Will Republicans end social security?

Will Republicans end social security?

  • Yes, at least try

    Votes: 33 28.2%
  • No

    Votes: 84 71.8%

  • Total voters
    117
No ones listening to you liars anymore. Listen liar. You should have told women what you were going to do before the 2016 election. You didn't. So fuck you. Women would be fools to trust or believe you.

Sorry, not even one general election has passed since you fucked women over. You're about to pay for it c*nts.
I did not vote in the 2016 election to end abortion. I think Republican states need to be wise in their restrictions. America First appealed to me. Abortions are here and most women who want one can make arrangements to get one if they travel. One million a year and more is a disgrace. Having abortions up to birth is genocide.
 
It wasn't discussed during the elections but does any one doubt SS is going to be put on the chopping block?

No way one usmb Republican will say they like and want to keep SS.

And if they want to at least tell us in 2019 so we can vote on it.
They better not touch SS! Or Medicare. If they do, then they will get their civil war!
 
Do illegals have Social Security numbers?
They don't need a SS# in CA to receive them.
Last year, Democrats entered a bill that would end the 5 year rule for illegals to get all manner of federal assistance. At the same time, allowing millions in.
You have to turn your calculator sideways to figure out what that will cost.
It all comes from the same place RW.
 
They don't need a SS# in CA to receive them.
Last year, Democrats entered a bill that would end the 5 year rule for illegals to get all manner of federal assistance. At the same time, allowing millions in.
You have to turn your calculator sideways to figure out what that will cost.
It all comes from the same place RW.
You need a SS number to receive benefits
Do illegals have one?

What I challenged was the claim they receive Social Security

From what I see, Illegals pay into SS but receive nothing in return
 
Last edited:
You need a SS number to receive benefits
Do illegals have one?

What I challenged was the claim they receive Social Security
You are not hearing.
In CA, you do not need a Soc. Sec card to get federal benefits.
Democrats tried to pass a bill to allow immediate government assistance to illegals last year.

IT ALL COMES FROM THE SAME POT.

Let's here you say you want to pay more taxes so illegals can get free money.
 
You are not hearing.
In CA, you do not need a Soc. Sec card to get federal benefits.
Democrats tried to pass a bill to allow immediate government assistance to illegals last year.

IT ALL COMES FROM THE SAME POT.

Let's here you say you want to pay more taxes so illegals can get free money.

I said nothing about Federal Benefits
Do they receive Social Security or not?

See post 1900
 
The only reason the Republicans have not ended Social Security and Medicate is because they have lacked the power to do so. The only people the GOP cares about are rich people. They do not need Social Security and Medicare.
still with no receipts, why?
 
I said nothing about Federal Benefits
Do they receive Social Security or not?

See post 1900
Oh I saw that, but you are not hearing me.
At this time, illegals cannot LEGALLY get Social Security.
That is going to change, and it is going to change soon. We are well on the way to making that happen.

Do you support that? - Different question.
Do you support illegals gaining access to tax payer funded money immediately with no waiting periods?
Do you?
 
I think that's a lie you've swallowed. What happened to all the money people who died before they were 65 paid in?

It's not a ponzi scheme. We paid in and a lot of us will never see a dime. So the fund should be funded.

Didn't both sides steal from the fund? Then they have to put it back.

Remember Bush found all the money he needed to fight two wars for 20 years? Don't tell me we don't have my money.
The money for those who died before age 65 stayed in the SS trust fund. You stated "we paid in and a lot of us will never see a dime". Precisely. That is an element of a Ponzi Scheme (using money from current contributors/investors to fund compensation for previous contributors/investors). The Enron debacle is a prominent example of such a process. Yes, both parties have borrowed from the trust fund and it should be paid back. But that will not change the ultimate outcome. When the system went into effect in the 1940s, the average life expectancy in America was in the low 60s. It now stands at about 76 for men and 80 for women. Despite that, the minimum payout age has been raised by only 2 to 4 years (depending on the year were born) since the 1940s. Also, the initial cadre of retirees were grandfathered into the system and never even paid into the system. As I said before, the ratio of workers to retirees was 13 to 1 at the inception of SS and is now 5 to 1 (dropping to 4 to 1 by about the year 2040). Finally, recipients are not limited in their collection of benefits to the amount they paid in. All these things considered, the system is not viable in perpetuity. It was not designed to fund average payouts lasting 15 to 20 years, particularly with a declining workforce size and an ever increasing retirement community size. Future retirees may not receive nothing, but will receive pennies on the dollar. It is inevitable.
 
Last edited:
The money for those who died before age 65 stayed in the SS trust fund. You stated "we paid in and a lot of us will never see a dime". Precisely. That is an element of a Ponzi Scheme (using money from current contributors/investors to fund compensation for previous contributors/investors). The Enron debacle is a prominent example of such a process. Yes, both parties have borrowed from the trust fund and it should be paid back. But that will not change the ultimate outcome. When the system went into effect in the 1940s, the average life expectancy in America was in the low 60s. It now stands at about 76 for men and 70 for women. Despite that, the minimum payout age has been raised by only 2 to 4 years (depending on the year were born) since the 1940s. Also, the initial cadre of retirees were grandfathered into the system and never even paid into the system. As I said before, the ratio of workers to retirees was 13 to 1 at the inception of SS and is now 5 to 1 (dropping to 4 to 1 by about the year 2040). Finally, recipients are not limited in their collection of benefits to the amount they paid in. All these things considered, the system is not viable in perpetuity. It was not designed to fund average payouts lasting 15 to 20 years, particularly with a declining workforce size and an ever increasing retirement community size. Future retirees may not receive nothing, but will receive pennies on the dollar. It is inevitable.
it is why the government pension fails. Why demofk pension states will never break even and drive citizens out of their states to red state.
 

The former president said there's "a lot you can do in terms of entitlements, in terms of cutting," but his answer mostly made no sense.

“So first of all, there is a lot you can do in terms of entitlements, in terms of cutting, and in terms of also the theft and the bad management of entitlements, tremendous bad management of entitlements,” Trump said. “There’s tremendous amounts of things and numbers of things you can do.”

It’s not clear what Trump meant by “cutting” His answer continued for several more minutes and ranged across several other topics, including COVID and ISIS.
I don't know what you didn't get from it. he's right...there is a lot you can do to fix the entitlement problems. There is a lot of mismanagement, in running the programs as well
 

Forum List

Back
Top