Will Republicans end social security?

[Nostra]

I didn’t say Germany. I said Nazis in Germany love Trump. Most Germans feel the same way I do about trump.

Where is your link to these Nazis loving Trump?

 

[Nostra]

Really?

Never-before-seen text messages show former Gov. Phil Bryant tried to shepherd a proposal to use welfare funds on the construction of a new volleyball stadium for retired NFL player Brett Favre – a project prosecutors have called a scheme to defraud the government. Bryant has previously denied any involvement with the project, which has emerged as the centerpiece of a massive criminal scandal in which prominent officials misspent or stole millions in welfare funds intended for the nation’s poorest residents.

Busted! Bret Favre is stupid and text messaged his crimes.

Favre is a Dimwinger.

 

[jc456]

Where is your link to these Nazis loving Trump?

There aren’t any it’s mere tdsing

 

[Lakhota]

 

[Jarlaxle]

Been paying into SS since 1985.
If you give me the choice, I'll take it all back - in an instant.
As such I will support anyone who will give me that choice.

I would happily write off everything I have paid in if I could stop having money taken from me.

What is a fair share? You all keep saying this mantra but never say what it is. what is it?

More. Always more.

Yes here. At least that's how it worked before you guys broke all the unions. Now labor doesn't have a seat at the table. In Germany they do. In America they used to.

Yeah, Slow Joe screwed the railway unions really well, didn't he.

 

[Jarlaxle]

In 1999 Ford Motor had record profits and Ford employees got record profit sharing checks.

Without unions, your fair share is a lot less.

Unless you are someone like me who benefits from every man for himself. I always told people i'd do better if it were every man for himself. And that turned out to be right. But most of the mids who work for my company, people like you, are not making their fair share.

Today you get what the CEO's and VP's say is your fair share. That's as little as they can get away with paying you. If they paid you any less you'd form a union. So your fair share is probably $3 hr less than what you'd be making if you were in a union.

I'm in a union. When the union came in, we LOST our profit-sharing. (And unused sick time payout, and safety bonuses.) Thanks a fuckload, guys!

How do you think people who are in unions get profit sharing and pensions? They insist the employees get their fair share.

You don't get profit sharing or a pension. So today your "fair share" is a lot less than it would be if you were smart.

I did until the Teamsters came in! I have been reamed in EVERY contract so far. Latest reaming was losing my 401k match in favor of their Ponzi-I mean pension-plan that I'll never see a cent from.

 

[Jarlaxle]

You cant. From the get go, social security was set up, as Pay As You go. The money collected today from workers and employers, is to pay for senior retirements today.

The worker can not use that money for an individual possessed retirement fund....its being used to pay for those receiving SS retirement.

Like any other Ponzi scheme.

I really don't understand how people like you get this dumb. I paid into the system over 40 years. So any moron that says others are funding what I get now are totally uneducated or lack common sense which is typical of leftists.

If you don't like these programs, then petition your fellow Communists to get rid of them.

No, actually, they are-entirely-correct. The money you paid in was paid out immediately. Current benefits are paid from what is now being paid in.

How much do you have saved? If you’re like most Americans, you’re gonna need social security. And no. If they gave you the money to do what you want with it no, you would not invest it. The corporations would eat that money up you stupid stupid bastards.

Stop projecting your faults on me. I have been saving for retirement since I was in my 20s.

So for you and us because if you’re broke we will have to take care of you, we insist you put money into social security and if you die at age 66 you get nothing. That’s the trade off.

Yeah, wonderful...you steal my money at gunpoint, give it to people, and promise me something I will never see. Yee fucking ha.

 

[MarathonMike]

No. The only thing that MIGHT happen is tweaks to the existing system which have already occurred. Neither Party will ever make fundamental changes to entitlements.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Apparently not enough otherwise these programs would not be going broke.

It's demographics. The numbers were crystal-clear decades ago.

Most wouldn’t. Most people if you gave them $25,000 a year raise would just spend it.

Your poor choices are not my problem.

 

[jc456]

I don't need your money you don't pay shit. I pay more taxes than you. Paying taxes is patriotic. Have you seen the debt?

I doubt you pay more. I thought you said they didn’t need my money. I’m still waiting for why they take it

 

[jc456]

Most wouldn’t. Most people if you gave them $25,000 a year raise would just spend it.

That’s exactly what happens!!

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No, actually, they are-entirely-correct. The money you paid in was paid out immediately. Current benefits are paid from what is now being paid in.

Irrelevant. You pay into a system with the promise X will be returned for your contributions. All insurances work that way. What I pay now for auto insurance covers the bills for people getting into accidents today. It doesn't mean I'm actually writing a check to these bad drivers because they too paid into the system that covered other drivers when they got into accidents.

 

[jc456]

Irrelevant. You pay into a system with the promise X will be returned for your contributions. All insurances work that way. What I pay now for auto insurance covers the bills for people getting into accidents today. It doesn't mean I'm actually writing a check to these bad drivers because they too paid into the system that covered other drivers when they got into accidents.

technically he's correct, that is why it's a ponzi scheme. got to have cash in to pay out those who invested. The fact is, it isn't what they say it is. It ought to be self sufficient and it isn't.

 

[Papageorgio]

You talk about Fox and then you post all of those proven lies about the 2008 recession which are now trying to blame on Obama. Talk about drinking the Republican Kool-Aid. I suppose Democrats are responsible for the Reagan crash and Trump’s crash is well.

Republicans loosen restrictions in the Banking and security laws meant to prevent a 1929 style crash, and enact anti-worker economic policy, cut taxes, spend like drunken sailors, and then turn around and blame the Democrats when it all comes crashing down around them.

I don’t know who’s dumber the Republicans who keep doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result, or the people who actually believe the shit they sling.

Links?

 

[sealybobo]

Like any other Ponzi scheme.



No, actually, they are-entirely-correct. The money you paid in was paid out immediately. Current benefits are paid from what is now being paid in.



Stop projecting your faults on me. I have been saving for retirement since I was in my 20s.



Yeah, wonderful...you steal my money at gunpoint, give it to people, and promise me something I will never see. Yee fucking ha.

So you don't like social security and you would end the program. You're the only honest conservative here.

If you could tell me how ending the program for future generations wouldn't affect my payouts in 10 years I'd be all ears. Just as long as you don't cut anyone who's 50 plus' benefits not one dime. And don't raise my retirement age one day.

If you want to fuck 49 year olds, go for it.

Not a ponzi scheme. Yes, we force you because otherwise you won't and then we will have to take care of you. If you would sign an agreement that if you don't have enough money when you get older you can't crawl to the government for any help. Your kids can't ask for help. Medical bills will eat up everything you got first and then we pop a cap in your ass. Or euthenize you.

I like it. We all pay in our entire lives and if we die early, tough shit. But if we live to be 100, we will get a check every month till we are 100.

We all paid in. Our employers paid in. The fund should be full of money. When it runs out, pretend Iraq has WMD's and fill it back up with the money you would come up with if Saddam had WMD's. Right? You'd find the money then right? Idiot!

 

[jc456]

So you don't like social security and you would end the program. You're the only honest conservative here.

If you could tell me how ending the program for future generations wouldn't affect my payouts in 10 years I'd be all ears. Just as long as you don't cut anyone who's 50 plus' benefits not one dime. And don't raise my retirement age one day.

If you want to fuck 49 year olds, go for it.

Not a ponzi scheme. Yes, we force you because otherwise you won't and then we will have to take care of you. If you would sign an agreement that if you don't have enough money when you get older you can't crawl to the government for any help. Your kids can't ask for help. Medical bills will eat up everything you got first and then we pop a cap in your ass. Or euthenize you.

I like it. We all pay in our entire lives and if we die early, tough shit. But if we live to be 100, we will get a check every month till we are 100.

We all paid in. Our employers paid in. The fund should be full of money. When it runs out, pretend Iraq has WMD's and fill it back up with the money you would come up with if Saddam had WMD's. Right? You'd find the money then right? Idiot!

oh the irony with this post. it's a ponzi scheme are you suggesting that ponzi schemes are legal? Get Madoff out of jail then.

 

[Care4all]

oh the irony with this post. it's a ponzi scheme are you suggesting that ponzi schemes are legal? Get Madoff out of jail then.

yep. social security retirement is 100% legal.

 

[sealybobo]

oh the irony with this post. it's a ponzi scheme are you suggesting that ponzi schemes are legal? Get Madoff out of jail then.

I said it's not a ponzi scheme. Very hard to communicate with an obtuse liar.

You wrote this:

it's a ponzi scheme are you suggesting that ponzi schemes are legal?

So let me start over. No, it's not a ponzi scheme. 2. No I'm not suggesting ponzi schemes are legal.

So your conclusion and premise are wrong wrong wrong. The only thing you got right was the spelling of the words.

 

[jc456]

I said it's not a ponzi scheme. Very hard to communicate with an obtuse liar.

it's exactly what it is, it takes input to feed output. Classic ponzi. dude, you just aren't intelligent enough to understand things you have no knowledge of. Then you litter the message board with posts of stupidity because you don't know what you're talking about.

 

[Jarlaxle]

I said it's not a ponzi scheme. Very hard to communicate with an obtuse liar.

Yes, it is. The only difference is that the government can change the rules and force everyone to pay at gunpoint.