Social Security disability on verge of insolvency!

You & your old fart friends retired to early & got to much Social Security & Medicare. You robbed ours. If you had any decency you would pay us back.

Or ... maybe it was a president 10 years ago screaming about how we had too much of a budget surplus and we needed to give it back to people.

That money would have come in handy now, don't you think?

Clinton only could claim a budget surplus because he counted the surplus ROBBED from Social Security.. They ALL did it --- that's why both sides are lying about today.

It is NOT redistribution. And you are extremely lazy or intentionally ignorant if you don't know and you don't care what the ORIGINAL INTENT was. I think my respect for my buds on the left just went down in flames..

It was SUPPOSED to be exactly current workers paying benefits to the retired. But in a way where the balance sheet was secured by a promise that current workers would do that and that the GOVT wasn't gonna OVERCHARGE current workers and steal the premiums. How you can TRUST the FEDS after a scam like this -- defies logic..

NOW -- you want to change the plan to sheer unmitigated welfare redistribution. Don't talk to me about the benefits of UNIVERSAL Healthcare if THIS is how you plan to "manage" and monitor these programs..

If you DO change Soc Sec to pure redistribution -- then let me have MOST of the retirement money for my OWN account -- and I'll kick back "something" to make a diff for the truly needy.. But don't continue to take 12+% of wages from the poor and middle class and call it UNIVERSAL...
 
"Behind every great fortune lies a great crime." (Honore de Balzac)

Guess that ALSO applies to the $3Trill theft from Soc Sec doesn't it?

On the day when my bank statement doesn't reflect a direct deposit from Social Security I'll get back to you. 'Til then, leave me alone. I've had enough of you guys and your death wish.
Unf-in-beleivable..

You're more into SELFISH motives than the folks on right who YOU claim are selfish ones aren't you? Congrats -- you've confirmed every fear I have about the political left..
 
You & your old fart friends retired to early & got to much Social Security & Medicare. You robbed ours. If you had any decency you would pay us back.

Or ... maybe it was a president 10 years ago screaming about how we had too much of a budget surplus and we needed to give it back to people.

That money would have come in handy now, don't you think?

Clinton only could claim a budget surplus because he counted the surplus ROBBED from Social Security.. They ALL did it --- that's why both sides are lying about today.

Clinton wasn't president 10 years ago.

And again, you can talk about SS with regards to what it was and what its intent was, but what it is NOW is a system where we tax Worker A and give those funds to Retiree B. That's what it is. Your money does not sit in a little bank account with your name on it accruing interest and waiting for the day you can collect it.

You need to look at the world as it is, not as you want it to be.
 
Last edited:
How can this be? Didn't we just allow Obama to borrow another $2,000,000,000,000 so we could make payments?

WTF???????????????????????????????????????
 
Or ... maybe it was a president 10 years ago screaming about how we had too much of a budget surplus and we needed to give it back to people.

That money would have come in handy now, don't you think?

Clinton only could claim a budget surplus because he counted the surplus ROBBED from Social Security.. They ALL did it --- that's why both sides are lying about today.

Clinton wasn't president 10 years ago.

And again, you can talk about SS with regards to what it was and what its intent was, but what it is NOW is a system where we tax Worker A and give those funds to Retiree B. That's what it is. Your money does not sit in a little bank account with your name on it accruing interest and waiting for the day you can collect it.

You need to look at the world as it is, not as you want it to be.

Dont be stupid - DontBeStupid.. Clinton stole MORE from soc sec than BUsh did because the surpluses were MUCH higher. How can you complain about corporations skimming excess profits when you dont giveashit about the $3TRILL GOVT profit skimming that went on here?

And now that Obama can't STEAL from the surplus (it died in 2010), he's stealing from the premiums that are being paid TODAY with his "stimulus" tax cuts.

It IS a shame that 12% of EVERY worker's salary under $130K (or whatever) goes to a program WITHOUT their name on it. And NOW -- YOU want to change the intent of this program so that only about 20% of ALL workers will see a net gain or break even on their "investment"??

Not only are you living up to your forum name.. But you also must think that most Americans are morons and won't realize how your "rules change" makes a mockery of UNIVERSAL govt anything.. I hope you actually push for those socialist changes -- because it will end ANY FAITH in govt that still exists out there.
 
[...]

YOU -- and your progressive friends want to redefine the original intent. And like I said -- go ahead and try -- but you will poison the concept of UNIVERSAL anything for several generations if you succeed in doing that.

[...]
I do??

If you hadn't told me what is on my mind I never would have known. But the fact is you are bursting with assumptions and you're as wrong as two left feet.
 
It IS a shame that 12% of EVERY worker's salary under $130K (or whatever) goes to a program WITHOUT their name on it. And NOW -- YOU want to change the intent of this program so that only about 20% of ALL workers will see a net gain or break even on their "investment"??

Uhm, what? When did I say I wanted that change made? When did anyone say they wanted that change made? The only change I've mentioned with regards to SS is that there should be a tax on profits of companies to help make up the shortfall. I don't think that's too much to ask, since those companies are making profits due to the workers.
 
The only change I've mentioned with regards to SS is that there should be a tax on profits of companies to help make up the shortfall. I don't think that's too much to ask, since those companies are making profits due to the workers.

Where do you get that nonsense from? Why on Earth is a worker entitled to more than they contract for in salary & benefits? Workers are 'entitled' to whatever they AGREE to be entitled to. Just because a company makes a profit, regardless of how big a profit, they are not required to share that with the workers.

It would be nice if they did, and I'd love my company (a Fortune 200 company) to do so, but I do not feel 'entitled' to it.

Company's make profits because of their workers, this is true. But the workers are not entitled to anything more or less than agreed to at the time of hire.
 
Last edited:
The only change I've mentioned with regards to SS is that there should be a tax on profits of companies to help make up the shortfall. I don't think that's too much to ask, since those companies are making profits due to the workers.

Where do you get that nonsense from? Why on Earth is a worker entitled to more than they contract for in salary & benefits? Workers are 'entitled' to whatever they AGREE to be entitled to. Just because a company makes a profit, regardless of how big a profit, they are not required to share that with the workers.

It would be nice if they did, and I'd love my company (a Fortune 200 company) to do so, but I do not feel 'entitled' to it.

Company's make profits because of their workers, this is true. But the workers are not entitled to anything more or less than agreed to at the time of hire.

So we agree, that companies make profits due to their workers. However, you seem to somehow have seen the word "entitled" in my post when in fact no such word was used. I have never said workers were "entitled" to profits. I merely pointed out that we could put a slight tax on companies profits and that would allow SS to pay full benefits for as far as the eye can see.

Choosing companies over citizens is a very dangerous path to head down.
 
FICA taxes are a huge windfall for the federal government. They realized that way back in FDR's day while politicians were stealing the money. LBJ made it "legal" by officially designating FICA taxes as the property of the federal government and from then on there was no pretending about a social security "locked box". There ain't no money because there never was anything but a promise to pay it back.

Yep and if you check you will see where the biggest windfall of SS surplus funds to squander came from.

Reagan increasing withholding too much.
 
Another deceptive parctice is to show all money spent by SS as part of the spending pie chart.
The oney "contributed" by workers and their employers is dedicated to SS and should not be confused with overall govt spending.
Politicians like to do it though cause it shrinks the % spent on the military for which ALL funding comes out of general non dedicated revenues.
Which means that part of our spending is all discretionary and can be cut unlike the contributory part of SS.

If you cut SS spending and wind up taking part of the 12.5 % or so of the contributions that is pure theft and worse than "borrowing" the surplus funds.
SS spending CANNOT be reduced beyond the contributory portion.
 
Last edited:
You & your old fart friends retired to early & got to much Social Security & Medicare. You robbed ours. If you had any decency you would pay us back.

Or ... maybe it was a president 10 years ago screaming about how we had too much of a budget surplus and we needed to give it back to people.

That money would have come in handy now, don't you think?

You are correct & yes that money would be handy right now.

Bush told us we would get some of that money in our personal retirement accounts where it would be safe, but the democrats said NO!

So Bush gave it to the rich for 8 years with the votes from a dozen Democrats!

Then guess what Obama & the Democrats give the rich even more tax cuts.
 
You & your old fart friends retired to early & got to much Social Security & Medicare. You robbed ours. If you had any decency you would pay us back.

Or ... maybe it was a president 10 years ago screaming about how we had too much of a budget surplus and we needed to give it back to people.

That money would have come in handy now, don't you think?

You are correct & yes that money would be handy right now.

Bush told us we would get some of that money in our personal retirement accounts where it would be safe, but the democrats said NO!

So Bush gave it to the rich for 8 years with the votes from a dozen Democrats!

Then guess what Obama & the Democrats give the rich even more tax cuts.

All bush did was talk he did not have the balls to submit any plan.
 
Or ... maybe it was a president 10 years ago screaming about how we had too much of a budget surplus and we needed to give it back to people.

That money would have come in handy now, don't you think?

You are correct & yes that money would be handy right now.

Bush told us we would get some of that money in our personal retirement accounts where it would be safe, but the democrats said NO!

So Bush gave it to the rich for 8 years with the votes from a dozen Democrats!

Then guess what Obama & the Democrats give the rich even more tax cuts.

All bush did was talk he did not have the balls to submit any plan.
After 33 months of Obama, it is now official......Blaming Bush is no longer permitted. Move on!
You libs are amazing! You are ready to take credit for anything positive yet will take NO responsibility for anything negative.
Man up and accept the fact that Obama is not getting anything done to assist in an economic recovery. In fact, he's botched it up so badly, things have gotten progressively WORSE. That's a FACT.
 
Or ... maybe it was a president 10 years ago screaming about how we had too much of a budget surplus and we needed to give it back to people.

That money would have come in handy now, don't you think?

Clinton only could claim a budget surplus because he counted the surplus ROBBED from Social Security.. They ALL did it --- that's why both sides are lying about today.

Clinton wasn't president 10 years ago.

And again, you can talk about SS with regards to what it was and what its intent was, but what it is NOW is a system where we tax Worker A and give those funds to Retiree B. That's what it is. Your money does not sit in a little bank account with your name on it accruing interest and waiting for the day you can collect it.

You need to look at the world as it is, not as you want it to be.
Actually Clinton was very good at economic issues. He listened to his advisors in and outside of his admin and simply stepped out of the way. The economy flourished.
 
You are correct & yes that money would be handy right now.

Bush told us we would get some of that money in our personal retirement accounts where it would be safe, but the democrats said NO!

So Bush gave it to the rich for 8 years with the votes from a dozen Democrats!

Then guess what Obama & the Democrats give the rich even more tax cuts.

All bush did was talk he did not have the balls to submit any plan.
After 33 months of Obama, it is now official......Blaming Bush is no longer permitted. Move on!
You libs are amazing! You are ready to take credit for anything positive yet will take NO responsibility for anything negative.
Man up and accept the fact that Obama is not getting anything done to assist in an economic recovery. In fact, he's botched it up so badly, things have gotten progressively WORSE. That's a FACT.

You are delusional, I in no way blamed Bush for anything in that post.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top