now they have . . . nothing.
What about those folks? And don't say you don't care, that if they can't fend for themselves, they deserve whatever they get. Because guess who is going to have to bear the burden of "whatever they get" - that would be YOU, brother.
Frank, I am a Pub, who is unhappy with the Tea Party's corporatist fascist wing. No one wants to give Obama a blank check, and the conservative wing of the party is banging McConnell about. Serious cuts in spending, raise the limit, make all Americans share the burden equitably of the social compact.
You understand that as the TP moves further to the right, that allows Obama to move far more toward the center, and his liberal base can't stop it. BHO is making the hard righties look as stupid as did Clinton.
Your hardon for the people of the Tea Party is misplaced. The majority of the people say NO to raising the dept ceiling.
and you call yourself a Responsible Republican.
You are not one, so I am not concerned about that. Most people want the spending under control, and will blame us, the GOP, if we don't do that.
Obama says he cannot guarantee Social Security checks will go out on August 3
Way to go, Barry. Way to go! Criminally irresponsible talk from the Failed Leader who thinks bank ATM's are hurting the economy and thinks blowing a Trillion dollar on not so shovel ready projects is funny.
Obama= Epic Fail
Obama says he cannot guarantee Social Security checks will go out on August 3 - Political Hotsheet - CBS News
I'd much rather have that money they're supposedly taking for 'my retirement' in my own pocket to invest it how I see fit. I can make much smarter decisions with it than they ever will on my behalf. My rate of return would be much higher than theirs is, if there even is a ROR on it at all anymore.
How fortunate for you that you have the business sense to be able to do much better than the present system. But let me ask you - what about those who do not have your ability to handle money? These people are in the vast majority, you know. What happens to those folks when they turn 65 or whatever and, golly gee, they DIDN'T make "smarter decisions" during their working years and now they have . . . nothing.
What about those folks? And don't say you don't care, that if they can't fend for themselves, they deserve whatever they get. Because guess who is going to have to bear the burden of "whatever they get" - that would be YOU, brother.
Giving it to the gubment and hoping you get it returned is a "smart decision"?.....
Perhaps not. But a damn sight smarter than forcing people who are totally incapable of doing so, to manage their own funds in order to sustain themselves in retirement.
Right, gubment knows best.....
Haven't the libs been screeching that SS is not broke? Now, unless they're allowed to borrow $1,000,000,000,000 more they can't even make SS payments?
How fucking dishonest are these people?
Your hardon for the people of the Tea Party is misplaced. The majority of the people say NO to raising the dept ceiling.
and you call yourself a Responsible Republican.
You are not one, so I am not concerned about that. Most people want the spending under control, and will blame us, the GOP, if we don't do that.
LOL, so raising the dept ceiling is getting spending under control. you are so full of bs jakey, stop pretending you're a Republican. most people here have caught onto your game.
You are not one, so I am not concerned about that. Most people want the spending under control, and will blame us, the GOP, if we don't do that.
LOL, so raising the dept ceiling is getting spending under control. you are so full of bs jakey, stop pretending you're a Republican. most people here have caught onto your game.
Stephanie, you are not a real Republican, so I am not concerned about what you think.
You are not one, so I am not concerned about that. Most people want the spending under control, and will blame us, the GOP, if we don't do that.
LOL, so raising the dept ceiling is getting spending under control. you are so full of bs jakey, stop pretending you're a Republican. most people here have caught onto your game.
Stephanie, you are not a real Republican, so I am not concerned about what you think.
LOL, so raising the dept ceiling is getting spending under control. you are so full of bs jakey, stop pretending you're a Republican. most people here have caught onto your game.
Stephanie, you are not a real Republican, so I am not concerned about what you think.
And you're not a Republican AT ALL. so I don't concern myself when you come out and CONDEMM them..
Stephanie, you are not a real Republican, so I am not concerned about what you think.
And you're not a Republican AT ALL. so I don't concern myself when you come out and CONDEMM them..
Steph, I am a classical liberal in the true Republican tradition. You are Righty Extremist Fascist trying to pervert the party. I don't think your type will have power after 2012.
Stephanie, you are not a real Republican, so I am not concerned about what you think.
And you're not a Republican AT ALL. so I don't concern myself when you come out and CONDEMM them..
Steph, I am a classical liberal in the true Republican tradition. You are Righty Extremist Fascist trying to pervert the party. I don't think your type will have power after 2012.
Wall Street can't wait to get their hands on the $Trillions in the Social Security Trust Fund. Think of the fees they can charge to manage that. Cons will get all kinds of kick backs for that favor.Sure they would.Social Security has been a bigger and better ponzi scheme than Bernie Madoff ever thought of. It's been their slush fund ever since the onset. They spend it on wars--foreign aid--and about anything and everything--other than the well being of seniors in this country.
That's why DEMOCRAT politicians always have a crap fit when anyone suggests privatizing social security. They wouldn't be able to get their grubby little hands on it--if it were privatized.
What ever huge evil banking institution does take on the venture will be vilified worse than big oil and will be taxed shitless for their efforts.
Wall Street can't wait to get their hands on the $Trillions in the Social Security Trust Fund. Think of the fees they can charge to manage that. Cons will get all kinds of kick backs for that favor.Sure they would.Social Security has been a bigger and better ponzi scheme than Bernie Madoff ever thought of. It's been their slush fund ever since the onset. They spend it on wars--foreign aid--and about anything and everything--other than the well being of seniors in this country.
That's why DEMOCRAT politicians always have a crap fit when anyone suggests privatizing social security. They wouldn't be able to get their grubby little hands on it--if it were privatized.
What ever huge evil banking institution does take on the venture will be vilified worse than big oil and will be taxed shitless for their efforts.
Any quotes or links to support that claim??That is not a lie. In fact, most Republicans want to get rid of SS and privatize it for their banking buddies.
Not for our banking buddies,after all I don't have any banking buddies,but for my own personal satisfaction,that I alone control my destiny,not the jack fucks we see in DC now.
We are watching a monumental screw up from both sides and have been.Why would anyone in their right mind trust them with YOUR money??
But our loving Nanny State has increased the number of bills.First, the treasury has to pay the interest on the trust fund bonds. Second, the principal is there to be drawn on if necessary.
But that's not what Obama just said.
You should pay closer attention to current events
There's not enough revenue coming in to pay the bills. The difference has to be borrowed. Borrowing is done to pay the bills. Social security checks are bills. When the debt ceiling is reached, the borrowing has to stop. Once borrowing is stopped, there isn't enough revenue to pay the bills.
There's not enough revenue coming in to pay the bills. The difference has to be borrowed. Borrowing is done to pay the bills. Social security checks are bills. When the debt ceiling is reached, the borrowing has to stop. Once borrowing is stopped, there isn't enough revenue to pay the bills.
