Quote Originally Posted by fubah2: For years, Donald Trump has denigrated mail-in voting as a source of massive election fraud - - yet in a jaw-dropping turnaround the Republican presidential candidate has now become a proponent!
Original
Hypocrite Trump voted via mail in past elections. He often lies and flip flops on plans to hide his true intentions. For examples, abortion ban and prosecuting Clinton.
Yeah well, that's the mind of a CONVICTED FELON
....and a CONVICTEDFRAUD
....and disgusting sex-offender
who as Commander-in-Chief, called our fallen, losers and suckers,
before ultimately this year being determined by a panel of 154 Presidential experts, to be the WORST president in US history
2
Quote Originally Posted by thirdperson:
Quote Originally Posted by fubah2: For years, Donald Trump has denigrated mail-in voting as a source of massive election fraud - - yet in a jaw-dropping turnaround the Republican presidential candidate has now become a proponent!
Original
Hypocrite Trump voted via mail in past elections. He often lies and flip flops on plans to hide his true intentions. For examples, abortion ban and prosecuting Clinton.
Yeah well, that's the mind of a CONVICTED FELON
....and a CONVICTEDFRAUD
....and disgusting sex-offender
who as Commander-in-Chief, called our fallen, losers and suckers,
before ultimately this year being determined by a panel of 154 Presidential experts, to be the WORST president in US history
Quote Originally Posted by thirdperson: Quote Originally Posted by fubah2: For years, Donald Trump has denigrated mail-in voting as a source of massive election fraud - - yet in a jaw-dropping turnaround the Republican presidential candidate has now become a proponent! Original Hypocrite Trump voted via mail in past elections. He often lies and flip flops on plans to hide his true intentions. For examples, abortion ban and prosecuting Clinton. Yeah well, that's the mind of a CONVICTED FELON ....and a CONVICTED FRAUD ....and disgusting sex-offender who as Commander-in-Chief, called our fallen, losers and suckers, before ultimately this year being determined by a panel of 154 Presidential experts, to be the WORST president in US history
...who was impeached TWICE!
0
Quote Originally Posted by fubah2:
Quote Originally Posted by thirdperson: Quote Originally Posted by fubah2: For years, Donald Trump has denigrated mail-in voting as a source of massive election fraud - - yet in a jaw-dropping turnaround the Republican presidential candidate has now become a proponent! Original Hypocrite Trump voted via mail in past elections. He often lies and flip flops on plans to hide his true intentions. For examples, abortion ban and prosecuting Clinton. Yeah well, that's the mind of a CONVICTED FELON ....and a CONVICTED FRAUD ....and disgusting sex-offender who as Commander-in-Chief, called our fallen, losers and suckers, before ultimately this year being determined by a panel of 154 Presidential experts, to be the WORST president in US history
At Las Vegas rally, Trump accidentally reveals the truth. "I don't care about you. I just want your vote." He really doesn't give a damn about the country. He only cares about gaining power.
1
At Las Vegas rally, Trump accidentally reveals the truth. "I don't care about you. I just want your vote." He really doesn't give a damn about the country. He only cares about gaining power.
At Las Vegas rally, Trump accidentally reveals the truth. "I don't care about you. I just want your vote." He really doesn't give a damn about the country. He only cares about gaining power.
so very true, but there is zero chance of changing the mind of a trump supporter even when the words come out of trumps own mouth. If they would just sit down and listen to his rallies, his interviews etc etc with a clear open mind, most would have to say theres no way am voting for this insane person. Flip the script can you imagine if biden acted like trump and said the same things he says? Do you see the difference between trump and biden. Trumps rallies are like highschool football rallies where everybody is like a rabid dog and went to kill somebody. You dont see the craziness when biden holds a rally, people act normal. And look am not trying to defend biden, cause i really believe that no person over the age of 75, that means if you turn 75 in the middle of your first term, your done, you cant run for a second term. Biden really should have stepped down and let the democrats find a replacement. But how can any sane person want trump. The guy is not gonna do anything to help the country, hes just gonna use his power to get revenge on his enemies. How does this help any of us.? His enemies didnt make trump commit the crimes he committed, like taking home all the nuke secrets. My Goid if he wasnt so full of himself and jkust gave the papers back when asked, he wouldnt have been charged with anything.
His rally in vegas he tells the people hes gonna do away with taxes on tips. Sol how is the country gonna make up that lost income? Secondly why should other people working have to pay taxes on their wages then. Tips are a wage, just like a factory workers wages. The guy will say anything to get elected. Surprised hes not saying that if he gets relected, he will send every person in the country 10k for getting him in. Hes already said he wants the oil companies to contribute a billion to his campaign fund and when he wins, they will be taken care of. This is his own words, not fake news saying it.
Right now republicans are looking to slash social security (which they still call an entitlement, which it isnt) and on top of that raise the age even higher, so that basically people will die before even collect a dime. If republicans get power thats what they will do, so if thats what you want to happen, then by all means vote for all the republicans you want.
By the way trump was wrong when the stock market would collapse worse then 1929 with biden in office(trump was rooting for the crash on top of that). Well my 401k has never been higher. If the trump cult would stop sending all their money to trump every time he asks they would actually have more money to invest and buy things. I know, trumpers would rather buy his 500 sneakers then pay the rent
2
Quote Originally Posted by thirdperson:
At Las Vegas rally, Trump accidentally reveals the truth. "I don't care about you. I just want your vote." He really doesn't give a damn about the country. He only cares about gaining power.
so very true, but there is zero chance of changing the mind of a trump supporter even when the words come out of trumps own mouth. If they would just sit down and listen to his rallies, his interviews etc etc with a clear open mind, most would have to say theres no way am voting for this insane person. Flip the script can you imagine if biden acted like trump and said the same things he says? Do you see the difference between trump and biden. Trumps rallies are like highschool football rallies where everybody is like a rabid dog and went to kill somebody. You dont see the craziness when biden holds a rally, people act normal. And look am not trying to defend biden, cause i really believe that no person over the age of 75, that means if you turn 75 in the middle of your first term, your done, you cant run for a second term. Biden really should have stepped down and let the democrats find a replacement. But how can any sane person want trump. The guy is not gonna do anything to help the country, hes just gonna use his power to get revenge on his enemies. How does this help any of us.? His enemies didnt make trump commit the crimes he committed, like taking home all the nuke secrets. My Goid if he wasnt so full of himself and jkust gave the papers back when asked, he wouldnt have been charged with anything.
His rally in vegas he tells the people hes gonna do away with taxes on tips. Sol how is the country gonna make up that lost income? Secondly why should other people working have to pay taxes on their wages then. Tips are a wage, just like a factory workers wages. The guy will say anything to get elected. Surprised hes not saying that if he gets relected, he will send every person in the country 10k for getting him in. Hes already said he wants the oil companies to contribute a billion to his campaign fund and when he wins, they will be taken care of. This is his own words, not fake news saying it.
Right now republicans are looking to slash social security (which they still call an entitlement, which it isnt) and on top of that raise the age even higher, so that basically people will die before even collect a dime. If republicans get power thats what they will do, so if thats what you want to happen, then by all means vote for all the republicans you want.
By the way trump was wrong when the stock market would collapse worse then 1929 with biden in office(trump was rooting for the crash on top of that). Well my 401k has never been higher. If the trump cult would stop sending all their money to trump every time he asks they would actually have more money to invest and buy things. I know, trumpers would rather buy his 500 sneakers then pay the rent
Also show me another President who had flags made with their names on it. The people who fly trump flags are not patriots, no matter how much they tell you they are. Politicians shouldnt be on flags, only the USA should be on the flag.
Also look at his 2024 flag, on the bottom its says THE REVENGE TOUR. How crazy and childish is that.
Show me a Washington or Lincoln flag. Those guys are probably rolling over in their graves, along with all the people who lost their lives to defend Our Freedoms and Democracy. But lets throw all that away for some crazy person who wants to rule the world if he could
1
Also show me another President who had flags made with their names on it. The people who fly trump flags are not patriots, no matter how much they tell you they are. Politicians shouldnt be on flags, only the USA should be on the flag.
Also look at his 2024 flag, on the bottom its says THE REVENGE TOUR. How crazy and childish is that.
Show me a Washington or Lincoln flag. Those guys are probably rolling over in their graves, along with all the people who lost their lives to defend Our Freedoms and Democracy. But lets throw all that away for some crazy person who wants to rule the world if he could
I have a serious question for you, do you think social security is any different than the pensions that companies used to offer but can no longer afford to fund?
Just so other posters don't think I am attacking here because it's an honest question off your post, but my thoughts...
The talk of social security not being around for me to collect in late 2030s have been spoken since the 1980's. the money we pay in every paycheck has nothing to do with the payout we would get, it's really like a Ponzi scheme which never works out in the end. In a perfect world we could throw all the money we sent to other countries and instead re invest in our social security, our Medicare, our post office just to name a few that all currently need cuts to stay afloat. But we can't throw money at anything because we send borrowed money to other people. We pay interest on money we send other people. The whole cuts to SSI is just to get panic votes from those on it or will be collecting in the near future. The liability of a pension went away for good reason and those who still have that offering, I hope you get what you were promised but just like everything in life nothing is written in stone. So when the money runs out, there is nothing left to give unless the government bails out the fund. The benefit accrual has aways been the downfall, back in the 90's when the DOT.com blew up pension funds were giving away 13th checks just to stay under their 95% funding because at 100% or more they pay uncle Sam.
the reason I compare these two is because SSI is basically a pension created in 1930's when the life expectancy was 60 to 65 and under 130 million in the pool
also, if the government didn't have their hands in the cookie jar all these years, this would be a moot point
0
@cd329
I have a serious question for you, do you think social security is any different than the pensions that companies used to offer but can no longer afford to fund?
Just so other posters don't think I am attacking here because it's an honest question off your post, but my thoughts...
The talk of social security not being around for me to collect in late 2030s have been spoken since the 1980's. the money we pay in every paycheck has nothing to do with the payout we would get, it's really like a Ponzi scheme which never works out in the end. In a perfect world we could throw all the money we sent to other countries and instead re invest in our social security, our Medicare, our post office just to name a few that all currently need cuts to stay afloat. But we can't throw money at anything because we send borrowed money to other people. We pay interest on money we send other people. The whole cuts to SSI is just to get panic votes from those on it or will be collecting in the near future. The liability of a pension went away for good reason and those who still have that offering, I hope you get what you were promised but just like everything in life nothing is written in stone. So when the money runs out, there is nothing left to give unless the government bails out the fund. The benefit accrual has aways been the downfall, back in the 90's when the DOT.com blew up pension funds were giving away 13th checks just to stay under their 95% funding because at 100% or more they pay uncle Sam.
the reason I compare these two is because SSI is basically a pension created in 1930's when the life expectancy was 60 to 65 and under 130 million in the pool
also, if the government didn't have their hands in the cookie jar all these years, this would be a moot point
Right now republicans are looking to slash social security (which they still call an entitlement, which it isnt) and on top of that raise the age even higher, so that basically people will die before even collect a dime. If republicans get power thats what they will do,
When Trump was president, every budget proposed spending cuts to social programs. Republicans insist cuts are necessary to save social security. That is false. If solvency is the problem, easier solution is to lift payroll tax cap. Roughly half of government budget deficits are caused by tax cuts creating revenue shortfalls. Polls show only 6-8% of Americans support reducing social security benefits. So cutting social security is neither popular nor necessary.
0
Quote Originally Posted by cd329:
Right now republicans are looking to slash social security (which they still call an entitlement, which it isnt) and on top of that raise the age even higher, so that basically people will die before even collect a dime. If republicans get power thats what they will do,
When Trump was president, every budget proposed spending cuts to social programs. Republicans insist cuts are necessary to save social security. That is false. If solvency is the problem, easier solution is to lift payroll tax cap. Roughly half of government budget deficits are caused by tax cuts creating revenue shortfalls. Polls show only 6-8% of Americans support reducing social security benefits. So cutting social security is neither popular nor necessary.
Quote Originally Posted by cd329: Right now republicans are looking to slash social security (which they still call an entitlement, which it isnt) and on top of that raise the age even higher, so that basically people will die before even collect a dime. If republicans get power thats what they will do, When Trump was president, every budget proposed spending cuts to social programs. Republicans insist cuts are necessary to save social security. That is false. If solvency is the problem, easier solution is to lift payroll tax cap. Roughly half of government budget deficits are caused by tax cuts creating revenue shortfalls. Polls show only 6-8% of Americans support reducing social security benefits. So cutting social security is neither popular nor necessary.
Obviously. To intelligent people at least. Promising to cut taxes is always popular around election time, particularly to the MILLIONS of morons around the nation who don't understand how that negatively affects the country and/or just don't phuckn care.
1
Quote Originally Posted by thirdperson:
Quote Originally Posted by cd329: Right now republicans are looking to slash social security (which they still call an entitlement, which it isnt) and on top of that raise the age even higher, so that basically people will die before even collect a dime. If republicans get power thats what they will do, When Trump was president, every budget proposed spending cuts to social programs. Republicans insist cuts are necessary to save social security. That is false. If solvency is the problem, easier solution is to lift payroll tax cap. Roughly half of government budget deficits are caused by tax cuts creating revenue shortfalls. Polls show only 6-8% of Americans support reducing social security benefits. So cutting social security is neither popular nor necessary.
Obviously. To intelligent people at least. Promising to cut taxes is always popular around election time, particularly to the MILLIONS of morons around the nation who don't understand how that negatively affects the country and/or just don't phuckn care.
Trump’s meeting with the GOP today did nothing to alleviate their fears that he’s lost his fucking mind. All aboard the POS' train. Next stop is hell!!
0
Quote Originally Posted by Midnight1:
Trump’s meeting with the GOP today did nothing to alleviate their fears that he’s lost his fucking mind. All aboard the POS' train. Next stop is hell!!
I disagree about the SS issue. To me the issue is how bloated the disability SS game has become it is almost a racket that people play and SS cant be propped up for retirees and the fake disabled as well. The caps are out of control already, the rate to which the phase out keeps increasing is criminal because you are excessively taxing the working class MORE than those taking the benefits.
My solution as we all know has been to phase IN benefits at a level below median income but above poverty levels, also to qualify you have to audit all assets and fall under a certain level, so say assets of 2M and above do not qualify, that is all assets too not just bank accounts so property etc.
The reality is people are living longer than the projections when they were paying the SS TAX themselves so you cant expect a program to function non-ponzi when the people getting the benefits live longer and we massively expanded the disability queue as well.
0
@thirdperson
I disagree about the SS issue. To me the issue is how bloated the disability SS game has become it is almost a racket that people play and SS cant be propped up for retirees and the fake disabled as well. The caps are out of control already, the rate to which the phase out keeps increasing is criminal because you are excessively taxing the working class MORE than those taking the benefits.
My solution as we all know has been to phase IN benefits at a level below median income but above poverty levels, also to qualify you have to audit all assets and fall under a certain level, so say assets of 2M and above do not qualify, that is all assets too not just bank accounts so property etc.
The reality is people are living longer than the projections when they were paying the SS TAX themselves so you cant expect a program to function non-ponzi when the people getting the benefits live longer and we massively expanded the disability queue as well.
The purpose for SS is not to provide casino cash for someone with means, the program needs to tighten up the purpose and that means phase in and outs. If someone has retirement assets and personal assets then why take from a program intended for those with no retirement options?
I'd say a firm tough phase in and phase out, much how disability requires lots of hoops to be jumped through (not enough IMO) then SS should be the same. If you have retirement assets and assets in general then use them and do not take from a program which is a wreck.
I would say this...if you really wanted to play nice on SS then allow people who do not qualify to use SS funds to pay for their Medicare and Medicare supp premiums, SS funds could cover those two things and then nothing additional. That seems like a solid idea and a very good compromise.
0
@Raiders22
The purpose for SS is not to provide casino cash for someone with means, the program needs to tighten up the purpose and that means phase in and outs. If someone has retirement assets and personal assets then why take from a program intended for those with no retirement options?
I'd say a firm tough phase in and phase out, much how disability requires lots of hoops to be jumped through (not enough IMO) then SS should be the same. If you have retirement assets and assets in general then use them and do not take from a program which is a wreck.
I would say this...if you really wanted to play nice on SS then allow people who do not qualify to use SS funds to pay for their Medicare and Medicare supp premiums, SS funds could cover those two things and then nothing additional. That seems like a solid idea and a very good compromise.
Cutoff would mean that if you are over that asset threshold then you would have your insurance premiums covered up to the Medicare and supp at a certain dollar figure, then nothing else. Someone with 2M in assets is not what that program was created for.
The problem is that it is a massive massive non-partisan vote grab so my idea has zero less than zero chance...the AARP crowd rules the political roost and will never ever ever ever ever give up 1 cent they feel entitled to even if it means taxing the crap out of their kids and grandkids.
Both of my inlaws have passed over the last few years but a while back I had a discussion with them about this topic and that SS is a tax, not an entitlement and the original intention was not what this has turned out to be...they both could not deny this fact and yet NEITHER of them could consider the idea of foregoing SS even though it meant their kids and grandkids are saddled with this obligation and cost. Most retirees feel this is theirs and they are going to go down to their grave before ever not taking SS even though they did not need it.
My inlaws were able to retire super super super young and had a middle class decent lifestyle their retired life, much better than the average citizen and yet holy crap do not ever expect them to give up what they feel is theirs...even though SS is a tax and NOBODY has claim on a tax.
0
@Raiders22
Cutoff would mean that if you are over that asset threshold then you would have your insurance premiums covered up to the Medicare and supp at a certain dollar figure, then nothing else. Someone with 2M in assets is not what that program was created for.
The problem is that it is a massive massive non-partisan vote grab so my idea has zero less than zero chance...the AARP crowd rules the political roost and will never ever ever ever ever give up 1 cent they feel entitled to even if it means taxing the crap out of their kids and grandkids.
Both of my inlaws have passed over the last few years but a while back I had a discussion with them about this topic and that SS is a tax, not an entitlement and the original intention was not what this has turned out to be...they both could not deny this fact and yet NEITHER of them could consider the idea of foregoing SS even though it meant their kids and grandkids are saddled with this obligation and cost. Most retirees feel this is theirs and they are going to go down to their grave before ever not taking SS even though they did not need it.
My inlaws were able to retire super super super young and had a middle class decent lifestyle their retired life, much better than the average citizen and yet holy crap do not ever expect them to give up what they feel is theirs...even though SS is a tax and NOBODY has claim on a tax.
Right. There could be issues with a hard and total cutoff point. It could 'encourage" folks to barely stay under the cutoff point, etc. If slowly move into, maybe not so much.
0
@wallstreetcappers
Right. There could be issues with a hard and total cutoff point. It could 'encourage" folks to barely stay under the cutoff point, etc. If slowly move into, maybe not so much.
It is not just the old folks either. No young folks want it messed with. They reach a certain point and realized that they have not planned for old age or retirement. Then they see this as their solid backup plan.
But there are so many issues with it no matter what they attempt to do.
For example, the USA has gotten so 'bad' about turning 18 and leaving home -- just to be on their own. But that is what they are taught to believe is correct. Most countries do not do this.
So, not only do people in the USA not plan to get old and save money -- they have run off the family members that used to take care of the old folks a lot.
Then even for the ones that paid in all their lives and are fortunate enough to not need it -- is it correct to yank it from them, etc.
But too many folks have that as their sole means of support. That is a very hard cycle to break.
Then you raise the age -- is to fair to folks that are sickly or apt to die earlier than others.
But for sure, the old folks have a great voting bloc and have scared the young voters and politicians into making sure nothing is done with it.
0
@wallstreetcappers
It is not just the old folks either. No young folks want it messed with. They reach a certain point and realized that they have not planned for old age or retirement. Then they see this as their solid backup plan.
But there are so many issues with it no matter what they attempt to do.
For example, the USA has gotten so 'bad' about turning 18 and leaving home -- just to be on their own. But that is what they are taught to believe is correct. Most countries do not do this.
So, not only do people in the USA not plan to get old and save money -- they have run off the family members that used to take care of the old folks a lot.
Then even for the ones that paid in all their lives and are fortunate enough to not need it -- is it correct to yank it from them, etc.
But too many folks have that as their sole means of support. That is a very hard cycle to break.
Then you raise the age -- is to fair to folks that are sickly or apt to die earlier than others.
But for sure, the old folks have a great voting bloc and have scared the young voters and politicians into making sure nothing is done with it.
I can make a decent case that this well-intended policy has had unwanted and unforeseen consequences. Same as a lot of the other entitlement or social programs.
The family unit has been deincentivized to stay cohesive, etc. People have not been as diligent about saving for old age. People have now been 'encouraged' to go get in debt right out of school.
Then the cycle continues.
0
@wallstreetcappers
I can make a decent case that this well-intended policy has had unwanted and unforeseen consequences. Same as a lot of the other entitlement or social programs.
The family unit has been deincentivized to stay cohesive, etc. People have not been as diligent about saving for old age. People have now been 'encouraged' to go get in debt right out of school.
Trump’s meeting with the GOP today did nothing to alleviate their fears that he’s lost his fucking mind. All aboard the POS' train. Next stop is hell!!
the mind of a fascist convicted criminal crime lord leading the maga party
"I'm the MOST HONEST human being that GOD EVER created!" - Donald "the felon" Trump
0
Quote Originally Posted by Midnight1:
Trump’s meeting with the GOP today did nothing to alleviate their fears that he’s lost his fucking mind. All aboard the POS' train. Next stop is hell!!
the mind of a fascist convicted criminal crime lord leading the maga party
If solvency is the problem, easier solution is to lift payroll tax cap.
the cap is just under 143,000!! both pay 6.2%!!
your solution is to take more greenbacks from the everyday joe who won't ever see 6 figures in their lifetime to make up the difference? And the small business owner also takes a kick to the nads
make the sheep dependent on the government and then just blame past policy is just kicking the can down the road to the next dotard who is less than the one he replaced
It's a hundred-year-old pension plan, now with 2.5x the population when set up and the life expectancy went up to 79 years old... up from 60-65
you can't make that gap up on wages of the working man, you can tax the rich like Joe wants but then the rich will leave, and jobs disappear. In NYS when the tax credits expire after 10 years these big companies go elsewhere, it's like a double-edged sword. You have to give the tax credit to get jobs, but then lose jobs as a result
Is there any legislation about these 10+ million undocumented, if they work, they must pay SSI? If you work in the US you need to pay the 6.2%, if you come here from Mars you pay taxes period
0
@thirdperson
If solvency is the problem, easier solution is to lift payroll tax cap.
the cap is just under 143,000!! both pay 6.2%!!
your solution is to take more greenbacks from the everyday joe who won't ever see 6 figures in their lifetime to make up the difference? And the small business owner also takes a kick to the nads
make the sheep dependent on the government and then just blame past policy is just kicking the can down the road to the next dotard who is less than the one he replaced
It's a hundred-year-old pension plan, now with 2.5x the population when set up and the life expectancy went up to 79 years old... up from 60-65
you can't make that gap up on wages of the working man, you can tax the rich like Joe wants but then the rich will leave, and jobs disappear. In NYS when the tax credits expire after 10 years these big companies go elsewhere, it's like a double-edged sword. You have to give the tax credit to get jobs, but then lose jobs as a result
Is there any legislation about these 10+ million undocumented, if they work, they must pay SSI? If you work in the US you need to pay the 6.2%, if you come here from Mars you pay taxes period
@cd329 I have a serious question for you, do you think social security is any different than the pensions that companies used to offer but can no longer afford to fund? Just so other posters don't think I am attacking here because it's an honest question off your post, but my thoughts... The talk of social security not being around for me to collect in late 2030s have been spoken since the 1980's. the money we pay in every paycheck has nothing to do with the payout we would get, it's really like a Ponzi scheme which never works out in the end. In a perfect world we could throw all the money we sent to other countries and instead re invest in our social security, our Medicare, our post office just to name a few that all currently need cuts to stay afloat. But we can't throw money at anything because we send borrowed money to other people. We pay interest on money we send other people. The whole cuts to SSI is just to get panic votes from those on it or will be collecting in the near future. The liability of a pension went away for good reason and those who still have that offering, I hope you get what you were promised but just like everything in life nothing is written in stone. So when the money runs out, there is nothing left to give unless the government bails out the fund. The benefit accrual has aways been the downfall, back in the 90's when the DOT.com blew up pension funds were giving away 13th checks just to stay under their 95% funding because at 100% or more they pay uncle Sam. the reason I compare these two is because SSI is basically a pension created in 1930's when the life expectancy was 60 to 65 and under 130 million in the pool also, if the government didn't have their hands in the cookie jar all these years, this would be a moot point
Social Security had enough funds to last another 100 years without even changing a thing, if the politicians, both democrat and republican, didnt keep raiding it like it was there own personal piggy bank. You getting to collect in 2030's shouldnt even be something you should have to worry about, but we all do know. All am gonna say is if you think trump and the republicans are going to fix social security, when on a daily basis, you hear these people talking about how they are going to get rid of it. Hey maybe all the maga trailer trash have loads of cash buried in their backyards, but if they dont and still vote republican, they are just voting against their own self interests. They might as well take one of their many weapons and just shoot themselves, cause thats exactly what they will be doing.
1
Quote Originally Posted by soup-can:
@cd329 I have a serious question for you, do you think social security is any different than the pensions that companies used to offer but can no longer afford to fund? Just so other posters don't think I am attacking here because it's an honest question off your post, but my thoughts... The talk of social security not being around for me to collect in late 2030s have been spoken since the 1980's. the money we pay in every paycheck has nothing to do with the payout we would get, it's really like a Ponzi scheme which never works out in the end. In a perfect world we could throw all the money we sent to other countries and instead re invest in our social security, our Medicare, our post office just to name a few that all currently need cuts to stay afloat. But we can't throw money at anything because we send borrowed money to other people. We pay interest on money we send other people. The whole cuts to SSI is just to get panic votes from those on it or will be collecting in the near future. The liability of a pension went away for good reason and those who still have that offering, I hope you get what you were promised but just like everything in life nothing is written in stone. So when the money runs out, there is nothing left to give unless the government bails out the fund. The benefit accrual has aways been the downfall, back in the 90's when the DOT.com blew up pension funds were giving away 13th checks just to stay under their 95% funding because at 100% or more they pay uncle Sam. the reason I compare these two is because SSI is basically a pension created in 1930's when the life expectancy was 60 to 65 and under 130 million in the pool also, if the government didn't have their hands in the cookie jar all these years, this would be a moot point
Social Security had enough funds to last another 100 years without even changing a thing, if the politicians, both democrat and republican, didnt keep raiding it like it was there own personal piggy bank. You getting to collect in 2030's shouldnt even be something you should have to worry about, but we all do know. All am gonna say is if you think trump and the republicans are going to fix social security, when on a daily basis, you hear these people talking about how they are going to get rid of it. Hey maybe all the maga trailer trash have loads of cash buried in their backyards, but if they dont and still vote republican, they are just voting against their own self interests. They might as well take one of their many weapons and just shoot themselves, cause thats exactly what they will be doing.
Hot Forum Topics
