Beating Social Security

[rightwinger]

Social Security works.
Ask Social Security receipients if they want it privatized

Anyone who wants a personal savings account is free to open one tax free. many employers will also provide matching funds

The point of the thread is that there are other systems and variations that work better.

Shed your Liberal biases, and admit it.

You have yet to name how you would implement it and how you would cover people currently under Social Security

This is the point where you run away and come back with a totally unrelated cut and paste

 

[Lakhota]

Beating Social Security

On almost any given day I can "beat" Social Security - but that's not the point of Social Security. Social Security is an insurance safety net - a valuable lesson learned from the Great Depression. The Trust Funds are invested in U.S. government securities - that same "safe" investment that China and Japan like. Imagine using the stock markets to insure your home, health, and vehicles - instead of actually having insurance policies for specific protection.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Social Security works.
Ask Social Security receipients if they want it privatized

Anyone who wants a personal savings account is free to open one tax free. many employers will also provide matching funds

The point of the thread is that there are other systems and variations that work better.

Shed your Liberal biases, and admit it.

You have yet to name how you would implement it and how you would cover people currently under Social Security

This is the point where you run away and come back with a totally unrelated cut and paste

That's a lie....actually a series of lies.

Examples of suggested fixes, and some in effect currently, are in this thread.

Are you ready to change your name to reflect the truth, and reality?


So stop telling lies. Let us tell our neighbors the truth, for we are all parts of the same body.
Ephesians 4:25

 

[PoliticalChic]

Beating Social Security

On almost any given day I can "beat" Social Security - but that's not the point of Social Security. Social Security is an insurance safety net - a valuable lesson learned from the Great Depression. The Trust Funds are invested in U.S. government securities - that same "safe" investment that China and Japan like. Imagine using the stock markets to insure your home, health, and vehicles - instead of actually having insurance policies for specific protection.

"Social Security is an insurance safety net."

1. Can you find the article of the Constitution that gives the federal government the power to create 'insurance'?

2. Can you explain why the Left, behind all sorts of government expansion, has not formed and advanced an amendment for that purpose?

 

[Lakhota]

Beating Social Security

On almost any given day I can "beat" Social Security - but that's not the point of Social Security. Social Security is an insurance safety net - a valuable lesson learned from the Great Depression. The Trust Funds are invested in U.S. government securities - that same "safe" investment that China and Japan like. Imagine using the stock markets to insure your home, health, and vehicles - instead of actually having insurance policies for specific protection.

"Social Security is an insurance safety net."

1. Can you find the article of the Constitution that gives the federal government the power to create 'insurance'?

2. Can you explain why the Left, behind all sorts of government expansion, has not formed and advanced an amendment for that purpose?

Ask SCOTUS.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Beating Social Security

On almost any given day I can "beat" Social Security - but that's not the point of Social Security. Social Security is an insurance safety net - a valuable lesson learned from the Great Depression. The Trust Funds are invested in U.S. government securities - that same "safe" investment that China and Japan like. Imagine using the stock markets to insure your home, health, and vehicles - instead of actually having insurance policies for specific protection.

"Social Security is an insurance safety net."

1. Can you find the article of the Constitution that gives the federal government the power to create 'insurance'?

2. Can you explain why the Left, behind all sorts of government expansion, has not formed and advanced an amendment for that purpose?

Ask SCOTUS.

I'm asking you....why do you oppose the United States Constitution....the 'law of the land'?

 

[Jarlaxle]

So would you like SS to refund all your contributions and take you off the program?

Oh, right, you don't work. You don't have SS contributions.

I would be perfectly happy to just write off everything that has already been taken (it's gone forever) if I could stop having more money taken for something I will never see.

Nobody gets SS anymore? lol, you're stupid.

Do you have a SPECIAL computer, that lets you read things I never posted?

You said the money we pay in is gone forever. If that's true then no money is available to pay benefits.

Wow...how do you clothe and feed yourself? OK, for the really slow kid: the money I have paid in is gone forever. (And actually, yeah, most money paid in IS gone.)

 

[Lakhota]

Beating Social Security

On almost any given day I can "beat" Social Security - but that's not the point of Social Security. Social Security is an insurance safety net - a valuable lesson learned from the Great Depression. The Trust Funds are invested in U.S. government securities - that same "safe" investment that China and Japan like. Imagine using the stock markets to insure your home, health, and vehicles - instead of actually having insurance policies for specific protection.

"Social Security is an insurance safety net."

1. Can you find the article of the Constitution that gives the federal government the power to create 'insurance'?

2. Can you explain why the Left, behind all sorts of government expansion, has not formed and advanced an amendment for that purpose?

Ask SCOTUS.

I'm asking you....why do you oppose the United States Constitution....the 'law of the land'?

SCOTUS has upheld Social Security.

On May 24, 1937, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Social Security Act.

Social Security Online History Pages

Constitutional Background to the Social Security Act of 1935

How Social Security Was Defended by Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson

 

[Jarlaxle]

Sun Devil, run my little man, run. RW is after you! Stop and cash your social security check first, though.

Are you on LSD?

You are adorable!

Stop humping my leg.

 

[Lakhota]

So would you like SS to refund all your contributions and take you off the program?

Oh, right, you don't work. You don't have SS contributions.

I would be perfectly happy to just write off everything that has already been taken (it's gone forever) if I could stop having more money taken for something I will never see.

Nobody gets SS anymore? lol, you're stupid.

Do you have a SPECIAL computer, that lets you read things I never posted?

You said the money we pay in is gone forever. If that's true then no money is available to pay benefits.

Wow...how do you clothe and feed yourself? OK, for the really slow kid: the money I have paid in is gone forever. (And actually, yeah, most money paid in IS gone.)

Yeah, sort of like your home, health, and vehicle insurance policy money is gone. What's your point?

 

[Jarlaxle]

Tell me how many of you have actually figured out how much money you would have if you had invested the 15% of your life time income instead of it being confiscated by the fucking government?

I have and if I had had control of it I would be retired already

I have not, and I won't, because it might push me into a bottle for the rest of my life.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Yes, the Supreme COurt has a very long historn of using the Constitution as toilet paper.

waaa.

Got a better idea for determining the constitutionality of laws?

Absolutely!

Use the Constitution.

Reagan saved Social Security when he could have let it go bankrupt.

Are you using a different Constitution than Reagan's?

And this is why brain-dead ideologues are called 'Lock-Step Liberals.'

Learn this from the first Republican President:

"Stand with anybody that stands RIGHT. Stand with him while he is right and PART with him when he goes wrong."
Abraham Lincoln, Speech at Peoria, Illinois (October 16, 1854),

So Reagan was wrong on one of the most important domestic socio-economic issues of our times.

Let's hear you say that.

"Reagan should have let Social Security go bankrupt."

lol, see how extreme the RWnuts have gotten in this country?

Absolutely yes, he should have. That is just ONE of many things Reagan fucked up.

 

[JoeTheEconomist]

Lefty idiots think everybody who disagrees with them hates them

The real issue here is that if people had control over where their SS contributions went they would retire much richer than they can now and the government can't have that after all when less people are dependent the government and the fucking crooks who run it have less power

Not unless you tell retirees to pound sand. If your SS contributions when to your personal account it would grow. Just not as fast as the income tax increases that are required to pay the benefits of existing retirees. This is a left pocket is rich, and we ignore the right pocket which is full of bills.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Beating Social Security

On almost any given day I can "beat" Social Security - but that's not the point of Social Security. Social Security is an insurance safety net - a valuable lesson learned from the Great Depression. The Trust Funds are invested in U.S. government securities - that same "safe" investment that China and Japan like. Imagine using the stock markets to insure your home, health, and vehicles - instead of actually having insurance policies for specific protection.

"Social Security is an insurance safety net."

1. Can you find the article of the Constitution that gives the federal government the power to create 'insurance'?

2. Can you explain why the Left, behind all sorts of government expansion, has not formed and advanced an amendment for that purpose?

Ask SCOTUS.

I'm asking you....why do you oppose the United States Constitution....the 'law of the land'?

SCOTUS has upheld Social Security.

On May 24, 1937, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the SocialSecurity Act.

Social Security Online History Pages

Constitutional Background to the Social Security Act of 1935

How Social Security Was Defended by Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson

So....you agreed with this decision, too?

March 6, 1857 The court held that Dred Scott was not free based on his residence in either Illinois or Wisconsin because he was not considered a person under the U.S. Constitution.


Clearly, both decisions were wrong.

If you don't believe it, brush up on the English language, and read the Constitution....specifically article 1, section 8.


No Supreme Court decision is correct unless it is directly related and consistent with the language of our Constitution.

 

[JoeTheEconomist]

Beating Social Security

On almost any given day I can "beat" Social Security - but that's not the point of Social Security. Social Security is an insurance safety net - a valuable lesson learned from the Great Depression. The Trust Funds are invested in U.S. government securities - that same "safe" investment that China and Japan like. Imagine using the stock markets to insure your home, health, and vehicles - instead of actually having insurance policies for specific protection.

It is a 'safety-net' for which 1/5th of the poorest quintile of retirees is not even eligible - some safety-net.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Once again I have always said in these discussions that the payroll tax and the employer contributions should not end but that the money should be left in the hands of the individual

why can't you seem to understand the concept?

Because NYC is inherently dishonest.

 

[JoeTheEconomist]

Beating Social Security

On almost any given day I can "beat" Social Security - but that's not the point of Social Security. Social Security is an insurance safety net - a valuable lesson learned from the Great Depression. The Trust Funds are invested in U.S. government securities - that same "safe" investment that China and Japan like. Imagine using the stock markets to insure your home, health, and vehicles - instead of actually having insurance policies for specific protection.

It is a 'safety-net' for which 1/5th of the poorest quintile of retirees is not even eligible - some safety-net. Something like 40% of benefits paid go to those people in the highest quintile of earnings history.

 

[Lakhota]

On almost any given day I can "beat" Social Security - but that's not the point of Social Security. Social Security is an insurance safety net - a valuable lesson learned from the Great Depression. The Trust Funds are invested in U.S. government securities - that same "safe" investment that China and Japan like. Imagine using the stock markets to insure your home, health, and vehicles - instead of actually having insurance policies for specific protection.

"Social Security is an insurance safety net."

1. Can you find the article of the Constitution that gives the federal government the power to create 'insurance'?

2. Can you explain why the Left, behind all sorts of government expansion, has not formed and advanced an amendment for that purpose?

Ask SCOTUS.

I'm asking you....why do you oppose the United States Constitution....the 'law of the land'?

SCOTUS has upheld Social Security.

On May 24, 1937, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the SocialSecurity Act.

Social Security Online History Pages

Constitutional Background to the Social Security Act of 1935

How Social Security Was Defended by Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson

So....you agreed with this decision, too?

March 6, 1857 The court held that Dred Scott was not free based on his residence in either Illinois or Wisconsin because he was not considered a person under the U.S. Constitution.


Clearly, both decisions were wrong.

If you don't believe it, brush up on the English language, and read the Constitution....specifically article 1, section 8.


No Supreme Court decision is correct unless it is directly related and consistent with the language of our Constitution.

Wow, you're sort of like the Orly Taitz of Social Security.

 

[rightwinger]

Social Security works.
Ask Social Security receipients if they want it privatized

Anyone who wants a personal savings account is free to open one tax free. many employers will also provide matching funds

The point of the thread is that there are other systems and variations that work better.

Shed your Liberal biases, and admit it.

You have yet to name how you would implement it and how you would cover people currently under Social Security

This is the point where you run away and come back with a totally unrelated cut and paste

That's a lie....actually a series of lies.

Examples of suggested fixes, and some in effect currently, are in this thread.

Are you ready to change your name to reflect the truth, and reality?


So stop telling lies. Let us tell our neighbors the truth, for we are all parts of the same body.
Ephesians 4:25

How did you manage to graduate from your second rate university without basic English comprehension

Anyone can make up a retirement plan...your challenge has been to transition from Social Security to your proposed plan

You have failed miserably

 

[Jarlaxle]

Tell me how many of you have actually figured out how much money you would have if you had invested the 15% of your life time income instead of it being confiscated by the fucking government?

I have and if I had had control of it I would be retired already

The payroll tax isn't 15%.

Excuse me but you are forgetting about the employer contribution

What's the matter you forget about the other times I've informed you of this?

The employer contribution is not YOUR contribution. If you end SS you end the obligation of your employer to pay that tax.

Think before you post.

It is generally accepted economic theory - and acknowledged by CBO and SSA - that the employer portion of payroll taxes is a pass-through to the employee in the form of lower wages. As you said, research before you post.

You make the incorrect assumption that he has any interest whatsoever in honesty.