Will Democrats Let Us Save Social Security?

[JoeB131]

First of all, I'm not a republican.

Secondly, It would be in the greatest of best interests for Colonel Sanders to be in charge of the chickens that he made millions off of.

What you know about economics could fit on one side of a matchbook.....Just STFU and prevent embarrassing yourself further.

Yeah, you're a MAGAt. That's even worse than a Republican.

Um, you missed the point of the Chicken Analogy. I'd explain it to you again, but you still wouldn't get it. (In that analogy, retirees are the chickens, and it doesn't end up well for them.)

Again, your side fucks up the economy every time you get ahold of it.

 

[hadit]

Yes, you've been saying that for years... no one believes you anymore, Wet Fart.

Tax the rich. That's 's how you make up the difference.

Well, dingleberry, there are a few things wrong with your assertions.

1. There's not enough regular income among the very rich to make up any difference. Go after their real source of income, capital gains, and suddenly they'll lose their pious, "I want to pay more taxes" schtick and you'll see income vanish from the taxman's grip, fast.
2. We're not the ones warning that the program will, within a few short years, be paying out more than it's taking in. Those are the trustees. Obviously, you don't believe them and instead prefer your comfortable fiction. When fiction meets reality, it loses. That means you lose as well.

 

[hadit]

First of all, I'm not a republican.

Secondly, It would be in the greatest of best interests for Colonel Sanders to be in charge of the chickens that he made millions off of.

What you know about economics could fit on one side of a matchbook.....Just STFU and prevent embarrassing yourself further.

When you allow a tribe to profit from the sale of tiger skins, suddenly tigers are protected from poachers and thrive. The best way to ensure the continued existence of something is to allow someone to profit from it.

 

[JoeB131]

When you allow a tribe to profit from the sale of tiger skins, suddenly tigers are protected from poachers and thrive. The best way to ensure the continued existence of something is to allow someone to profit from it.

Except... they aren't. Tigers are nearly extinct in the wild.

The problem with "letting someone profit" is that it only serves those who make a profit. And that won't be the people Social Security is meant to serve.

Did you all forget 2008? Where everyone took it on the chin for their 401Ks and mortages but the big banks got bailouts? I remember it well. .

 

[22lcidw]

Yeah, you're a MAGAt. That's even worse than a Republican.

Um, you missed the point of the Chicken Analogy. I'd explain it to you again, but you still wouldn't get it. (In that analogy, retirees are the chickens, and it doesn't end up well for them.)

Again, your side fucks up the economy every time you get ahold of it.

If the economy depends how much money you print up, oh wow you are great. Meanwhile in parts unknown in the world, slaves are making products for us cheaply.

 

[hadit]

Except... they aren't. Tigers are nearly extinct in the wild.

Allow tribes to profit from the sales of their skins would seem them protected.

The problem with "letting someone profit" is that it only serves those who make a profit. And that won't be the people Social Security is meant to serve.

Allowing someone to profit from investing SS money would ensure that it would be invested as well as possible. Everyone should be allowed to select some portion of their money to be invested.

Did you all forget 2008? Where everyone took it on the chin for their 401Ks and mortages but the big banks got bailouts? I remember it well. .

Oh, I remember that time very well. I remember that massive bank failures would have hurt a lot of people.

 

[JoeB131]

Allow tribes to profit from the sales of their skins would seem them protected.

Not really. Tigers are nearly extinct in the wild because of habitat loss. Because there was more profit in turning that jungle into farmland.

Allowing someone to profit from investing SS money would ensure that it would be invested as well as possible. Everyone should be allowed to select some portion of their money to be invested.

no one is stopping you from investing your own money. But I remember all these people who lost their shirts in the stock market in 2008 screaming for the government to make good their losses

Oh, I remember that time very well. I remember that massive bank failures would have hurt a lot of people.

I remember having an underwater mortgage, a busted 401K, and the credit card companies trying to make up their losses by jacking up interest rates. (Which is why I make a point to carry ZERO credit card balances, because fuck those guys. )

Stop bending over and taking it up the ass for the rich. They are not your friends.

 

[hadit]

Not really. Tigers are nearly extinct in the wild because of habitat loss. Because there was more profit in turning that jungle into farmland.

Exactly. If there was more profit in the sale of skins than in creating more farmland, that habitat would be preserved. Congratulations, you're starting to understand the profit motive.

no one is stopping you from investing your own money.

Actually, they ARE when they confiscate my money from my paycheck and dump it into the general fund, pretending they're taking care of it for me.

But I remember all these people who lost their shirts in the stock market in 2008 screaming for the government to make good their losses

When the law says the government will cover bank deposits to a certain level, it's legit to demand it do just that. I don't remember anyone claiming the government needed to cover losses in the stock market, I certainly didn't. Although, when you think about it, the government certainly gets excited when investments result in profit, then look the other way when they result in loss.

I remember having an underwater mortgage, a busted 401K, and the credit card companies trying to make up their losses by jacking up interest rates. (Which is why I make a point to carry ZERO credit card balances, because fuck those guys. )

Stop bending over and taking it up the ass for the rich. They are not your friends.

Who cares what a credit card company thinks? You carry no balances because it saves you money, not because it does anything to the company. Again, profit motive.

 

[JoeB131]

Exactly. If there was more profit in the sale of skins than in creating more farmland, that habitat would be preserved. Congratulations, you're starting to understand the profit motive.

The sale of a single tiger skin is never going to produce as much revenue as one acre of farmland.

You guys have no understanding of economics. There's a reason why governments have to drive conservation.

Actually, they ARE when they confiscate my money from my paycheck and dump it into the general fund, pretending they're taking care of it for me.

They are taking care of it for you. If you get completely wiped out with bad investments because you sunk all your money into DJT stocks, Social Security will still be there for you.

When the law says the government will cover bank deposits to a certain level, it's legit to demand it do just that. I don't remember anyone claiming the government needed to cover losses in the stock market, I certainly didn't. Although, when you think about it, the government certainly gets excited when investments result in profit, then look the other way when they result in loss.

You miss the point of why 2008 happened. It didn't happen because the government did it's job and protected banking, it happened because government didn't do it's job, and let the banks engage in all kinds of sub-prime shenanigans.

"The problem with Capitalism is Capitalists...they're too damned greedy." - Herbert Hoover

 

[Oddball]

Yeah, you're a MAGAt. That's even worse than a Republican.

Except I'm not...I'm an agorist....Tired of being wrong yet?

Um, you missed the point of the Chicken Analogy. I'd explain it to you again, but you still wouldn't get it. (In that analogy, retirees are the chickens, and it doesn't end up well for them.)

Your chicken analogy lays bare your total ignorance of economics ....It's only a stunning dearth of self-awareness which prevents the embarrassment it would take, for you to stop running your unprepossessing alligator mouth.

Again, your side fucks up the economy every time you get ahold of it.

* yawn*

 

[mikegriffith1]

Except... they aren't. Tigers are nearly extinct in the wild.

The problem with "letting someone profit" is that it only serves those who make a profit. And that won't be the people Social Security is meant to serve.

Folks, please understand that JoeB131 is a Marxist admirer of Mao Tse-Tung. This is one reason he fixates on the "solution" of just taxing the rich even more than they're already taxed. His answer to every budget issue is tax the rich.

Some of you have pointed out to him that taxing the rich would not be enough to fix Social Security. He doesn't care, and he won't read anything that disagrees with his Marxist hatred of wealth and success.

Did you all forget 2008? Where everyone took it on the chin for their 401Ks and mortages but the big banks got bailouts? I remember it well. .

My 401K didn't take a big hit in 2008 because I didn't have any subprime-mortgage-related funds in my investment portfolio. The only people who took big hits in their 401Ks were people whose 401Ks included investments in subprime mortgages and/or in companies that bought and bundled those mortgages.

And you keep avoiding the key point that those subprime mortgages never would have existed in the first place were it not for the federal government's disastrous intervention in the housing market via Freddie, Fannie, the Fed, and the CRA, and were it not for the ridiculous and destructive mark-to-market regulation.

 

[JoeB131]

Your chicken analogy lays bare your total ignorance of economics ....It's only a stunning dearth of self-awareness which prevents the embarrassment it would take, for you to stop running your unprepossessing alligator mouth.

Look, guy, we knew you didn't understand the analogy at all. I knew explaining it to you would not lead to any enlightenment. No need to further embarrass yourself.

And you keep avoiding the key point that those subprime mortgages never would have existed in the first place were it not for the federal government's disastrous intervention in the housing market via Freddie, Fannie, the Fed, and the CRA, and were it not for the ridiculous and destructive mark-to-market regulation.

Uh, guy, that's like going down to the Rape Crisis Center and telling those women they shouldn't have dressed like sluts. Nobody MADE the banks engage in the kinds of shenanigans they did.

Folks, please understand that JoeB131 is a Marxist admirer of Mao Tse-Tung. This is one reason he fixates on the "solution" of just taxing the rich even more than they're already taxed. His answer to every budget issue is tax the rich.

I'd be perfectly happy to go back to the Pre-Reagan tax days. America had its greatest prosperity when the top marginal rate was 93%.

I never heard of anyone named "Mao Tse-Tung". I've heard of a Mao Zedong, who turned China from a battered and ruined nation into a world superpower in a generation. I don't admire him, but I recognize his achievements, as do most Modern Chinese.

Some of you have pointed out to him that taxing the rich would not be enough to fix Social Security. He doesn't care, and he won't read anything that disagrees with his Marxist hatred of wealth and success.

Hey, I still like my idea of harvesting the Wall Streeter for transplant organs, they only time they would ever be of use to humanity.

 

[Oddball]

Look, guy, we knew you didn't understand the analogy at all. I knew explaining it to you would not lead to any enlightenment. No need to further embarrass yourself.

Look, commie assclown, you haven't the first fucking idea what you've been blabbering about, yet you keep on blabbering....LMFAO!

The self-awareness of a fucking tree.

 

[JoeB131]

Look, commie assclown, you haven't the first fucking idea what you've been blabbering about, yet you keep on blabbering....LMFAO!

The self-awareness of a fucking tree.

Guy, I know that the Colonel Sanders reference confused you.

Colonel Sanders was not good to Chickens.
Letting Wall Street loot social security is not good for old people

 

[hadit]

Look, guy, we knew you didn't understand the analogy at all. I knew explaining it to you would not lead to any enlightenment. No need to further embarrass yourself.

Uh, guy, that's like going down to the Rape Crisis Center and telling those women they shouldn't have dressed like sluts. Nobody MADE the banks engage in the kinds of shenanigans they did.

You might as well complain that an elderly woman is not safe walking in certain alleys alone at night. IOW, why be stupid?

I'd be perfectly happy to go back to the Pre-Reagan tax days. America had its greatest prosperity when the top marginal rate was 93%.

As long as we re-instate all the tax shelters he did away with. It would be nice to deduct credit card interest again. Funny how those who insist we should go back to the top rates no one paid get real quiet when you mention those deduction.

I never heard of anyone named "Mao Tse-Tung". I've heard of a Mao Zedong, who turned China from a battered and ruined nation into a world superpower in a generation. I don't admire him, but I recognize his achievements, as do most Modern Chinese.

Sure, and many a dictator has made the trains run on time. Mao turned China into a world superpower. Who cares that he killed tens of million doing it? Heck, you get mad at TRUMP! for a few thousand deaths from a novel disease that targeted the sick and the elderly.

Hey, I still like my idea of harvesting the Wall Streeter for transplant organs, they only time they would ever be of use to humanity.

Man will always find ways to exploit the system. You get mad when they figure out ways to do it that you didn't.

 

[JoeB131]

As long as we re-instate all the tax shelters he did away with. It would be nice to deduct credit card interest again. Funny how those who insist we should go back to the top rates no one paid get real quiet when you mention those deduction.

I'm all for returning to those deductions... but the rich will still pay their fair share, so I'm fine.

Sure, and many a dictator has made the trains run on time. Mao turned China into a world superpower. Who cares that he killed tens of million doing it? Heck, you get mad at TRUMP! for a few thousand deaths from a novel disease that targeted the sick and the elderly.

Well, at the end of Trump's reign, we were all worse off, Wet Fart.

Mao did fuck a lot of things up, to be sure, such as the Four Pests campaign, that resulted in the deaths of swallows in China, which resulted in an explosion in the insect population, which contributed to Famine of 1959. (BTW, my wife was born during this famine, and her parents described it as horrible).

But China in 1945 was a ruined country.
China in 1976 was a world super power.

 

[hadit]

I'm all for returning to those deductions... but the rich will still pay their fair share, so I'm fine.

You do realize, don't you, that no one paid those confiscatory rates because of all those deductions, right?

Well, at the end of Trump's reign, we were all worse off, Wet Fart.

Yeah, it's almost like something really catastrophic happened that made the economy basically shut down. Now if we could just figure out what that was...

Mao did fuck a lot of things up, to be sure, such as the Four Pests campaign, that resulted in the deaths of swallows in China, which resulted in an explosion in the insect population, which contributed to Famine of 1959. (BTW, my wife was born during this famine, and her parents described it as horrible).

But China in 1945 was a ruined country.
China in 1976 was a world super power.

What a way to describe the deaths of tens of millions. It's almost like you're trying to absolve Mao of responsibility.

 

[JoeB131]

You do realize, don't you, that no one paid those confiscatory rates because of all those deductions, right?

Deductions that specifically helped the economy. I'm fine with that.

What a way to describe the deaths of tens of millions. It's almost like you're trying to absolve Mao of responsibility.

No more than any other unrest in China. The problem is, when China suffers, she suffers hard.

The Taiping Rebellion cost 30 million lives in the 19th century.
The fall of the Ming Dynasty cost 25 million lives.
22 million Chinese lost their lives when Japan invaded them.

So, um, yeah, the Great Leap Forward was kind of a fuckup, and some of it had to do with Mao, and some of it had to do with unintended consequences.

 

[JoeB131]

Yeah, it's almost like something really catastrophic happened that made the economy basically shut down. Now if we could just figure out what that was...

Yes, something catastrophic did happen. We needed a President to show leadership, and we got a Game Show Host doing publicity stunts.

 

[hadit]

Yes, something catastrophic did happen. We needed a President to show leadership, and we got a Game Show Host doing publicity stunts.

Yeah, all that fast-tracking vaccines to get them out as soon as possible, shutting down travel from highly infected areas (oh, wait, we didn't do that one, there was a political party dead set against doing anything like that), accepting and following CDC mask and distancing dictates. Big time publicity stunts.