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.
The problem is not social security itself. The problem is that the trust fund is not an asset held by the government, therefore the money you put in is gone. The government did not invest social security surpluses in every year you paid in, they spent every penny. That was your generation that did that.You missed the part where I said cut spending. I don't want to punish the wealthy, but god damn it don't increase my goddamned payroll tax to sustain your generation so that I'm paying 25% of my paycheck in taxes while then cutting the fucking top bracket to 10%. In what universe would it be fair for the payroll tax to increase to 25% on the first 100,000 someone makes, drops to 0 on the second 100,000, and then make the income tax rate for millionaires 10%. That's fucking bullshit, but it seems to be something you guys would support to keep you baby boomer asses living fat in retirement while screwing over the poor by eliminating welfare.That's because taxes on the wealthy are low.
Cut spending, then raise taxes on those who can afford it if necessary to balance the budget.
There should be a balanced budget amendment, with no gimmicks such as separating out social security or wars allowed, deficit allowed if voted on by supermajority in case of national emergency.
And no, needing to invade Iraq or Syria to overthrow their leader is not a national emergency.
Look punishing the wealthy isn't the answer, they don't have enough wealth to fund the goddamn liberal utopia the lying liberal politicians keep promising the dumb as a brick Democrats.
So who should you expect to support you and your generation when it comes time for you to retire?
If you cannot support yourself in retirement, then you have failed in life.
Really? Then what about the people that can't support themselves long before retirement?
I'll be fine come retirement, but what if I wasn't?
Would it be my fault for not having enough to save, or would it be governments fault for forcing me into a social program I knew would eventually be a failure instead of them letting me keep that money for my own retirement?
You are spot on with that point, and that is government causes people to be failures.
The problem is not social security itself. The problem is that the trust fund is not an asset held by the government, therefore the money you put in is gone. The government did not invest social security surpluses in every year you paid in, they spent every penny. That was your generation that did that.You missed the part where I said cut spending. I don't want to punish the wealthy, but god damn it don't increase my goddamned payroll tax to sustain your generation so that I'm paying 25% of my paycheck in taxes while then cutting the fucking top bracket to 10%. In what universe would it be fair for the payroll tax to increase to 25% on the first 100,000 someone makes, drops to 0 on the second 100,000, and then make the income tax rate for millionaires 10%. That's fucking bullshit, but it seems to be something you guys would support to keep you baby boomer asses living fat in retirement while screwing over the poor by eliminating welfare.Look punishing the wealthy isn't the answer, they don't have enough wealth to fund the goddamn liberal utopia the lying liberal politicians keep promising the dumb as a brick Democrats.
So who should you expect to support you and your generation when it comes time for you to retire?
If you cannot support yourself in retirement, then you have failed in life.
Really? Then what about the people that can't support themselves long before retirement?
I'll be fine come retirement, but what if I wasn't?
Would it be my fault for not having enough to save, or would it be governments fault for forcing me into a social program I knew would eventually be a failure instead of them letting me keep that money for my own retirement?
You are spot on with that point, and that is government causes people to be failures.
Don't forget George W. Bush's wars and his new Social Program Medicare Part D. Don't forget Reagan taking the debt to 1 trillion dollars for the first time in history.The problem is not social security itself. The problem is that the trust fund is not an asset held by the government, therefore the money you put in is gone. The government did not invest social security surpluses in every year you paid in, they spent every penny. That was your generation that did that.You missed the part where I said cut spending. I don't want to punish the wealthy, but god damn it don't increase my goddamned payroll tax to sustain your generation so that I'm paying 25% of my paycheck in taxes while then cutting the fucking top bracket to 10%. In what universe would it be fair for the payroll tax to increase to 25% on the first 100,000 someone makes, drops to 0 on the second 100,000, and then make the income tax rate for millionaires 10%. That's fucking bullshit, but it seems to be something you guys would support to keep you baby boomer asses living fat in retirement while screwing over the poor by eliminating welfare.
So who should you expect to support you and your generation when it comes time for you to retire?
If you cannot support yourself in retirement, then you have failed in life.
Really? Then what about the people that can't support themselves long before retirement?
I'll be fine come retirement, but what if I wasn't?
Would it be my fault for not having enough to save, or would it be governments fault for forcing me into a social program I knew would eventually be a failure instead of them letting me keep that money for my own retirement?
You are spot on with that point, and that is government causes people to be failures.
No, it's your government that did that. It's your government that conned everybody years ago into believing in this system. It's your government that is ripping everybody off and are still ripping everybody off with new social programs like Obama Care.
Don't you understand that allowing workers to opt out of this black hole would only send it into a nose dive.We can milk those socialist entitlement programs along for a few more years, an opt in or opt out choice would be fair and reasonable...
A failure always needs to hit rock bottom for it rise again...Don't you understand that allowing workers to opt out of this black hole would only send it into a nose dive.We can milk those socialist entitlement programs along for a few more years, an opt in or opt out choice would be fair and reasonable...
Imagine if 850 billion dollars per year in social security outlays, soon to top 1 trillion, we're not funded by the payroll tax.
Our country would quickly go down the toilet.
Your plan would lead to disaster.
If you cannot support yourself in retirement, then you have failed in life.
SS is not intended to be sole support but rather to supplement
There are many legit reasons why one could be in poor financial straits at retirement but those who failed to sacrifice some spending and save for retirement have indeed failed and, I would argue, did so knowingly, perhaps believing others - family or gov't - would carry them.
SS's biggest problem is the mass of soon-to-be retired (and collecting SS) baby-boomers. Currently there are 5 workers for every SS beneficiary. In 10 years the ratio will be 3.5 to 1.
Double digit interest? Are you living in 1978? My mortgage was about 4%, my stepfather's car loan is 1.5%.A bank charges double digit interest and pays less than 1% interest and charges those with small balances a fee, while providing loans at a lesser rate to those with large accounts and paying a higher rate of interest isn't fair, and is an example of legal institutional discrimination.
Wry seems to live in a loony leftist fog where any lie that smears "the rich" is justifiable. Hers is a pretty common Bernie Sanders lament where the rich are rich because the poor are poor.
It's stupid but it seems to make them feel good about themselves.
So is envy...If you cannot support yourself in retirement, then you have failed in life.
SS is not intended to be sole support but rather to supplement
There are many legit reasons why one could be in poor financial straits at retirement but those who failed to sacrifice some spending and save for retirement have indeed failed and, I would argue, did so knowingly, perhaps believing others - family or gov't - would carry them.
SS's biggest problem is the mass of soon-to-be retired (and collecting SS) baby-boomers. Currently there are 5 workers for every SS beneficiary. In 10 years the ratio will be 3.5 to 1.
Double digit interest? Are you living in 1978? My mortgage was about 4%, my stepfather's car loan is 1.5%.A bank charges double digit interest and pays less than 1% interest and charges those with small balances a fee, while providing loans at a lesser rate to those with large accounts and paying a higher rate of interest isn't fair, and is an example of legal institutional discrimination.
Wry seems to live in a loony leftist fog where any lie that smears "the rich" is justifiable. Hers is a pretty common Bernie Sanders lament where the rich are rich because the poor are poor.
It's stupid but it seems to make them feel good about themselves.
Facts seem to confuse you. Greed is a deadly sin,
The problem is not social security itself. The problem is that the trust fund is not an asset held by the government, therefore the money you put in is gone. The government did not invest social security surpluses in every year you paid in, they spent every penny. That was your generation that did that.You missed the part where I said cut spending. I don't want to punish the wealthy, but god damn it don't increase my goddamned payroll tax to sustain your generation so that I'm paying 25% of my paycheck in taxes while then cutting the fucking top bracket to 10%. In what universe would it be fair for the payroll tax to increase to 25% on the first 100,000 someone makes, drops to 0 on the second 100,000, and then make the income tax rate for millionaires 10%. That's fucking bullshit, but it seems to be something you guys would support to keep you baby boomer asses living fat in retirement while screwing over the poor by eliminating welfare.
So who should you expect to support you and your generation when it comes time for you to retire?
If you cannot support yourself in retirement, then you have failed in life.
Really? Then what about the people that can't support themselves long before retirement?
I'll be fine come retirement, but what if I wasn't?
Would it be my fault for not having enough to save, or would it be governments fault for forcing me into a social program I knew would eventually be a failure instead of them letting me keep that money for my own retirement?
You are spot on with that point, and that is government causes people to be failures.
No, it's your government that did that. It's your government that conned everybody years ago into believing in this system. It's your government that is ripping everybody off and are still ripping everybody off with new social programs like Obama Care.
So is envy...If you cannot support yourself in retirement, then you have failed in life.
SS is not intended to be sole support but rather to supplement
There are many legit reasons why one could be in poor financial straits at retirement but those who failed to sacrifice some spending and save for retirement have indeed failed and, I would argue, did so knowingly, perhaps believing others - family or gov't - would carry them.
SS's biggest problem is the mass of soon-to-be retired (and collecting SS) baby-boomers. Currently there are 5 workers for every SS beneficiary. In 10 years the ratio will be 3.5 to 1.
Double digit interest? Are you living in 1978? My mortgage was about 4%, my stepfather's car loan is 1.5%.A bank charges double digit interest and pays less than 1% interest and charges those with small balances a fee, while providing loans at a lesser rate to those with large accounts and paying a higher rate of interest isn't fair, and is an example of legal institutional discrimination.
Wry seems to live in a loony leftist fog where any lie that smears "the rich" is justifiable. Hers is a pretty common Bernie Sanders lament where the rich are rich because the poor are poor.
It's stupid but it seems to make them feel good about themselves.
Facts seem to confuse you. Greed is a deadly sin,
Maybe so, It's different every year for me... I never know till January.So is envy...If you cannot support yourself in retirement, then you have failed in life.
SS is not intended to be sole support but rather to supplement
There are many legit reasons why one could be in poor financial straits at retirement but those who failed to sacrifice some spending and save for retirement have indeed failed and, I would argue, did so knowingly, perhaps believing others - family or gov't - would carry them.
SS's biggest problem is the mass of soon-to-be retired (and collecting SS) baby-boomers. Currently there are 5 workers for every SS beneficiary. In 10 years the ratio will be 3.5 to 1.
Double digit interest? Are you living in 1978? My mortgage was about 4%, my stepfather's car loan is 1.5%.A bank charges double digit interest and pays less than 1% interest and charges those with small balances a fee, while providing loans at a lesser rate to those with large accounts and paying a higher rate of interest isn't fair, and is an example of legal institutional discrimination.
Wry seems to live in a loony leftist fog where any lie that smears "the rich" is justifiable. Hers is a pretty common Bernie Sanders lament where the rich are rich because the poor are poor.
It's stupid but it seems to make them feel good about themselves.
Facts seem to confuse you. Greed is a deadly sin,
I'd bet I pay more in taxes in a year, than you gross in the same year.
The problem is not social security itself. The problem is that the trust fund is not an asset held by the government, therefore the money you put in is gone. The government did not invest social security surpluses in every year you paid in, they spent every penny. That was your generation that did that.You missed the part where I said cut spending. I don't want to punish the wealthy, but god damn it don't increase my goddamned payroll tax to sustain your generation so that I'm paying 25% of my paycheck in taxes while then cutting the fucking top bracket to 10%. In what universe would it be fair for the payroll tax to increase to 25% on the first 100,000 someone makes, drops to 0 on the second 100,000, and then make the income tax rate for millionaires 10%. That's fucking bullshit, but it seems to be something you guys would support to keep you baby boomer asses living fat in retirement while screwing over the poor by eliminating welfare.
So who should you expect to support you and your generation when it comes time for you to retire?
If you cannot support yourself in retirement, then you have failed in life.
Really? Then what about the people that can't support themselves long before retirement?
I'll be fine come retirement, but what if I wasn't?
Would it be my fault for not having enough to save, or would it be governments fault for forcing me into a social program I knew would eventually be a failure instead of them letting me keep that money for my own retirement?
You are spot on with that point, and that is government causes people to be failures.
No, it's your government that did that. It's your government that conned everybody years ago into believing in this system. It's your government that is ripping everybody off and are still ripping everybody off with new social programs like Obama Care.
How about the government just cuts me a check for the total amount of my money they have taken from me to 'hold' for me...I won't pay in anymore, they won't take anymore feom me, and I won't ask for anymore money?!
That's not possible, though, because MY money is GONE! To get 'MY' money the ponzi scheme must continue.
Maybe so, It's different every year for me... I never know till January.So is envy...If you cannot support yourself in retirement, then you have failed in life.
SS is not intended to be sole support but rather to supplement
There are many legit reasons why one could be in poor financial straits at retirement but those who failed to sacrifice some spending and save for retirement have indeed failed and, I would argue, did so knowingly, perhaps believing others - family or gov't - would carry them.
SS's biggest problem is the mass of soon-to-be retired (and collecting SS) baby-boomers. Currently there are 5 workers for every SS beneficiary. In 10 years the ratio will be 3.5 to 1.
Double digit interest? Are you living in 1978? My mortgage was about 4%, my stepfather's car loan is 1.5%.
Wry seems to live in a loony leftist fog where any lie that smears "the rich" is justifiable. Hers is a pretty common Bernie Sanders lament where the rich are rich because the poor are poor.
It's stupid but it seems to make them feel good about themselves.
Facts seem to confuse you. Greed is a deadly sin,
I'd bet I pay more in taxes in a year, than you gross in the same year.
So what's your point??
Glad for ya, by the way I don't think you should have to pay any taxes, you being retired and all you have already paid your dues...Maybe so, It's different every year for me... I never know till January.So is envy...SS is not intended to be sole support but rather to supplement
There are many legit reasons why one could be in poor financial straits at retirement but those who failed to sacrifice some spending and save for retirement have indeed failed and, I would argue, did so knowingly, perhaps believing others - family or gov't - would carry them.
SS's biggest problem is the mass of soon-to-be retired (and collecting SS) baby-boomers. Currently there are 5 workers for every SS beneficiary. In 10 years the ratio will be 3.5 to 1.
Wry seems to live in a loony leftist fog where any lie that smears "the rich" is justifiable. Hers is a pretty common Bernie Sanders lament where the rich are rich because the poor are poor.
It's stupid but it seems to make them feel good about themselves.
Facts seem to confuse you. Greed is a deadly sin,
I'd bet I pay more in taxes in a year, than you gross in the same year.
So what's your point??
Wow, you're really dumb. You claimed I was envious, I'm not, I'm retired with an income of six figures, I own two late model vehicles, and two homes in the SF Bay Area, one outright, the other with a small mortgage which is rented. A third I own with my sister, a large home situated 10 minutes from SFO, 10 minutes to BART and CALTrain, 10 minutes to 101 and ten minutes to 280 (midway between San Francisco and Silicon Valley).
Maybe so, It's different every year for me... I never know till January.So is envy...SS is not intended to be sole support but rather to supplement
There are many legit reasons why one could be in poor financial straits at retirement but those who failed to sacrifice some spending and save for retirement have indeed failed and, I would argue, did so knowingly, perhaps believing others - family or gov't - would carry them.
SS's biggest problem is the mass of soon-to-be retired (and collecting SS) baby-boomers. Currently there are 5 workers for every SS beneficiary. In 10 years the ratio will be 3.5 to 1.
Wry seems to live in a loony leftist fog where any lie that smears "the rich" is justifiable. Hers is a pretty common Bernie Sanders lament where the rich are rich because the poor are poor.
It's stupid but it seems to make them feel good about themselves.
Facts seem to confuse you. Greed is a deadly sin,
I'd bet I pay more in taxes in a year, than you gross in the same year.
So what's your point??
Wow, you're really dumb. You claimed I was envious, I'm not, I'm retired with an income of six figures, I own two late model vehicles, and two homes in the SF Bay Area, one outright, the other with a small mortgage which is rented. A third I own with my sister, a large home situated 10 minutes from SFO, 10 minutes to BART and CALTrain, 10 minutes to 101 and ten minutes to 280 (midway between San Francisco and Silicon Valley).
Now you're catching on. Since Social Security's 15% is only on the first $118 thousand, it hits the middle class and poor especially hard. While we add that percentage to our income tax rate to get out total percentage paid before we take home anything, the rich pay a smaller percentage of their gross earnings on Social Security.The problem is not social security itself. The problem is that the trust fund is not an asset held by the government, therefore the money you put in is gone. The government did not invest social security surpluses in every year you paid in, they spent every penny. That was your generation that did that.So who should you expect to support you and your generation when it comes time for you to retire?
If you cannot support yourself in retirement, then you have failed in life.
Really? Then what about the people that can't support themselves long before retirement?
I'll be fine come retirement, but what if I wasn't?
Would it be my fault for not having enough to save, or would it be governments fault for forcing me into a social program I knew would eventually be a failure instead of them letting me keep that money for my own retirement?
You are spot on with that point, and that is government causes people to be failures.
No, it's your government that did that. It's your government that conned everybody years ago into believing in this system. It's your government that is ripping everybody off and are still ripping everybody off with new social programs like Obama Care.
Since these turds in government spent all our Social Security contributions I wonder what the real income tax rate is, Social Security alone is a whopping 15.3%, add payroll and Medicare and federal alone is close to or over 50% of every dollar earned.
You honestly think every liberal is on welfare?Maybe so, It's different every year for me... I never know till January.So is envy...Facts seem to confuse you. Greed is a deadly sin,
I'd bet I pay more in taxes in a year, than you gross in the same year.
So what's your point??
Wow, you're really dumb. You claimed I was envious, I'm not, I'm retired with an income of six figures, I own two late model vehicles, and two homes in the SF Bay Area, one outright, the other with a small mortgage which is rented. A third I own with my sister, a large home situated 10 minutes from SFO, 10 minutes to BART and CALTrain, 10 minutes to 101 and ten minutes to 280 (midway between San Francisco and Silicon Valley).
I thought you were a liberal?
