Dear Liberals: I Want a Divorce!

[ConservaDerrps]

love? Naw, just a lot of respect? She can run circles around you and your light weight clown posse both day and night with her feet tied together. Don't you guys have a circle jerk scheduled for noon? Better get busy.

ha ha ha. You're a bonafide fucking idiot. Congrats! You made the list!

View attachment 19624

lol

 

[Borillar]

I don't base my ideology on cherry picked events or circumstances or individuals I don't like or appreciate. You, and most of your liberal friends, obviously justify your ideology in that manner because you are incapable of conceptionalizing anything any other way. And that's a pity but that is also why we have irreconcilable differences.

I want a divorce.

Yes, we see your attitude at work by Repugs in congress all the time now. It's your way or the highway. No room for compromise. It has to be 100% your way, because 85% just isn't enough. The only thing you conservatives seem to conceptualize is to co-opt everything. The founders, a very ideologically diverse group, now are all conservatives (or "classic liberals") in your mind. God is a right wing republican because conservative televangelists say so. Your whole screed boils down to Conservative = good, Liberal = bad, because you can't conceptualize that liberals have ever done anything good.

Name a Democratic entitlement program that is not going bankrupt.

Social Security. Social Security is fully funded until at least 2036 and will pay 77% of benefits after that, even if nothing is done, and no one believes that will happen.

 

[peach174]

Yes, we see your attitude at work by Repugs in congress all the time now. It's your way or the highway. No room for compromise. It has to be 100% your way, because 85% just isn't enough. The only thing you conservatives seem to conceptualize is to co-opt everything. The founders, a very ideologically diverse group, now are all conservatives (or "classic liberals") in your mind. God is a right wing republican because conservative televangelists say so. Your whole screed boils down to Conservative = good, Liberal = bad, because you can't conceptualize that liberals have ever done anything good.

Name a Democratic entitlement program that is not going bankrupt.

Social Security. Social Security is fully funded until at least 2036 and will pay 77% of benefits after that, even if nothing is done, and no one believes that will happen.

Disability SSI will be bankrupt in 4 years.
77 % ? It should be 100%. It would be if congress had not spent the surplus.
SSI is not really an entitlement because it is paid for by worker's and employers.

Social Security Going Bankrupt

Social Security will post nearly $600 billion in deficits over the next decade as the economy struggles to recover and millions of baby boomers stand at the brink of retirement, according to new congressional projections. This year alone, Social Security is projected to collect $45 billion less in payroll taxes than it pays out in retirement, disability and survivor benefits, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said Wednesday. That figure swells to $130 billion when a new one-year cut in payroll taxes is included.

In the short term, Social Security is suffering from a weak economy that has payroll taxes lagging and applications for benefits rising.
In the long term, Social Security will be strained by the growing number of baby boomers retiring and applying for benefits.
More than 54 million people receive retirement, disability or survivor benefits from Social Security with monthly payments averaging $1,076 per person.

The deficits add a sense of urgency to efforts to improve Social Security's finances. For much of the past 30 years, Social Security has run big surpluses, which the government has borrowed to spend on other programs. Now that the program is running deficits, the federal government will have to find money elsewhere to pay back Social Security, so it can continue to issue benefits.

Social Security has built up a $2.5 trillion surplus since the retirement program was last overhauled in the 1980s, but the surplus has been borrowed over the years by the federal government to spend on other programs.

Benefits will be safe until that money runs out, which is projected to happen in 2037.
At that point, Social Security would collect enough in payroll taxes to pay out about 78 percent of benefits, according to the Social Security Administration.


Repubs are trying to fix it. Dems have put up nothing on the subject.
Getting SSI out of the hands of Congress, so that they will never be able to get to spend any of the surplus seems like a pretty good idea to me.

 

[Borillar]

Name a Democratic entitlement program that is not going bankrupt.

Social Security. Social Security is fully funded until at least 2036 and will pay 77% of benefits after that, even if nothing is done, and no one believes that will happen.

Disability SSI will be bankrupt in 4 years.
77 % ? It should be 100%. It would be if congress had not spent the surplus.
SSI is not really an entitlement because it is paid for by worker's and employers.

Social Security Going Bankrupt

Social Security will post nearly $600 billion in deficits over the next decade as the economy struggles to recover and millions of baby boomers stand at the brink of retirement, according to new congressional projections. This year alone, Social Security is projected to collect $45 billion less in payroll taxes than it pays out in retirement, disability and survivor benefits, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said Wednesday. That figure swells to $130 billion when a new one-year cut in payroll taxes is included.

In the short term, Social Security is suffering from a weak economy that has payroll taxes lagging and applications for benefits rising.
In the long term, Social Security will be strained by the growing number of baby boomers retiring and applying for benefits.
More than 54 million people receive retirement, disability or survivor benefits from Social Security with monthly payments averaging $1,076 per person.

The deficits add a sense of urgency to efforts to improve Social Security's finances. For much of the past 30 years, Social Security has run big surpluses, which the government has borrowed to spend on other programs. Now that the program is running deficits, the federal government will have to find money elsewhere to pay back Social Security, so it can continue to issue benefits.

Social Security has built up a $2.5 trillion surplus since the retirement program was last overhauled in the 1980s, but the surplus has been borrowed over the years by the federal government to spend on other programs.

Benefits will be safe until that money runs out, which is projected to happen in 2037.
At that point, Social Security would collect enough in payroll taxes to pay out about 78 percent of benefits, according to the Social Security Administration.


Repubs are trying to fix it. Dems have put up nothing on the subject.
Getting SSI out of the hands of Congress, so that they will never be able to get to spend any of the surplus seems like a pretty good idea to me.

I agree that Social Security funds should not be used in the general fund for whatever congress wants. Repubs want to privatize it, not fix it. If you really want to fix it for all time, just lift the income cap on it. Why should 90 - 100% of my income be subject to Social Security (FICA), while only .1% of Bill Gates' or the Koch brothers income is subject to the same tax?

 

[bripat9643]

I agree that Social Security funds should not be used in the general fund for whatever congress wants. Repubs want to privatize it, not fix it. If you really want to fix it for all time, just lift the income cap on it. Why should 90 - 100% of my income be subject to Social Security (FICA), while only .1% of Bill Gates' or the Koch brothers income is subject to the same tax?

The answer is simple: Bill Gates doesn't receive any more benefit than you recieve, so why should he pay 1000 times more in SS taxes? Is SS supposed to be a retirement program or a welfare program?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Social Security. Social Security is fully funded until at least 2036 and will pay 77% of benefits after that, even if nothing is done, and no one believes that will happen.

Lie much?

 

[ConservaDerrps]

Social Security. Social Security is fully funded until at least 2036 and will pay 77% of benefits after that, even if nothing is done, and no one believes that will happen.

Lie much?

Ignorant, unable to read, uneducated, much?

Why Social Security Cannot Go Bankrupt - Forbes

HATE SITE!!!

 

[Uncensored2008]

Ignorant, unable to read, uneducated, much?

Why Social Security Cannot Go Bankrupt - Forbes

HATE SITE!!!

That doesn't say what you think it does, retard. It points out that SS is a fraud, that there is no "trust fund" and it is in fact an entitlement program.

Seriously, even for a feral baboon, you are astoundingly stupid.

 

[Borillar]

Social Security. Social Security is fully funded until at least 2036 and will pay 77% of benefits after that, even if nothing is done, and no one believes that will happen.

Lie much?

Where did I lie? Look it up yourself. From The Truth Squad..."The 2010 Social Security Trustees Report shows retirees will receive 100% of benefits until 2037, and 78% of promised benefits after that, paid out of incoming payroll taxes. There are no actuarial forecasts which show zero benefits for future generations. While the challenges facing Medicare are more serious, passage of healthcare reform added years of solvency to the program and Medicare 's costs are projected to be 25 percent lower over the next 75 years. Continued reforms in the healthcare system nationwide are needed. There is no factual basis for claims that there will be no Social Security and Medicare for future generations, unless the American people elect representatives determined to end these programs." Or you can look at the Trustees report itself if you don't like the Truth Squad.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

Ignorant, unable to read, uneducated, much?

Why Social Security Cannot Go Bankrupt - Forbes

HATE SITE!!!

That doesn't say what you think it does, retard. It points out that SS is a fraud, that there is no "trust fund" and it is in fact an entitlement program.

Seriously, even for a feral baboon, you are astoundingly stupid.

uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. No it doesn't idiot. Try re-reading it. And then point to me the paragraphs that say it's a fraud. Go on. And make sure you read it all.

HOLY FUCKING SHIT YOU ARE FUCKING STUPID AND CAN'T UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU READ, CLEARLY.

From the motherfucking article:

In closing, I’m not telling you whether you should be for or against Social Security, but the argument that it is going bankrupt is a non-starter. It is much ado about nothing.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

Hey Uncensored, have you finished re-reading that article yet, you dumb, bias-blinded piece of dog shit? I know, it's long, uses really big words and totally spits in the face of your sycophancy, but there it is.

There is another trust fund issue and it is the one related to the expected increase in the ratio of retirees to workers over the next couple of decades. This would presumably cause a net drain on the fund since payments to retirees might increase relative to tax revenues. This is actually the specific phenomenon to which many people are referring when they say that Social Security is going to go bankrupt. However, a) there is no guarantee this will occur since rising productivity could drive up wages sufficiently to compensate (although our trend of stagnating wages relative to profits is frustrating this) and b) even if that did occur, this hardly means that Social Security is kaput. Any shortfall can always be addressed in a very straightforward and supremely logical fashion: raise taxes or lower benefits (and it is exceedingly like that even if this occurs, we aren’t talking about anything drastic). It bears emphasizing, however, that such changes would still be a function of productivity and have absolutely, positively nothing to do with how much money we have or haven’t saved up. Funding, finances, money, taxes, etc. are part of the coordination mechanism, not the feasibility.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Where did I lie? Look it up yourself. From The Truth Squad..."The 2010 Social Security Trustees Report shows retirees will receive 100% of benefits until 2037, and 78% of promised benefits after that, paid out of incoming payroll taxes.

{WASHINGTON — The nation's Social Security and Medicare programs are sliding closer to insolvency, the federal government warned in a new report underscoring the fiscal challenges facing the two mammoth retirement programs as baby boomers begin to retire.

Medicare, which will provide health insurance to more than 50 million elderly and disabled Americans this year, is expected to start operating in the red in its largest fund in 2024, according to the annual assessment by the trustees charged with overseeing the programs. That's unchanged from last year.}

From the far left Los Angeles Times

Social Security slipping closer to insolvency, government warns - Los Angeles Times

There are no actuarial forecasts which show zero benefits for future generations.

Social Security is an entitlement program. Payouts are not tied to any sort of trust fund or invested equity. SS could easily end tomorrow, with no recourse by those dependent on it.

While the challenges facing Medicare are more serious, passage of healthcare reform added years of solvency to the program and Medicare 's costs are projected to be 25 percent lower over the next 75 years. Continued reforms in the healthcare system nationwide are needed. There is no factual basis for claims that there will be no Social Security and Medicare for future generations, unless the American people elect representatives determined to end these programs." Or you can look at the Trustees report itself if you don't like the Truth Squad.

Obama's fascist care is unconstitutional and will do nothing to ease the burden of medicare.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

Hey fucko, are you going to answer your drubbing just a couple posts above? Or do you want to recant your assertion about the link I provided? Huh, Fucko?

 

[flacaltenn]

Yes, we see your attitude at work by Repugs in congress all the time now. It's your way or the highway. No room for compromise. It has to be 100% your way, because 85% just isn't enough. The only thing you conservatives seem to conceptualize is to co-opt everything. The founders, a very ideologically diverse group, now are all conservatives (or "classic liberals") in your mind. God is a right wing republican because conservative televangelists say so. Your whole screed boils down to Conservative = good, Liberal = bad, because you can't conceptualize that liberals have ever done anything good.

Name a Democratic entitlement program that is not going bankrupt.

Social Security. Social Security is fully funded until at least 2036 and will pay 77% of benefits after that, even if nothing is done, and no one believes that will happen.

Great! I see the "victors" are displaying their incredible stupidity again.. Only morons think there is anything of value in the Social Security Trust Fund... In 2010, the fund ran negative meaning that Obama started stealing from the PREMIUMS (payroll taxes for the mental dwarfs) and forced that date to come 8 yrs early..

You WERE ROBBED and you don't even know it. Or you DO KNOW IT and make bullshit partisian claims anyway.. Congress STOLE from the SS surplus every year and wrote an IOU.. ALL those IOUs have to be funded with PRESENT YEAR TAXPAYER MONEY. The money was spent ONCE, now you're paying it again. And you're TOO STUPID to know that you've been robbed.

Here's the short story..

The SS FUND IS BROKE --- and Obama is stealing from the premiums to play Robin Hood...

Trustees Report Summary

Social Security expenditures exceeded the program’s non-interest income in 2010 for the first time since 1983. The $49 billion deficit last year (excluding interest income) and $46 billion projected deficit in 2011 are in large part due to the weakened economy and to downward income adjustments that correct for excess payroll tax revenue credited to the trust funds in earlier years.

AND SS Administration themselves puts this statement at the end of every ELABORATE yearly report. After accounting for every "pennie" of the SSTFund, "there's nothing of value in the fund"...

http://www.socialsecurity.gov/history/pdf/tr09summary.pdf

Social Security’s annual surpluses
of tax income over expenditures are expected to fall sharply this
year and to stay about constant in 2010 because of the economic recession,
and to rise only briefly before declining and turning to cash flow
deficits beginning in 2016 that grow as the baby-boom generation retires.


The combined difference grows each year, so that by 2016, net revenue
flows from the general fund would total $369 billion (1.8 percent of
GDP). The positive amounts that begin in 2016 for OASDI, and started in
2008 for HI, initially represent payments the Treasury must make to the
trust funds when assets are depleted to help pay benefits in years prior to
exhaustion of the funds. Neither the redemption of trust fund bonds, nor
interest paid on those bonds, provides any new net income to the Treasury,
which must finance redemptions and interest payments through
some combination of increased taxation, reductions in other government
spending, or additional borrowing from the public.

That about describes how loonie you cartoons really appear with your end-zone celebrations and all..

 

[candycorn]

Name a Democratic entitlement program that is not going bankrupt.

Social Security. Social Security is fully funded until at least 2036 and will pay 77% of benefits after that, even if nothing is done, and no one believes that will happen.

Great! I see the "victors" are displaying their incredible stupidity again.. Only morons think there is anything of value in the Social Security Trust Fund... In 2010, the fund ran negative meaning that Obama started stealing from the PREMIUMS (payroll taxes for the mental dwarfs) and forced that date to come 8 yrs early..

You WERE ROBBED and you don't even know it. Or you DO KNOW IT and make bullshit partisian claims anyway.. Congress STOLE from the SS surplus every year and wrote an IOU.. ALL those IOUs have to be funded with PRESENT YEAR TAXPAYER MONEY. The money was spent ONCE, now you're paying it again. And you're TOO STUPID to know that you've been robbed.

Here's the short story..

The SS FUND IS BROKE --- and Obama is stealing from the premiums to play Robin Hood...

Trustees Report Summary

Social Security expenditures exceeded the program’s non-interest income in 2010 for the first time since 1983. The $49 billion deficit last year (excluding interest income) and $46 billion projected deficit in 2011 are in large part due to the weakened economy and to downward income adjustments that correct for excess payroll tax revenue credited to the trust funds in earlier years.

AND SS Administration themselves puts this statement at the end of every ELABORATE yearly report. After accounting for every "pennie" of the SSTFund, "there's nothing of value in the fund"...

http://www.socialsecurity.gov/history/pdf/tr09summary.pdf

Social Security’s annual surpluses
of tax income over expenditures are expected to fall sharply this
year and to stay about constant in 2010 because of the economic recession,
and to rise only briefly before declining and turning to cash flow
deficits beginning in 2016 that grow as the baby-boom generation retires.


The combined difference grows each year, so that by 2016, net revenue
flows from the general fund would total $369 billion (1.8 percent of
GDP). The positive amounts that begin in 2016 for OASDI, and started in
2008 for HI, initially represent payments the Treasury must make to the
trust funds when assets are depleted to help pay benefits in years prior to
exhaustion of the funds. Neither the redemption of trust fund bonds, nor
interest paid on those bonds, provides any new net income to the Treasury,
which must finance redemptions and interest payments through
some combination of increased taxation, reductions in other government
spending, or additional borrowing from the public.

That about describes how loonie you cartoons really appear with your end-zone celebrations and all..

First you say "obama" stole it...then you say "congress" stole it. If there is an imbecile here; it is you.

 

[flacaltenn]

Social Security. Social Security is fully funded until at least 2036 and will pay 77% of benefits after that, even if nothing is done, and no one believes that will happen.

Great! I see the "victors" are displaying their incredible stupidity again.. Only morons think there is anything of value in the Social Security Trust Fund... In 2010, the fund ran negative meaning that Obama started stealing from the PREMIUMS (payroll taxes for the mental dwarfs) and forced that date to come 8 yrs early..

You WERE ROBBED and you don't even know it. Or you DO KNOW IT and make bullshit partisian claims anyway.. Congress STOLE from the SS surplus every year and wrote an IOU.. ALL those IOUs have to be funded with PRESENT YEAR TAXPAYER MONEY. The money was spent ONCE, now you're paying it again. And you're TOO STUPID to know that you've been robbed.

Here's the short story..

The SS FUND IS BROKE --- and Obama is stealing from the premiums to play Robin Hood...

Trustees Report Summary



AND SS Administration themselves puts this statement at the end of every ELABORATE yearly report. After accounting for every "pennie" of the SSTFund, "there's nothing of value in the fund"...

http://www.socialsecurity.gov/history/pdf/tr09summary.pdf

Social Security’s annual surpluses
of tax income over expenditures are expected to fall sharply this
year and to stay about constant in 2010 because of the economic recession,
and to rise only briefly before declining and turning to cash flow
deficits beginning in 2016 that grow as the baby-boom generation retires.


The combined difference grows each year, so that by 2016, net revenue
flows from the general fund would total $369 billion (1.8 percent of
GDP). The positive amounts that begin in 2016 for OASDI, and started in
2008 for HI, initially represent payments the Treasury must make to the
trust funds when assets are depleted to help pay benefits in years prior to
exhaustion of the funds. Neither the redemption of trust fund bonds, nor
interest paid on those bonds, provides any new net income to the Treasury,
which must finance redemptions and interest payments through
some combination of increased taxation, reductions in other government
spending, or additional borrowing from the public.

That about describes how loonie you cartoons really appear with your end-zone celebrations and all..

First you say "obama" stole it...then you say "congress" stole it. If there is an imbecile here; it is you.

Well now that you realize you've been stolen from TWICE -- lemme 'splain it to you..

It WAS Congress that was stealing the SURPLUS every year up until 2010 when there was no more surplus.. They go and spend THAT money in the General Fund and left it to FUTURE congresses to come with the dough when the "surplus" that the TFund "contains" was needed..

So when the SURPLUS wasn't around to steal, Obama then decides to start stealing from the actual PREMiUMS that are currently being paid into the SS system. That's the wonderful "little man" tax break that he touts so highly.. It's strangled SS at a time when it's taking it's swan dive so Obama can look like Robin Hood..

Lay off the insults until you can make one stick.. If you WANT to discuss how full of money/shit the SSTF is --- let's do it here.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/3797463-post1.html

 

[flacaltenn]

Can we go back now to the question that Peach asked...

Name a Democratic entitlement program that is not going bankrupt.

Besides the blatent THEFT of SS money over DECADES and lies about the Trust Fund -- We got an Indian Lands Trust Fund that has also been emptied. Go ask the Indians.. Uncle Sam was holding their profits on timber sales, mineral rights and DIPPING into it for decades.. The theft of the SS surplus was exactly PROFIT SKIMMING.. About 5 or 6% off the top.. Something you chastise business for doing..

So I guess MY MAJOR question to the Lefty CLown Posse here (be it one or many) is ----

Why should I trust in UNIVERSAL ANYTHING given where SSoc has turned from a UNIVERSAL program for the benefit of EVERYONE -- to just another welfare transfer..

You want to trust the CONGRESS with your LIFE and HEALTH? Good luck convincing Americans that they need more UNIVERSAL anything..

You know -- as clowns --- you MIGHT have a future career in the National Clown College. It meets daily on Capitol Hill..

 

[ConservaDerrps]

Besides the blatent THEFT of SS money over DECADES and lies about the Trust Fund

That Social Security article I linked earlier in the thread opened my eyes to the craziness that is the "Social Security will go bankrupt" lie. What exactly do you mean by blatant theft, too? Call me ignorant I guess, but what're you referring too?

We got an Indian Lands Trust Fund that has also been emptied. Go ask the Indians.. Uncle Sam was holding their profits on timber sales, mineral rights and DIPPING into it for decades.. The theft of the SS surplus was exactly PROFIT SKIMMING.. About 5 or 6% off the top.. Something you chastise business for doing..

That's fucked up if it's true, and those responsible should have been prosecuted, censured, etc. But I need to read up more on this because I really don't know much about it, and honestly you're sounding a little "theoretically factual" to me right now. Sorry.

So I guess MY MAJOR question to the Lefty CLown Posse here (be it one or many) is ----

That's a good way to ensure a productive response; insulting us.

Why should I trust in UNIVERSAL ANYTHING given where SSoc has turned from a UNIVERSAL program for the benefit of EVERYONE -- to just another welfare transfer..

Because that's not really what's happened to Social Security; at least in my opinion. I think you're being completely hyperbolic here. Social Security will be fine if we get this fuckbagged economy back on it's feet. That can happen if we do what 9 out of 10 economists suggest which is to raise taxes on the highest earners, cut spending responsibly, and inject some stimulus spending into the economy.

You want to trust the CONGRESS with your LIFE and HEALTH? Good luck convincing Americans that they need more UNIVERSAL anything..

No. I want to trust the doctors with my life and health; I just want my tax dollars to pay for it.

You know -- as clowns --- you MIGHT have a future career in the National Clown College. It meets daily on Capitol Hill..

WAKKA WAKKA WAKKA!

 

[flacaltenn]

Besides the blatent THEFT of SS money over DECADES and lies about the Trust Fund

That Social Security article I linked earlier in the thread opened my eyes to the craziness that is the "Social Security will go bankrupt" lie. What exactly do you mean by blatant theft, too? Call me ignorant I guess, but what're you referring too?

Not WILL go bankrupt.. It IS bankrupt. It ran a deficit in 2010 and 2011 which CURRENT taxpayers are AGAIN paying for. All you need to know is the words from the SSA (horse's mouth) that I posted above. To paraphrase, THERE IS NOTHING OF VALUE IN THE SOCIAL SECURITY TRUST FUND. The "fund" is an accounting gimmick to cover the multi-decade theft of the surplus. If theft is too strong for you, consider it OVERCHARGING past payers into the system and giving NOTHING in return. Regardless, we're paying twice now for benefits and issuing NEW DEBT to cover the SS deficit TODAY.

We got an Indian Lands Trust Fund that has also been emptied. Go ask the Indians.. Uncle Sam was holding their profits on timber sales, mineral rights and DIPPING into it for decades.. The theft of the SS surplus was exactly PROFIT SKIMMING.. About 5 or 6% off the top.. Something you chastise business for doing..

That's fucked up if it's true, and those responsible should have been prosecuted, censured, etc. But I need to read up more on this because I really don't know much about it, and honestly you're sounding a little "theoretically factual" to me right now. Sorry.

It's not a happy story.. If you think the Fed Govt screwed the Indians in the 1800s and quit --- you'd be wrong.

That's a good way to ensure a productive response; insulting us.

Just didn't think y'all deserve that massive "victory" celebration, because in truth -- you didn't have much truth on your side.

Because that's not really what's happened to Social Security; at least in my opinion. I think you're being completely hyperbolic here. Social Security will be fine if we get this fuckbagged economy back on it's feet. That can happen if we do what 9 out of 10 economists suggest which is to raise taxes on the highest earners, cut spending responsibly, and inject some stimulus spending into the economy.

Why is it that at a time when SS is running a deficit, that the Pelosi/Reid/Obama revolution thought they could REDUCE the premiums for political gain? Is that brilliant management of a socialtal contract for UNIVERSAL retirement insurance. Let's just drop the pretense that Soc Sec is UNIVERSAL AT ALL and just call it welfare then -- if you want "the rich" to pay for it all. Just don't ask me to sign up for UNIVERSAL anything else.

You want to trust the CONGRESS with your LIFE and HEALTH? Good luck convincing Americans that they need more UNIVERSAL anything..

No. I want to trust the doctors with my life and health; I just want my tax dollars to pay for it.

When every doctor has ONE CUSTOMER and ONE boss, it's no longer under your control. And asking the Congress to sit on premiums and not steal them is obviously out of the question.

You know -- as clowns --- you MIGHT have a future career in the National Clown College. It meets daily on Capitol Hill..

WAKKA WAKKA WAKKA!

Carry on man.. It seems like you MIGHT to discuss some stuff. I suggest you first absorb the revelation that SS is BROKEN today. If you're not angry in 24 hours, you're still a duped, but useful clown...

 

[buckeye45_73]

Derps they have been taking the surplus money out of SS to mask the deficit, for decades!!! IT has no money, and now you're going to have more retirees than you can afford, unless maybe you hit 1% unemployment, good luck!