Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Because your tax increase is to prop up the façade that the free lunch is alive and well.
Oddball said:The problem is, has been, and remains spending....Including that "mandatory" nonsense.
So you'd rather fuck the seniors who paid the higher taxes for their entire lives out of their benefits, than subject the current work force to moderately higher taxes?
I think you know better.
The only people screwing the eldery are the people like you who are lying to them.
"Lying to them?" What have I said that's incorrect?
The only people screwing the eldery are the people like you who are lying to them.
"Lying to them?" What have I said that's incorrect?
Telling them they can rely on government for their support is a lie. Promising them money that doesnt exist is a lie.
If you think the SS ponzi scheme is going to work indefinitely, then you are lying to yourself. It's either going to have be settled now, or there are going to be alot of people dying when the government collapses under the weight of the spending you refuse to address.
Because your tax increase is to prop up the façade that the free lunch is alive and well.
That's just ridiculous.
Oddball said:The problem is, has been, and remains spending....Including that "mandatory" nonsense.
The biggest line item in the budget, which also happens to be a mandatory program, is Social Security. It has a $2.7T SURPLUS. That doesn't mean it's under a mattress in DC somewhere, it means that all other things equal, the debt would be $2.7T HIGHER had SS never existed.
The money was blown on discretionary programs over time; Predominantly, overwhelmingly, practically exclusively, on military programs.
Because your tax increase is to prop up the façade that the free lunch is alive and well.
That's just ridiculous.
Oddball said:The problem is, has been, and remains spending....Including that "mandatory" nonsense.
The biggest line item in the budget, which also happens to be a mandatory program, is Social Security. It has a $2.7T SURPLUS. That doesn't mean it's under a mattress in DC somewhere, it means that all other things equal, the debt would be $2.7T HIGHER had SS never existed.
The money was blown on discretionary programs over time; Predominantly, overwhelmingly, practically exclusively, on military programs.
Social security is pretty workable compared to MEDICARE, MEDICAID, OBAMACARE...
The biggest line item in the budget, which also happens to be a mandatory program, is Social Security. It has a $2.7T SURPLUS. That doesn't mean it's under a mattress in DC somewhere, it means that all other things equal, the debt would be $2.7T HIGHER had SS never existed.
Predominantly, overwhelmingly, practically exclusively, bullshit...The domestic socialistic moocher state hasn't come cheaply, either....I remind you that a lot of that spending includes federal mandates to the states, to shake down the peasants to pay for their "benevolent patronage" as well.The money was blown on discretionary programs over time; Predominantly, overwhelmingly, practically exclusively, on military programs.
The biggest line item in the budget, which also happens to be a mandatory program, is Social Security. It has a $2.7T SURPLUS. That doesn't mean it's under a mattress in DC somewhere, it means that all other things equal, the debt would be $2.7T HIGHER had SS never existed.
I can't believe that anyone can be so willingly naïve....The debt wouldn't have been run up had there not been an immense honey pot of available cash to steal from in the first place.
Predominantly, overwhelmingly, practically exclusively, bullshit...The domestic socialistic moocher state hasn't come cheaply, either....I remind you that a lot of that spending includes federal mandates to the states, to shake down the peasants to pay for their "benevolent patronage" as well.The money was blown on discretionary programs over time; Predominantly, overwhelmingly, practically exclusively, on military programs.
So what should we reneg on? Debt interest? SS Payments? Medicare people have been paying into their entire lives?
This argument gets so tiresome....
Three potential Republican candidates for president came out against boosting the federal debt limit without substantial spending cuts, raising the temperature in a debate that is quickly becoming a test of Washington's newfound appetite for financial discipline.
Rep. Mike Pence of Indiana and former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich on Monday joined former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty in calling for spending cuts and opposing any increase in the $14.3 trillion debt ceiling without them.
"Congressman Pence does not believe conservatives should support an increase in the debt ceiling unless it is married to very real and significant reductions in spending in the short term and long term," Pence spokesman Matt Lloyd said Monday. Gingrich spokesman Rick Tyler said Mr. Gingrich holds "the same position."
Congressional GOP leaders say a vote to raise the limit is inevitable if the nation is to avoid defaulting on its loans. They hope to formulate a compromise that combines increasing the debt limit with a package of spending cuts.
Mr. Pawlenty on Sunday called on congressional Republicans to block an increase and instead proposed legislation that he said would prevent a U.S. default.
In an interview with The Wall Street Journal, Mr. Pawlenty said Congress should pass legislation that would put interest and debt payments ahead of other federal spending and allow the federal government to pay its creditors as tax revenue flows in. With the surge of tax payments that come in between April and June, that would at least buy time to try to cut spending dramatically, he said.
"This debate about how we're going to restructure spending is inevitable. My view is, let's have it now," Mr. Pawlenty said in the interview. "Let's call their bluff." On "Fox News Sunday," both Mr. Pawlenty and New Jersey Republican Gov. Chris Christie called on Congress to reject the debt-ceiling increase.
New Calls on GOP Side Not to Lift Debt Limit - WSJ.com
So what should we reneg on? Debt interest? SS Payments? Medicare people have been paying into their entire lives?
This argument gets so tiresome....
What I consider to be a tiresome argument is this idea that because people have been paying into Social Security or Medicare their whole lives that somehow they should be immune to having those payments cut back. Those very same people also have voted in all of these lousy politicians throughout their lives who mismanaged these programs as well, so the way I see it, cutting back their Social Security and/or Medicare to balance the budget is the consequence of their votes.
So what should we reneg on? Debt interest? SS Payments? Medicare people have been paying into their entire lives?
This argument gets so tiresome....
What I consider to be a tiresome argument is this idea that because people have been paying into Social Security or Medicare their whole lives that somehow they should be immune to having those payments cut back. Those very same people also have voted in all of these lousy politicians throughout their lives who mismanaged these programs as well, so the way I see it, cutting back their Social Security and/or Medicare to balance the budget is the consequence of their votes.
Why should they have to finance your ability to pay lower taxes than they ever did?
No, you're wrong.
In 20-some years, without changes, the program will begin running a deficit. Right now it has a massive surplus. You want to tell the people that funded the surplus that they're FUCKED out of their money so you can enjoy lower taxes than they ever had.
Dats fucked up.
Why should they have to finance your ability to pay lower taxes than they ever did?
What I consider to be a tiresome argument is this idea that because people have been paying into Social Security or Medicare their whole lives that somehow they should be immune to having those payments cut back. Those very same people also have voted in all of these lousy politicians throughout their lives who mismanaged these programs as well, so the way I see it, cutting back their Social Security and/or Medicare to balance the budget is the consequence of their votes.
Why should they have to finance your ability to pay lower taxes than they ever did?
Why should I have to finance their retirement through a Social Security program I'm never going to see a dime from because they voted for politicians who spent away that money years ago? That's their fault and they should face the consequences of their vote.
The Baby Boomers have been the most destructive generation this country has ever seen. They don't give a shit about the hell they've created for their kids or their grandkids and so on.
What I consider to be a tiresome argument is this idea that because people have been paying into Social Security or Medicare their whole lives that somehow they should be immune to having those payments cut back. Those very same people also have voted in all of these lousy politicians throughout their lives who mismanaged these programs as well, so the way I see it, cutting back their Social Security and/or Medicare to balance the budget is the consequence of their votes.
Why should they have to finance your ability to pay lower taxes than they ever did?
Why should I have to finance their retirement through a Social Security program I'm never going to see a dime from because they voted for politicians who spent away that money years ago? That's their fault and they should face the consequences of their vote.
The Baby Boomers have been the most destructive generation this country has ever seen. They don't give a shit about the hell they've created for their kids or their grandkids and so on.
No, you're wrong.
In 20-some years, without changes, the program will begin running a deficit. Right now it has a massive surplus. You want to tell the people that funded the surplus that they're FUCKED out of their money so you can enjoy lower taxes than they ever had.
Dats fucked up.
Massive surplus? You're just delusional.
You point out how destructive our politicians have been......very true....but making it a generational war is plain stupid....SS was originally created long ago under FDR....part of the New Deal...
Boomers...as all others.... are FORCED to pay 15% of their gross income for SS.....if YOU had saved 15% of your gross paycheck for 40 years and invested it well you probably would have a million dollar retirement on that alone....
Not raising the debt limit would force us NOW to begin paying for the mistakes....instead of putting them off into the future...i say we cut government to the bone....not SS checks...
You point out how destructive our politicians have been......very true....but making it a generational war is plain stupid....SS was originally created long ago under FDR....part of the New Deal...
Boomers...as all others.... are FORCED to pay 15% of their gross income for SS.....if YOU had saved 15% of your gross paycheck for 40 years and invested it well you probably would have a million dollar retirement on that alone....
Not raising the debt limit would force us NOW to begin paying for the mistakes....instead of putting them off into the future...i say we cut government to the bone....not SS checks...
How on earth do we cut government to the bone without cutting SS checks?
You point out how destructive our politicians have been......very true....but making it a generational war is plain stupid....SS was originally created long ago under FDR....part of the New Deal...
Boomers...as all others.... are FORCED to pay 15% of their gross income for SS.....if YOU had saved 15% of your gross paycheck for 40 years and invested it well you probably would have a million dollar retirement on that alone....
Not raising the debt limit would force us NOW to begin paying for the mistakes....instead of putting them off into the future...i say we cut government to the bone....not SS checks...
How on earth do we cut government to the bone without cutting SS checks?
Hey, here's a no-brainer. Let me put it into a little bit easier perspective still, than I already have.
If you CUT SS outlays - Do you also want to ELIMINATE the tax?
Because if you ELIMINATE both, you INCREASE the deficit.
Coming into focus for you yet?
You point out how destructive our politicians have been......very true....but making it a generational war is plain stupid....SS was originally created long ago under FDR....part of the New Deal...
Boomers...as all others.... are FORCED to pay 15% of their gross income for SS.....if YOU had saved 15% of your gross paycheck for 40 years and invested it well you probably would have a million dollar retirement on that alone....
Not raising the debt limit would force us NOW to begin paying for the mistakes....instead of putting them off into the future...i say we cut government to the bone....not SS checks...
How on earth do we cut government to the bone without cutting SS checks?
