Would you support this law?

[M14 Shooter]

Ridiculous.

It ensures Congress only enacts laws that are of absolute, critical importance.
It ensures Congress actually works 5-6 says week, rather than 3.
It ensure only people willing to do that work make it to Congress.
Not so ridiculous.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

You could have decided not to.

Listen up Sofaspud, your support of a completely unworkable program is noted.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

It ensures Congress only enacts laws that are of absolute, critical importance.
It ensures Congress actually works 5-6 says week, rather than 3.
It ensure only people willing to do that work make it to Congress.
Not so ridiculous.

The task is completely unworkable. Don't you see that?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

If the program is valid it will get the votes for reauthorization. Any program nearly as successful as you claim SS is should have zero issue getting the votes.


Take the money the government is pulling out of peoples checks for SS and instead of spending it, investing it so it's there when they retire. The evil bastard....

Investing? I lost over $5000 from my retirement fund in just the time it took to withdraw it.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The task is completely unworkable. Don't you see that?

The task is entirely workable, once you reset your idea of what the federal government is for, what it should do, and your expectations of the people we send to do it.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The task is entirely workable, once you reset your idea of what the federal government is for, what it should do, and your expectations of the people we send to do it.

Are you SS? If so, who is contributing to pay for your benefits? Now, eliminate those workers paying into SS that are the sources for your income. Who pays for your SS after they no longer contribute to the program?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Are you SS? ...

My personal situation, whatever it is or is not, does not validate, or invalidate, what I said.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

My personal situation, whatever it is or is not, does not validate, or invalidate, what I said.

So, you can just stop collecting SS if that is the case, simply because if you support this "new" program to replace it, you will get NOTHING!

 

[M14 Shooter]

So, you can just stop collecting SS if that is the case, simply because if you support this "new" program to replace it, you will get NOTHING!

My personal situation, whatever it is or is not, does not validate, or invalidate, what I said.
The fact you need to repeat your irrelevant complaint means you know you cannot meaningfully address the point I made.
Your concession, accepted.

 

[Delldude]

Fifty years ago.

Different fucking century moron

Oh so that makes it different.....LOL

Still the same dickhead.

 

[Couchpotato]

Listen up Sofaspud, your support of a completely unworkable program is noted.

Why is the review of federal programs on a X year schedule unworkable? Why shouldn't we expect Congress to review programs after a set period of time to ensure they are actually accomplishing what they were designed to accomplish and whether we even need them or potentially need to expand them? Why is that unworkable? And if you're just going to give your usual, "you're a moron and wouldnt understand it", or some other such bull shit cop out then don't bother to respond.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Why is the review of federal programs on a X year schedule unworkable? Why shouldn't we expect Congress to review programs after a set period of time to ensure they are actually accomplishing what they were designed to accomplish and whether we even need them or potentially need to expand them? Why is that unworkable? And if you're just going to give your usual, "you're a moron and wouldnt understand it", or some other such bull shit cop out then don't bother to respond.

It was not an X year schedule. Why not just write an expiration date into the law? If it is worthwhile, then it could be reauthorized. No need for programs such as SS and Medicare to include that requirement.

 

[M14 Shooter]

It was not an X year schedule. Why not just write an expiration date into the law? If it is worthwhile, then it could be reauthorized. No need for programs such as SS and Medicare to include that requirement.

Entitlements are a PRIME example of laws that should have expiration dates and/or subject to regular review/renewal.

 

[Couchpotato]

It was not an X year schedule. Why not just write an expiration date into the law? If it is worthwhile, then it could be reauthorized. No need for programs such as SS and Medicare to include that requirement.

So no explanation as to why it's unworkable then. Got it. As usual you're all bark and no bite.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Entitlements are a PRIME example of laws that should have expiration dates and/or subject to regular review/renewal.

Entitlements are programs YOU pay into in order to receive them. They are not welfare.

 

[WTH_Progs?]

Every program in the Fed Govt has to be looked at freshly at least once every four years to determine if it is still needed

You're leftist right? Let me ask if you support it? Since you guys are always wrong, the opposite is always the right answer.

 

[Billo_Really]

That’s another lie.

Fuck, tough crowd!

 

[M14 Shooter]

Entitlements are programs YOU pay into in order to receive them. They are not welfare.

This does not address - much less change - the fact Entitlements are a PRIME example of laws that should have expiration dates and/or subject to regular review/renewal.

The federal government spends on entitlements, regardless of if it has the money or not, because the laws says it has to.
Money is not appropriated to entitlement spending - the money is just spent.

To NOT have an expiration date on entitlement programs, and to not subject them to regular review and renewal is absolute insanity.

"Although benefit payments for SSA’s programs are considered mandatory spending and thus are not controlled by
appropriations acts,..."

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

This does not address - much less change - the fact Entitlements are a PRIME example of laws that should have expiration dates and/or subject to regular review/renewal.

The federal government spends on entitlements, regardless of if it has the money or not, because the laws says it has to.
Money is not appropriated to entitlement spending - the money is just spent.

To NOT have an expiration date on entitlement programs, and to not subject them to regular review and renewal is absolute insanity.

"Although benefit payments for SSA’s programs are considered mandatory spending and thus are not controlled by
appropriations acts,..."

With all due respect, you have not a clue as to what an entitlement is versus mandatory spending.

 

[M14 Shooter]

With all due respect, you have not a clue as to what an entitlement is versus mandatory spending.

Please-
Demonstrate for us the difference.
Then tell us how this difference changes the fact Entitlements are a PRIME example of laws that should have expiration dates and/or subject to regular review/renewal.