lmao,, i cant wait to see how many of you dumbass republicans support this and end up getting screwed by it in the end if it passes , it happens all the time, republicans do what their masters tell them to do, they turn around and end up needing whatever it is they were told they didn't need and its not longer there to help them and then they go vote for a republican, how many of you have grandparents who would be poor without ssi, you people are the stupidest group of people on the planet!!
How much did George W. Bush spend in 8 years? About the same amount that your precious Obama spent in his first year. Liberals are always the biggest hypocrites.
@IAmANerd25 why would you call liberals hypocrites, i know you are a republican but do you realize that the majority of the money obama supposedly spent in the first year was a results of bush's policies, i.e ,, the bush tax cuts, the bush medigap bill, the bush bail out, and the same with the rest of the debt that is growing each year, while it is true obama is spending more money than any other president, the majority are from bush policies and of coarse the spending done to save the economy
OK let me get this straight, if S/S is a ponzi scheme, what return do we get from aid to foreign nations which amounts to more than the govt. pays out in one year. Or in other words we give away to foreign nations more money each year than is paid out in S/S payments, and they didn't contribute one penny........THAT IS A RIPOFF TO USA CITIZENS far worse, not to mention the money spend on death and destruction of the wars being waged!!!!
i think social security is a scam because i'm part of generation x and i keep hearing that there won't be any money for us when we get older, so if there is not gonna be any left, why are they taking it out of our checks every week? and they sit and wonder why so many people don't like voluntarily filing for taxes on any side money they earn.
Me and this guy think exactly alike. Only difference is in the face of cronfrontaion I get so pissed that my brain shuts down. If I could keep a level head, I would disown every libtard at my college.
Me and this guy think exactly alike. Only difference is in the face of cronfrontaion I get so pissed that my brain shuts down. If I could keep a level head, I would disown every libtard at my college.
Me and this guy think exactly alike. Only difference is in the face of cronfrontaion I get so pissed that my brain shuts down. If I could keep a level head, I would disown every libtard at my college.
Me and this guy think exactly alike. Only difference is in the face of cronfrontaion I get so pissed that my brain shuts down. If I could keep a level head, I would disown every libtard at my college.
Social Security is just one of the many failings of government, who simply is incapable of doing business and can only steal and borrow money in order to spend it. This makes government a criminal organization.
@thisREGISTERATIONsuc Yes, the only thing remaining for the Ponzi to be complete is to let the rich and the TeaTards eliminate Social Security after handing massive tax cuts mostly to the richest 1%, effectively stripping every American of money they have paid into the program, money that amounted to 2.6 Trillion dollars.
WRONG! A Ponzi Scheme is deliberately set up to scam somebody in the end to benefit the person who set up the Ponzi Scheme. The Social Security system only becomes a Ponzi Scheme if we allow you cafeteria Republicans to de-fund what you choose, i.e. the things you personally don't benefit from. It is becoming a Ponzi Scheme because the money we paid into SS has gone to fund the Bush era tax cuts.
Is this guy a fucking retard? I hope youtube can pay fill this guys retirement fund because he can have fun starving if social security gets taken away
@DarklingX Lots of people told me 401K was THE way to go, it was almost an unanimous chorus, they use words like aaa securitys blah blah blah and now....it's gone. But the banks and brokerages are still there, only now we are all saddled with the cost of saving them. This is socialism make no mistake about it the only difference between this and say Sweden is it is socialism for the financial elite.
For people who think he was wasting tax payer money by calling. The employees would have been paid that money even if they never talked to him. If everyone calls them and clogs up the phone lines, they still get paid the same. If nobody calls them and they spend all day on facebook or singing to the radio, they get paid the same.
I have watched my father collect government benefits (including getting people to pay for his healthcare), while he continues to eat like a pig (diabetic) and smoke like a chimney (COPD). I cannot express how much I do NOT want him to collect social security.
Which my "faking retard" brother collects at the age of 28.
Yes. I managed to come out half sane because I watched my leech family (mom loves dad's money, I'm telling you) EXPECT someone to simply carry them. It's a lie.
@prisscoble Thus, because of your anecdotal experience, the program needs to be eliminated? Wow - I know a guy in a red sports car who drives like a maniac; should we then conclude red sports cars need to be banned? I know rich people who have illegal alien maids, should we conclude all rich people hire illegal aliens and have them all arrested? Good Lord, you probably are in the Tea Party with this kind of "thinking"
@insdel2004 He already pays them for this service, so why not ask them if it sounds like a PONZI scheme or not? Seems logical, its what they are there for.
@siradon2000 Obviously they already know about social security, and know how it works. He was just looking for a 'got ya' moment. Not only did he not get one, he wasted taxpayer money in the process, and is urging everyone else to waste taxpayer money! If you're fine with wasting taxpayer money, then don't bitch about having to pay taxes to fund it.
Yes everybody should be in 401Ks because they ALWAYS deliver well and NEVER fail, and the banks and brokerages never suddenly fail catastrophicaly. Fortunately Steven Crowder, genius he is wouldnt steer us wrong.
@lerch25 Actually if we were allowed to opt out of social security. Place our money in the same place that social security invests, we could collect all of the money that we put in and actually get more for it. In social security of you die your family gets a paltry sum, and that's it. If you invest it in the same place your self, your family inherits it if you die. You don't even need a 401K to get more back, or to save. FYI SS was never intended to be a retiring plan, only supplemental.
@siradon2000 Pffft YOu know why the 401ks crashed? Its because they were invested in mortgage backed securitys, the stock market, and the bond market, all three markets collapsed catastrophically, what investment does that leave? You could start a junk yard. Or you could do like the banks and and make derivative trades betting that all the markets, and your own securitys will crash, meanwhile advertising them as safe investments. One day those bankers will die at our hands.
@siradon2000 That is what Wall Street wants you to conclude and you bring up an excellent point. The wealthiest 1% want the program eliminated so they can immediately garner a 6.5% profit boost in their businesses. Wall Street wants the money to go into their hands and control which should frighten all of us considering they are simultaneously shouting that the reason the market failed was too much oversight and too many rules. Like a rapist saying he rapes because rape is illegal.
It sounds cruel but should we really pay for the sins of our grandparents? Really... they screwed up. They thought that they could turn their future generations into indentured servants. I for one think we should just cut them off. If you think about it, were not taking our grandparents money... they already spent that decades ago. No they are stealing my money... the money I'm never going to see... because Social Security no matter what can't last. Cut mom, dad, gramps, and grams off.
@lerch25 My grandfather who fought in WW2 was smart enough to save his money and not depend on the government and was able to move down to Florida. Where he died. Sorry but the we owe it to WW2 vets to keep social security isn't a very valid argument anymore as most of them have died of old age. All 4 of my grandparents are dead. Social Security has surpassed our Defense Budget... which is the whole reason the federal government exists. Read the Federalist Papers.
@MAINEPREPPER Yes. Of course you found me out! All of the other millions of Tea Party ideologs and I are paid activists by the 1% richest Americans. Its just cheaper for them to pay millions of Americans a salary than to pay 10, 20, maybe 30 percent more in taxes. I guess you could say their ideology of lower taxes is paying me off; or what it really is... keeping my own money?
Democrats, I guess I have to pay in right? Unless you don't work then all your doing is cashing out.
@JeshuaNace What part of you being a shill for the 1% wasn't absolutely spot on? You obviously know as little about the meaning of Ad Homenim as you do about anything else. Guess YOU are the one with nothing intelligent to say but then we kind of figured that out the FIRST time you posted here, didn't we?
@MAINEPREPPER What bothers me about the liberal/OWS agenda is that it doesn't make any kind of intelligent sense. Contradicting empty phrases like "paying a fair share" is just intellectually bankrupt. A fair share by definition is equal. So if your advocating a fair share then you should be asking for a flat tax. But your not! Your asking for a Unfair tax that increases percentage as you increase in salary.
@JeshuaNace Paying fair share refers to the fact that corporations and business have massive vested wealth and interests requiring a much larger proportion of the infrastructure, including national defense, to protect THEIR interests. A fair share would be equal if we all had equal assetts, holdings and financial interests.
@JeshuaNace You're missing the point. "Paying a fair share" may be "intellectually bankrupt" in your mind, but it's an effort to not be "morally bankrupt" and there is a segment of the population, you included I assume, who doesn't care about anyone else but themselves, and reads Ayn Rand, and has borderline personality narcissism disorder and a host of other behavior issues. We can't help you but you will have to pay your fair share. It's called being responsible, child-person.
@AmeriProud67 Your fine with your children paying 30% of their taxable income to keep social security at the current payout by the time Generation Y retires? That's greedy! That's immoral! The moral thing would be to leave your children something not take. If I read Ayn Rand I guess you read the Communist Manifesto and works by Karl Marx right; because the American Socialist and Populist parties were responsible for demanding a graduated income tax system.
I hate socialism. I can imagine living in a socialist world. Its gonna sound great until it is actualized then you would realize the problems and everyone will start crying for...... capitalism again.
@usp5676977 In the military I've traveled to and visited Socialist countries. We are somewhat socialist here but it is backward. The government taxes the citizens and distributes disproportionate amounts of the money and wealth to the upper 1%. The current justification for this is that the upper 1% "pay too much" when in fact they require massively larger amounts of government services to protect and facilitate THEIR investments, holdings and businesses.
@TheTomtah That is why they collected the 2.6 trillion dollar surplus back in the 80s. We allowed our politicians to write IOUs against the money. When it gets paid back, the money will be there. Don't listen to the upper 1% who want it eliminated. Right now revenues are down because the economy is down; the upper 1% are prolonging the depression so they can force the elimination of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid; things they personally don't need.
The main differences between a ponzi scheme and Social Security is that a Ponzi scheme is illegal and also has false reports as to the "investments'" status. However they are both unsustainable and misleading to the uniformed.
You're encouraging people to waste the time of other people who are doing a job in good faith. A huge section of your fellow compatriots rely on the Social Security system to survive. You are laughing in their faces. You're a jerk.
If you want to attack the 'rewarding of failure' why aren't you in Wall Street with a megaphone, you seedless cretin?
@mrbobbywindsor Oh, the good old emotional appeal in response to a rational argument, classic. Its also worth noting that he's making fun of how unsustainable social security is with only 3 people paying for everyone 1 retiree today as compared to 16 people for every 1 retiree back when social security was founded in the US. He's not making fun of the beneficiaries persay but it doesnt stop those emotional appeals
As far as the wall street collapse goes, all i can say is Affordable Housing Act
@taylort123 It is sustainable because they foresaw the demographics and collected a 2.6 Trillion dollar surplus back in the 80s ON PURPOSE. Wall Street collapsed because the banksters used regulatory capture to put their inside con men in charge of the regulatory commission. Check the names of the regulators and see who they used to work for and then who they went BACK to work for. Revolving door at its worst.
Perry the ponzi labeling corporate puppet is nothing more than an unnuanced shock jock white trash republican. He is no near being a prime time politician. Perry is trying for the lowest common denonimator voter in America. The voter that knows nothing about policy and knows little of his/her own stupidity. Perry is hitting out of the park with these teabagger clowns.
how can people think Social Security is a legitimate program? Everybody knows it's unsustainable, it's time to switch over to the Chilean model where the pay out is better and it won't screw over an entire generation of newly retired workers
LOL, She rerouted your call, because she realized you where wasting her time. lol that was awesome. I feel out of my chair laughing because all I could picture in my head was the point when she realized that you where talking about a program that all americans have been relying on since 1935. LOL, If that's a ponzi Sceme? its been paying out to its investors for nearly 80 years. Thats not a ponzi sceme; thats one heck of a success story, LOL Steven you crazy.
@pargenta1 You calling it a ponzi scheme is the reason most Americans call Perry and the teabaggers ...........dumb and dumber. Anyone that can actually add numbers knows that having SS revenue come out of Americans salaries and stopping at 106,000 a year is hurting the fund. Not to mention the republicans raiding the money form the fund for their own purposes.
The reason that SS caps its "take" is that it caps it's payout. If you are suggesting that some people pay more than they could even possibly hope to get out then it's WORSE than a Ponzi scheme - which at least has the potential to pay out if you are one of the early ones in. Your plan would LITERALLY be like forcing people to flush money down the toilet every paycheck. The essence of slavery is that someone else take the products of your labor without any return at all.
The reason that SS caps its "take" is that it caps it's payout. If you are suggesting that some people pay more than they could even possibly hope to get out then it's WORSE than a Ponzi scheme - which at least has the potential to pay out if you are one of the early ones in. Your plan would LITERALLY be like forcing people to flush money down the toilet every paycheck. The essence of slavery is that someone else takes the products of your labor without any return at all.
@pargenta1 Yea baby simple math. So have you ever seen how much SS comes out of your check? Pttily shit for high rollers like you huh? Me too. So for them to go a little higher ...say $150,000 I would not give a shit one way or the other. Hell if you aren't making $150,000 a year then you are a pussy for not getting your employer to give you a decent wage. As far as leaving the upper SS scale according to a bare minmum for benefits.......cool........I can handle that. It is still 2,000 a month.
@teabaggersblow I appreciate your tremndous generosity. I am sure that you are as true to your word as you say. The problem is that you are suggesting that everyone should manditorily step up to your moral highground - and redistribute wealth as you see fit. This is what an armed robber does (without the lecture): HE redistributes YOUR wealth as HE sees fit. Mind you I am not saying you CAN'T give your money to others (I do), but I think I should decide who gets what I earned
@pargenta1 Look spare me your bullshit. Even for young people, under normal growth 95% would never reach the maximum level for your distribution of wealth theory. But you do tend to exaggerate since many people die way before they get the money they put in. Oh my! A tragedy without a fix. hehehe Or you could privatize it but we both know if you offered the SS plan or privatize it, 95% of the public would not opt out of SS. But republicans are well sighted in on thier woulda coulda shoulda ideas.
I am sorry, but I don't understand a word of what you wrote. If you are saying that the system will work if enough people die prior to receiving any benefit (thus leaving their "extra" wealth for the others) I am ok with that idea -like life insurance. The reality however is that people are "living too long" in the current format. There simply aren't enough people in the working half to pay for the non-working half - unless you take whopping amounts from the workers.
@pargenta1 IF you are to continue SS there are few options
1. start paying later in life (so more people die before receiving a cent - now you are talking about a lottery system where everyone pays a small amount and the "winners" get a great chuck the losers get nothing)
2. pay out less (so that everyone on the take gets something of what's left)
3. cap the total you can get (REALLY stick it to the really old)
4. Rape the working until they are literally working solely to retire
I am sorry, but I don't understand a word of what you wrote. If you are saying that the system will work if enough people die prior to receiving any benefit (thus leaving their "extra" wealth for the others) I am ok with that idea -like life insurance. The reality however is that people are "living too long" in the current format. There simply aren't enough people in the working half to pay for the non-working half - unless you take whopping amounts from the workers.
@teabaggersblow Can you at least try to be something other than a foul mouthed walking talking point memo? What, did you just get tired of agreeing with all the freaks at the Daily Kos about how pathetic your lives are and how oooohhh so much better everything would be if only Obama would go ahead and unilaterally impose communism? Loser.
@kdouglaslee The reason pinko losers like that idiot get so foulmouthed is because they're losing the argument and they know it. He's kind of saying "I don't care if you've proven the administration's criminal actions! I'm still going to support Obama!!!"
@teabaggersblow Some people do die before they get any of THEIR money back. That's a misnomer too because the money isn't saved or invested. It's transferred immediately upon payment. It works nothing like insurance. It's a real scam for black men who tend to die in their 60's.
It used to be that a voluntary welfare society existed. It was composed of mutual-aid socieities, families, neighbors, charities, churches, fraternal org.'s, etc. That was replaced with fraud and force. It's failing.
@joepeeler34 SS is solvent until 2037 without any changes and no robbing the trust fund by shitstained republicans. If you are not married and have no children that are minors then your SS money is left in the system to be spent as needed. Anyone that dies early under these conditions could lose all or part depending on how many living beneficiaries he/her has. Black men have a lower life expectancy and republicans want to raise the age limit to draw benefits to 67. So you make my point for me.
@teabaggersblow Keep believing those number emanating from the Ministry of Truth. Do you also believe its CPI number. The government CBO was off by a factor of 10 on the cost of Medicare over a 30-year period.
That number is dependent on very generous GDP numbers. It's also based on the Treasuries that SSA holds. It's already in the red because S.S. has taken in less money the last 2-years than it has payed out.
It's just government sophistry. Why do you have such faith in these fools?
@teabaggersblow Repeat after me: There-Is-No-Trust-Fund. Wash, rinse, repeat.
The SS "fund" is full of instrument of debt. One agency of government owes another agency of government a credit. The govt. then claims it is a wash. It's absurd.
The same people who payed SS taxes now have to pay taxes again to pay for the same S.S. program. Do you understand? You don't seem to be following.
Under your force and fraud system people are getting robbed.
@teabaggersblow If they don't raise age and means testing, everyone still gets a check. The currency will not have much purchasing power though. Govt. is paying for some of its liabilities by increasing the money supply thereby creating an inflation tax.
S.S. is indexed to the govt.'s CPI. The CPI is full of subjectivity. When pre-Boskin measures are used, the price inflation rate is over 10%. The govt. hasn't given COLA increases last two years. They are monetizing their liabilities.
@joepeeler34 Republicans want to raise the age limit while dems want to raise the taxable income limit. I agree with you that blackmen and many whitemen should start benefits at 65. Women live much longer so maybe women should not start their benefits until a later date. But realistically that might not fly. Means testing is also an option.
@teabaggersblow I got news for you. There is a dime's worth of difference between the party establishments. They just play off each other. They are working behind the scenes to present a plan to raise the age and means test. They'll use commissions and a "Super Congress" as tactics and cover.
Maybe, just maybe, a free individual shouldnt' have to participate in a retirement scheme that has turned into a corrupt political patronage racket.
@teabaggersblow You are also proving my point with your black and women examples about the inequitablity of the system.
When you say you want S.S. taxable income cap to be raised you are implicitly conceding the point that many of us have been making for decades. Namely, it's nothing more than a welfare transfer program
With real insurance risk is measured. Varying premiums are payed based on risk assessment. The premiums are then invested. It's tailored to the individual, not so with S.S.
@joepeeler34 Call it what you want, as long as shitstained republicans don't steal SS blind, it will work way longer than any shitstained republican can live. Everytime shitstained republicans get power they prove to all Americans that government never works when they are behind the curtain pulling the levers.
@teabaggersblow Why do you focus on the political parties and individual personalities of the moment. That's not thought. I focus on ideas.
Did you understand my points on the alledged fund? I'll take your silence on the subject as acquiescense to reality if not.
The New Deal/Progressive era structure has been in place for generations with both parties playing about the edges of the same basic structure. They are both peddling a mixed economy with corporatism and socialism interjected.
@teabaggersblow Moreover, you didn't challenge my claims about the government's CPI number. Are you familiar with hedonics, liberal substitutions, overweighting/underweigting, geometric weighting? All of these measures are subjectivity. In which direction do you think the bias will inevitably go?
If the old fixed basket of goods absent all the subjective measures is used, price inflation/dollar debasement is about 10%.
S.S. is indexed to govt.'s CPI. It showed no inflation last 2 years.
@joepeeler34 I suppose shitstained republicans are for more anal than dems when it comes to how effective the American government can be. I really do not obsess over it because I can live handsomely on the retirement money I have already banked. SS will be the cherry on top.
@teabaggersblow And where is that "cherry on the top" coming from? Many well-off seniors get S.S. checks every month that were taken from a current worker who is in many instances far worse off than the beneficiary. Is that moral?
The cursing and namecalling is what I have come to expect sadly. I think it is a defense mechanism used by people who aren't confident in their ideas.
Fiat dollar debasement means your dollar denominated "assets" and govt. checks will be wiped out.
@teabaggersblow It's sad that you are anti-intellectual. You don't want to have a respectful dialogue. I suspect you are just young. You'll be embarrassed by your behaviour in ten-years time.
@joepeeler34 heheh Ok dude think any shitstain republican thought that pops into your brain but I am in the golden years when it comes to my age. And again my social security that I will get, if shitstained republicans do not rob my future was banked by me paying taxes all these years. Look I have disliked shitstained republicans since forever. NOTHING in my political makeup will ever change. I dislike the shitstained republican party now more than ever.
But but but... wasn't it Bill Clinton who made your SSecurity benefit taxable? & Isn't it Barack who failed to provide social security cost of living increases THREE YEARS IN A ROW - while every other U.S. President gave one every year?
Seems to me Barack cut $500 BILLION dollars from Medicare and made wheel chairs, dialysis machines, walkers, blind men's canes, & every other medical devices taxable to "improve" healthcare? Sounds like mean spirited tax on the poor to me.
But at least Barack didn't let GE get away with not paying ANY taxes on their $14 BILLION dollars in profits.. then give them a $3.2 Billion tax payer REFUND on the taxes it never paid to "Help Offset Cuts & Save U.S. Jobs” - while they outsourced 22,000 jobs from U.S. to China & India... OH... WAIT
YES HE DID!
Go over to huffpo & look - /scott-paul/should-ges-jeffrey-immelt_b_812132.html
Or give $500Mn tax payer dollars to Solyndra, or sell his senate seat
@mredstriumph You are right shitstained republicans in the House all voted to end medicare and medicade as we know it. So I guess all shitstained republicans do their bidding for the insurance companies after they spent 8 years robbing from the social security trust fund. If you want to try to figure out whose side shitstianed republicans are on just call Met Life or the Hartford. lol hehehe Shitstained republicans never found an insurance or bank lobbyist they did not love.
Seems to me a lot of people have been "robbing" the social security trust fund...
As I recall, it was Progressive Democrat Lyndon Johnson & his Democratically controlled House & Senate who made it part of the general fund just so they could spend it.
Jimmy Carter came along & changed the law so he could hand it out to immigrants who moved here at age 65.
Clinton came along & made SS taxable - w Al Gore casting the tie-breaking vote in t Senate.
Heck, Reagan in 1984 had to pass a law to FORCE federal employees to pay into it or they'd still be exempt.
Kind of a moot point though, as Dems have changed the law to allow Alcoholics and Drug Addicts to qualify as "disabled" classes to make sure the cashflow didn't swing in any positive direction.
Maybe u should watch I.O.U.S.A. (available on youtube) written by Clinton's GAO. It's chock full of progressives lies & propaganda, but still manages to tell the truth abt SS.
You will need to double the numbers and debt projections though - after all, it only came out in 2008 and since then Barry has been in charge with Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid with filibuster proof majorities in Congress to help him - so naturally, the involved deficits, debts, and liabilities have doubled.
You can check out USdebtclock - DOT - org for the updated numbers if you like.
Good thing Dems didn't raise taxes on millionaires in the 2 YEARS they controlled congress, eh?
@mredstriumph All I know is if credit default swaps were not put into law while the powers that be(GWB) signed a bill to not allow prosecution of selling insurance without a license, all of this rhetoric would be academic. Do I believe the shitstained republicans willfully bankrupted our country? ............Of course I do. Do I believe dems could have stopped the carnage?....................Of course I do. Do both parties drink from the same trough.............Of course they do.
Well... let's start at the beginning. Who INVENTED "Securitization" & "Mortgage Backed Securities"?
The U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development - February, 1970. Who created HUD? Progressive Democrats.
Who created the Fed, which in turn set interest rates ARTIFICIALLY LOW - which drove the 'Mortgage Bubble" - Progressive Dem Woodrow Wilson w filibuster proof Dem majorities in both houses.
Who SUED mortgage lenders to FORCE THEM to make those "predatory loans" ? Dems
"Credit Default Swaps" themselves were made by major Obama contributor Morgan Stanley in the early days of the Clinton Administration.
Near as I can tell, there never was ANY law against this kind of insurance (nor dictating where they could be sold), Nor am I aware of a CDS EVER being sold by any "unlicensed" person - since selling insurance policies as a private citizen 1 - doesn't work / won't sell, 2 - isn't something I've ever seen done.
@mredstriumph Who made credit default swaps legal you shitstained republican? W did shitstain. Gramm(R) got the bill passed in an all republican congress.
What are u on about blow? If u are talking about Gramm-Leach-Bliley, that was 1999.
Now I'm CERTAIN u don't know this, but the Governor of Texas doesn't get a vote in the Federal Legislature. Further, It was WJ Clinton who lobbied, supported, & signed GLB w 84% of Dems in the Senate & 75% of Dems in the House - not that those little details matter to u.
Just for future reference, George W Bush's term began January 20 2001, &Gore was re-re-re-re-counting chads till 12/22/01
@mredstriumph GWB signed a bill after entering office to not allow prosecution of selling credit default swaps without a license. It is nothing more than insurance and all insurance transactions need a license. Funny how we will never get the skinny on who and how much money was bet in the derivatives scam. I have heard anywhere from $60T-$300T. So these rich fat cat elites that own these derivatives can call in their makers anytime or anywhere. Shitstained republicans make us feel all warm huh?
I asked u 2clarify yourself many times. I heard he signed "A bill" doesn't cut it
"the skinny on who & how much was bet in the derivatives scam. I heard $60T-$300T"
Fannie Mae is WHO collapsed+ran the scam. Google CNN Bailout Tracker 2see4yourself. Check FNMA stock pr. B.Frank & C.Dodd are your fat cats. The world's most notorious derivatives trader, George Soros, bankrolled O's campaign - Cui bono? The 'risk' in the 'bet' was US homes having value. Dem undid that - Cui bono?
@mredstriumph Grow the fuck up you shitstained piece of unamerican shit. I don't work for shitstained republicans. If you want answers do like I did . Dig it up. Nobody especially me gives a fuck how hard you yell. Republicans have been shitstains on my rights as American for many many years. And stupid teatard fucks like you keep swallowing the corporate cum.
@mredstriumph Whatever you think. People like you shitsatined republicans would rather lie than admit you have been deceiving americans for decades. Fuck a shitstained republican.
So here we go again. The commodities Modernization Act of 2000 was once again passed by Bill Clinton. Only 4 congressmen voted against it, & two were Republicans.
(Remember how I explicitly told you Bush's term started on January 20, *** 2001 *** ? Now you know why... FAILED again .. u charming Democrat u)
I hate to tell you, but no Commodity Futures Modernization Act has ever made anyone stop paying their mortgage, nor bankrupted 2 Federal Agencies run by Congress. = FAIL.
@mredstriumph Yes here we are again you ignorant shitstained republican. GWB later signed a bill that made it legal to sell insurance without a license. Or the bill, Clinton signed meant nothing. It is against the law to sell insurance unless you are licensed to do so. Anti trust laws would have been violated. So GWB made it impossible for a bank or person to be prosecuted for selling derivatives. hehehehe I guess you fucking shitstained republicans forget about that. How convenient!
So Progressive Democrats sue banks, obliterate lending standards, buy the bad loans away from lenders, & community organize to make sure they get made, but it's the INSURANCE AGENT who's at fault when it implodes?
Genius, there is nothing WRONG with buying an insurance policy. It's the RESPONSIBLE thing to do when you see a looming danger to insure yourself against.
WSJ - "2/3 of ALL bad mortgages were bought by govt agencies or required by government regulations"
tinyurl -DOT - com/ylcxb4n
NYT 9/29/99 "Under increasing pressure by Clinton Admin.. Dept Housing Urban Dev propose by 2K1, 50% Fannie/Fred portfolio=loans 2 low-mod-income borrowers"
tinyurl -DOT - com/ye9tjst
The graph is irrefutable & self explanatory
tinyurl -DOT- com/yekh2eo
No policy in 2002, 2004, 2006 inflated the mortgage bubble in mid 1990's. End of story.
@mredstriumph Hey dumbfuck derivatives is a hedge on a bad mortgage rated at AAA. The very thing the shitstined republican party was in favor of. Musical mortgages. Loan to high end speculators(83% of the bad mortgages) and watch the mortgages go belly up. But have insurance where you the bank get the mortgages for pennies on the dollar and then wait to fuck the consumer again. Fuck a shitstained republican and fuck the mega banks that keep taking away the rights of the American people.
Hey dubmfkuc a derivative is ANYTHING that derives it's value from something else. It can be ANYTHING: a stock, a bond, a currency, an index, even an INSURANCE POLICY AGAINST A LOAN.
A DOLLAR BILL IS A DERIVATIVE - it derives it's value from a promise from the govt
Mortgage DE-Regulation was PARTY LINE - And Democrats FORCED IT:
/watch?v=Lr1M1T2Y314
Proof:
tinyurl - DOT - com/3mbewvm
Just what do you think "COMMUNITY ORGANIZING" is?? It's FORCING "PREDATORY LOANS" on banks!
@mredstriumph You are just another republican shitstain that lies and tells anyone with a third grade IQ how to become a shitstained republican. Buying insurance on mortgages that is not worth the paper it is printed on and bundling it with other worthless mortgages and then selling them to dumbfucks like you is a shitstained republican idea that cratered the world's economy. Pull that shitstained republican head out of your ass, you little shitstained republican wordsmith.
What's not "worth the paper it's printed on" is the U.S. Dollar - and this has been the Democrat Progressive Plan for over a century
"The best way to destroy the capitalist system is to debauch the currency. By a continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens." - Progressive Democrat (&Obama) Economist - John Maynard Keynes
@mredstriumph What are you mental? Change the subject when your shitstained republican lies mean nothing to anybody. Go find some third grader you can bwainwash with your shitstained republican ideas.
@mredstriumph Pull that shitstained republican leaning brain out of your shitstained ass and just go back to when Bush came into office. Look at all the bills he and the republican lead congress passed. Don't be a shitstained republican fool. Learn from history or be doomed to repeat it.
@mredstriumph In 2004 Bush and your shitstained republicans passed a bill relaxing regulations leveraging loans by 30-40 times their value.By 2006 only 17% of the subprime mortgages were for low to moderate income groups. Yet 83% of subprime loans were initiated for high income groups. Hell we got high end warehouses right here in Houston that are finished but the doors were never opened. Shitstained republicans thinking that predatory lending never happened is mistaken.
@teabaggersblow And once again proving that REALITY is the EXACT OPPOSITE of what you say it is.. Republicans tried to STOP this. They tried to REGULATE: 2003: tinyurl - DOT - com/cmf3u8 2005: tinyurl - DOT - com/5gvopc 2007: tinyurl - DOT - com/3ugawft Where are DEMOCRAT DE-Regulation efforts? N/A - 0 - NONE EXIST. DEMOCRATS on REGULATION: /watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs The "mega bank" taking away the rights of the American people was soley a PROGRESSIVE DEMOCRAT CREATION: tinyurl - DOT - com/2folrv
@pargenta1 It is really kind of funny .........you being so anal about the payouts. Many SS payees die early without underage children or wife and lose all that is left. Other people whether they are lucky or just healthier go for a longer period than most and suck their benefits and other's money dry. Sp what is your anal point anyway. Just raise the amount you can be taxed on. R U one of those shitstained republicans? I would be careful and not be branded with such a load of crap.
@teabaggersblow Why would we want to give more money to a Ponzi scheme? Why should a free individual be forced into such a destructive scheme?
S.S. results in far less savings. It is out of savings that credit for capital investment derives. That is how prodcutivity levels are raised. That increases supply. Increased supply means more purchasing power. That means higher real wages. How much poorer is everyone because of the discouragement of savings? It's incalculable.
@teabaggersblow "Hurting the fund." You mean hurting the redistribution scheme.
There is no fund. It is a welfare transfer program. The make-believe fund is full of U.S. Treasuries--instruments of debt. Think about that. They took money and replaced it with I.O.U.'s to be payed for on the backs of the very same people who have already been taxed once for S.S.
If those bonds were foreign bonds to be payed for by others, then SSA could claim a legitimate fund.
@pewterbot9 Maybe you don't realize this, but social security was meant to be used as a primary retirement fund. Excuse me, but how do you think people planned for retirement? Do you think they believed they would just work until they died? Or do you think that they realized they would eventually be unable to continue working? I know this is a foreign word to you, but the elderly still recognize it. We call it saving. Not just borrowing, and paying down a loan, but saving money.
@siradon2000 squoinked: "Maybe you don't realize this, but social security was meant to be used as a primary retirement fund."
Yes, and I totally agree.
"how do you think people planned for retirement?"
Before WWII, most citizens were too piss-poor to save anything towards retirement. What's your point, you seem to be agreeing with me, yet arguing at the same time. It's your time of month perhaps?
lmao,, i cant wait to see how many of you dumbass republicans support this and end up getting screwed by it in the end if it passes , it happens all the time, republicans do what their masters tell them to do, they turn around and end up needing whatever it is they were told they didn't need and its not longer there to help them and then they go vote for a republican, how many of you have grandparents who would be poor without ssi, you people are the stupidest group of people on the planet!!
thebestanswerever 5 days ago
omfing god, people ARE GETTING MONEY OUT THA THEY PUT IN YOU IDIOT, IT WOULD BE FINE IF YOUR REPUBLICAN FUCKTARDS DIDNT SPEND ALL THE FUCKING MONEY.
MrRazzeldazzel88 6 days ago
@MrRazzeldazzel88
How much did George W. Bush spend in 8 years? About the same amount that your precious Obama spent in his first year. Liberals are always the biggest hypocrites.
IAmANerd25 5 days ago
@IAmANerd25 why would you call liberals hypocrites, i know you are a republican but do you realize that the majority of the money obama supposedly spent in the first year was a results of bush's policies, i.e ,, the bush tax cuts, the bush medigap bill, the bush bail out, and the same with the rest of the debt that is growing each year, while it is true obama is spending more money than any other president, the majority are from bush policies and of coarse the spending done to save the economy
thebestanswerever 5 days ago
SOCIAL SECURTY HAS MONEY FOR A LOOOOOOOONG TIME. fucking idiots
MrRazzeldazzel88 6 days ago
94 people were original investors.
emericanmann 1 week ago
OK let me get this straight, if S/S is a ponzi scheme, what return do we get from aid to foreign nations which amounts to more than the govt. pays out in one year. Or in other words we give away to foreign nations more money each year than is paid out in S/S payments, and they didn't contribute one penny........THAT IS A RIPOFF TO USA CITIZENS far worse, not to mention the money spend on death and destruction of the wars being waged!!!!
mrgoodvibrations 1 week ago
i think social security is a scam because i'm part of generation x and i keep hearing that there won't be any money for us when we get older, so if there is not gonna be any left, why are they taking it out of our checks every week? and they sit and wonder why so many people don't like voluntarily filing for taxes on any side money they earn.
howardg93 1 week ago
:D is the only face i can make
sonofdrjekyll 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Me and this guy think exactly alike. Only difference is in the face of cronfrontaion I get so pissed that my brain shuts down. If I could keep a level head, I would disown every libtard at my college.
skxek 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Me and this guy think exactly alike. Only difference is in the face of cronfrontaion I get so pissed that my brain shuts down. If I could keep a level head, I would disown every libtard at my college.
skxek 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Me and this guy think exactly alike. Only difference is in the face of cronfrontaion I get so pissed that my brain shuts down. If I could keep a level head, I would disown every libtard at my college.
skxek 2 weeks ago
Me and this guy think exactly alike. Only difference is in the face of cronfrontaion I get so pissed that my brain shuts down. If I could keep a level head, I would disown every libtard at my college.
skxek 2 weeks ago
Tell that to the people who have been receiving social security for the past couple decades
SwiftGQ 3 weeks ago
In a ponzi scheme pays off the first few investors. social security does not even do that.
halloranedward 3 weeks ago in playlist misc III
A lot of lunatica here
Bulloxe4 1 month ago
Social Security is just one of the many failings of government, who simply is incapable of doing business and can only steal and borrow money in order to spend it. This makes government a criminal organization.
TWSceptic 1 month ago 5
Wasn't reaganomics a ponzi scheme too?
TheLastOfTheFinest80 1 month ago
@thisREGISTERATIONsuc Yes, the only thing remaining for the Ponzi to be complete is to let the rich and the TeaTards eliminate Social Security after handing massive tax cuts mostly to the richest 1%, effectively stripping every American of money they have paid into the program, money that amounted to 2.6 Trillion dollars.
MAINEPREPPER 1 month ago
WRONG! A Ponzi Scheme is deliberately set up to scam somebody in the end to benefit the person who set up the Ponzi Scheme. The Social Security system only becomes a Ponzi Scheme if we allow you cafeteria Republicans to de-fund what you choose, i.e. the things you personally don't benefit from. It is becoming a Ponzi Scheme because the money we paid into SS has gone to fund the Bush era tax cuts.
MAINEPREPPER 2 months ago
Is this guy a fucking retard? I hope youtube can pay fill this guys retirement fund because he can have fun starving if social security gets taken away
lancedance2 3 months ago in playlist More videos from StevenCrowder
@DarklingX Lots of people told me 401K was THE way to go, it was almost an unanimous chorus, they use words like aaa securitys blah blah blah and now....it's gone. But the banks and brokerages are still there, only now we are all saddled with the cost of saving them. This is socialism make no mistake about it the only difference between this and say Sweden is it is socialism for the financial elite.
lerch25 3 months ago
@lerch25 Excellent and astute comment! You nailed it right on the head; socialism for the elite at the expense of the rest of us.
MAINEPREPPER 1 month ago
For people who think he was wasting tax payer money by calling. The employees would have been paid that money even if they never talked to him. If everyone calls them and clogs up the phone lines, they still get paid the same. If nobody calls them and they spend all day on facebook or singing to the radio, they get paid the same.
triger37 3 months ago
The SEC doesn't regulate the SSA
jesse89LA 3 months ago
This is pure gold, bwahaha
AbdelClass 4 months ago
I have watched my father collect government benefits (including getting people to pay for his healthcare), while he continues to eat like a pig (diabetic) and smoke like a chimney (COPD). I cannot express how much I do NOT want him to collect social security.
Which my "faking retard" brother collects at the age of 28.
Yes. I managed to come out half sane because I watched my leech family (mom loves dad's money, I'm telling you) EXPECT someone to simply carry them. It's a lie.
prisscoble 4 months ago
@prisscoble Thus, because of your anecdotal experience, the program needs to be eliminated? Wow - I know a guy in a red sports car who drives like a maniac; should we then conclude red sports cars need to be banned? I know rich people who have illegal alien maids, should we conclude all rich people hire illegal aliens and have them all arrested? Good Lord, you probably are in the Tea Party with this kind of "thinking"
MAINEPREPPER 1 month ago
Apparently Crowder likes to waste the governments time and money. Then complains about having to pay taxes to fund it all. Hilarious!
insdel2004 4 months ago
@insdel2004 He already pays them for this service, so why not ask them if it sounds like a PONZI scheme or not? Seems logical, its what they are there for.
siradon2000 3 months ago
@siradon2000 Obviously they already know about social security, and know how it works. He was just looking for a 'got ya' moment. Not only did he not get one, he wasted taxpayer money in the process, and is urging everyone else to waste taxpayer money! If you're fine with wasting taxpayer money, then don't bitch about having to pay taxes to fund it.
insdel2004 3 months ago
And now you know, and knowing is half the battle.
G.I. JOE!
KathrinHart 4 months ago 10
Yes everybody should be in 401Ks because they ALWAYS deliver well and NEVER fail, and the banks and brokerages never suddenly fail catastrophicaly. Fortunately Steven Crowder, genius he is wouldnt steer us wrong.
lerch25 4 months ago
@lerch25 Actually if we were allowed to opt out of social security. Place our money in the same place that social security invests, we could collect all of the money that we put in and actually get more for it. In social security of you die your family gets a paltry sum, and that's it. If you invest it in the same place your self, your family inherits it if you die. You don't even need a 401K to get more back, or to save. FYI SS was never intended to be a retiring plan, only supplemental.
siradon2000 3 months ago
@siradon2000 Pffft YOu know why the 401ks crashed? Its because they were invested in mortgage backed securitys, the stock market, and the bond market, all three markets collapsed catastrophically, what investment does that leave? You could start a junk yard. Or you could do like the banks and and make derivative trades betting that all the markets, and your own securitys will crash, meanwhile advertising them as safe investments. One day those bankers will die at our hands.
lerch25 2 months ago
@siradon2000 That is what Wall Street wants you to conclude and you bring up an excellent point. The wealthiest 1% want the program eliminated so they can immediately garner a 6.5% profit boost in their businesses. Wall Street wants the money to go into their hands and control which should frighten all of us considering they are simultaneously shouting that the reason the market failed was too much oversight and too many rules. Like a rapist saying he rapes because rape is illegal.
MAINEPREPPER 1 month ago
It sounds cruel but should we really pay for the sins of our grandparents? Really... they screwed up. They thought that they could turn their future generations into indentured servants. I for one think we should just cut them off. If you think about it, were not taking our grandparents money... they already spent that decades ago. No they are stealing my money... the money I'm never going to see... because Social Security no matter what can't last. Cut mom, dad, gramps, and grams off.
JeshuaNace 4 months ago
@JeshuaNace Sorry gramps your fucked, shoulda died sooner fucking freeloading WW2 vet parasite
lerch25 4 months ago
@lerch25 My grandfather who fought in WW2 was smart enough to save his money and not depend on the government and was able to move down to Florida. Where he died. Sorry but the we owe it to WW2 vets to keep social security isn't a very valid argument anymore as most of them have died of old age. All 4 of my grandparents are dead. Social Security has surpassed our Defense Budget... which is the whole reason the federal government exists. Read the Federalist Papers.
JeshuaNace 4 months ago
@JeshuaNace Wow, it's nice to see the Tea Party represented so honestly here, doing the bidding of the upper 1%.
MAINEPREPPER 1 month ago
@MAINEPREPPER Yes. Of course you found me out! All of the other millions of Tea Party ideologs and I are paid activists by the 1% richest Americans. Its just cheaper for them to pay millions of Americans a salary than to pay 10, 20, maybe 30 percent more in taxes. I guess you could say their ideology of lower taxes is paying me off; or what it really is... keeping my own money?
Democrats, I guess I have to pay in right? Unless you don't work then all your doing is cashing out.
JeshuaNace 1 month ago
@JeshuaNace Actually you are not even bright enough to at least get paid for shilling for the Koch brothers. I think the term is Useful Idiots.
MAINEPREPPER 1 month ago
@MAINEPREPPER Pretty quick to resort to an Ad Hominem attack. Guess that means you have nothing intelligent to say.
JeshuaNace 1 month ago
@JeshuaNace What part of you being a shill for the 1% wasn't absolutely spot on? You obviously know as little about the meaning of Ad Homenim as you do about anything else. Guess YOU are the one with nothing intelligent to say but then we kind of figured that out the FIRST time you posted here, didn't we?
MAINEPREPPER 1 month ago
@MAINEPREPPER What bothers me about the liberal/OWS agenda is that it doesn't make any kind of intelligent sense. Contradicting empty phrases like "paying a fair share" is just intellectually bankrupt. A fair share by definition is equal. So if your advocating a fair share then you should be asking for a flat tax. But your not! Your asking for a Unfair tax that increases percentage as you increase in salary.
JeshuaNace 1 month ago
@JeshuaNace Paying fair share refers to the fact that corporations and business have massive vested wealth and interests requiring a much larger proportion of the infrastructure, including national defense, to protect THEIR interests. A fair share would be equal if we all had equal assetts, holdings and financial interests.
MAINEPREPPER 1 month ago
@JeshuaNace You're missing the point. "Paying a fair share" may be "intellectually bankrupt" in your mind, but it's an effort to not be "morally bankrupt" and there is a segment of the population, you included I assume, who doesn't care about anyone else but themselves, and reads Ayn Rand, and has borderline personality narcissism disorder and a host of other behavior issues. We can't help you but you will have to pay your fair share. It's called being responsible, child-person.
AmeriProud67 3 weeks ago
@AmeriProud67 Your fine with your children paying 30% of their taxable income to keep social security at the current payout by the time Generation Y retires? That's greedy! That's immoral! The moral thing would be to leave your children something not take. If I read Ayn Rand I guess you read the Communist Manifesto and works by Karl Marx right; because the American Socialist and Populist parties were responsible for demanding a graduated income tax system.
JeshuaNace 3 weeks ago
I hate socialism. I can imagine living in a socialist world. Its gonna sound great until it is actualized then you would realize the problems and everyone will start crying for...... capitalism again.
usp5676977 4 months ago
@usp5676977 squoinked: "everyone will start crying for...... capitalism again."
Yeah, like the elderly Russian crying for Stalin's resurrection. Das Kapitalism is dead in the water...polluted water.
pewterbot9 4 months ago
@usp5676977 In the military I've traveled to and visited Socialist countries. We are somewhat socialist here but it is backward. The government taxes the citizens and distributes disproportionate amounts of the money and wealth to the upper 1%. The current justification for this is that the upper 1% "pay too much" when in fact they require massively larger amounts of government services to protect and facilitate THEIR investments, holdings and businesses.
MAINEPREPPER 1 month ago
Not a ponzi scheme but an unsustainable system if the beneficiaries start outnumbering the people who fund the system(tax payers)
TheTomtah 4 months ago
@TheTomtah That is why they collected the 2.6 trillion dollar surplus back in the 80s. We allowed our politicians to write IOUs against the money. When it gets paid back, the money will be there. Don't listen to the upper 1% who want it eliminated. Right now revenues are down because the economy is down; the upper 1% are prolonging the depression so they can force the elimination of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid; things they personally don't need.
MAINEPREPPER 1 month ago
Look how angry all of you liberal losers get. Your the idiots!
25thfret 4 months ago
The main differences between a ponzi scheme and Social Security is that a Ponzi scheme is illegal and also has false reports as to the "investments'" status. However they are both unsustainable and misleading to the uniformed.
KriegWaters 4 months ago
Its best coming out of the mouth of Friedman many years ago - watch?v=rCdgv7n9xCY
Listen how he describes SS exactly.
drshlotzkin 4 months ago
Crowder should look at the definition of insurance, because social security is infinitely closer to insurance than a ponzy scheme.
LiekABaus 4 months ago 2
@StevenCrowder Fonzi said "Aaayyyyy" Steven.
I think it was Gonzi that said "Eeeeeeey", and Honzi "Iiiiyyyyy", Ionzi "Ooooooy" and finally, Jonzi said "Uuuuuy".
82compoundw 4 months ago
you want to here a real ponzi scheme?..............america's central banking system.
badmudda 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
(Shooting star) THE MORE YOU KNOW!!!!!!
Paulbarbato 4 months ago
Comment removed
Paulbarbato 4 months ago
You're encouraging people to waste the time of other people who are doing a job in good faith. A huge section of your fellow compatriots rely on the Social Security system to survive. You are laughing in their faces. You're a jerk.
If you want to attack the 'rewarding of failure' why aren't you in Wall Street with a megaphone, you seedless cretin?
mrbobbywindsor 4 months ago
@mrbobbywindsor Oh, the good old emotional appeal in response to a rational argument, classic. Its also worth noting that he's making fun of how unsustainable social security is with only 3 people paying for everyone 1 retiree today as compared to 16 people for every 1 retiree back when social security was founded in the US. He's not making fun of the beneficiaries persay but it doesnt stop those emotional appeals
As far as the wall street collapse goes, all i can say is Affordable Housing Act
taylort123 4 months ago
@taylort123 It is sustainable because they foresaw the demographics and collected a 2.6 Trillion dollar surplus back in the 80s ON PURPOSE. Wall Street collapsed because the banksters used regulatory capture to put their inside con men in charge of the regulatory commission. Check the names of the regulators and see who they used to work for and then who they went BACK to work for. Revolving door at its worst.
MAINEPREPPER 1 month ago
I like Ponzi. He was good on Happy Days :oP
hithr3000 4 months ago in playlist Liked
72 people can't comprehend a simple definition and apply it in real life
jkheitz 5 months ago
Steve the obvious answer is to close your eyes and have faith that the government knows what its doing lol
nabasta 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
can you stop fucking yelling
OCIRELCNU 5 months ago
Did you get beat up? o_0
electricskillet 5 months ago
Perry the ponzi labeling corporate puppet is nothing more than an unnuanced shock jock white trash republican. He is no near being a prime time politician. Perry is trying for the lowest common denonimator voter in America. The voter that knows nothing about policy and knows little of his/her own stupidity. Perry is hitting out of the park with these teabagger clowns.
teabaggersblow 5 months ago
At a certain point "safety nets" start looking a lot like hammocks.
hibby76 5 months ago 9
@hibby76
I don't think they look like hammocks. I think they look like things you drop into the water to catch a lot of stupid fish.
mredstriumph 5 months ago
how can people think Social Security is a legitimate program? Everybody knows it's unsustainable, it's time to switch over to the Chilean model where the pay out is better and it won't screw over an entire generation of newly retired workers
Redeye1524 5 months ago
Its not a ponzi scheme because social security was intentional fraud, but the outcome eventually be the same if its not fixed.
BorgKing001 5 months ago
LOL, She rerouted your call, because she realized you where wasting her time. lol that was awesome. I feel out of my chair laughing because all I could picture in my head was the point when she realized that you where talking about a program that all americans have been relying on since 1935. LOL, If that's a ponzi Sceme? its been paying out to its investors for nearly 80 years. Thats not a ponzi sceme; thats one heck of a success story, LOL Steven you crazy.
issuesmattertome 5 months ago
@issuesmattertome
This only makes it a GREAT Ponzi scheme - which is why it will be a GREAT collapse with a great impact on those of us holding the bag.
pargenta1 5 months ago
@pargenta1 You calling it a ponzi scheme is the reason most Americans call Perry and the teabaggers ...........dumb and dumber. Anyone that can actually add numbers knows that having SS revenue come out of Americans salaries and stopping at 106,000 a year is hurting the fund. Not to mention the republicans raiding the money form the fund for their own purposes.
teabaggersblow 5 months ago
@teabaggersblow:
The reason that SS caps its "take" is that it caps it's payout. If you are suggesting that some people pay more than they could even possibly hope to get out then it's WORSE than a Ponzi scheme - which at least has the potential to pay out if you are one of the early ones in. Your plan would LITERALLY be like forcing people to flush money down the toilet every paycheck. The essence of slavery is that someone else take the products of your labor without any return at all.
pargenta1 5 months ago
@teabaggersblow:
The reason that SS caps its "take" is that it caps it's payout. If you are suggesting that some people pay more than they could even possibly hope to get out then it's WORSE than a Ponzi scheme - which at least has the potential to pay out if you are one of the early ones in. Your plan would LITERALLY be like forcing people to flush money down the toilet every paycheck. The essence of slavery is that someone else takes the products of your labor without any return at all.
pargenta1 5 months ago
@pargenta1 Yea baby simple math. So have you ever seen how much SS comes out of your check? Pttily shit for high rollers like you huh? Me too. So for them to go a little higher ...say $150,000 I would not give a shit one way or the other. Hell if you aren't making $150,000 a year then you are a pussy for not getting your employer to give you a decent wage. As far as leaving the upper SS scale according to a bare minmum for benefits.......cool........I can handle that. It is still 2,000 a month.
teabaggersblow 5 months ago
@teabaggersblow I appreciate your tremndous generosity. I am sure that you are as true to your word as you say. The problem is that you are suggesting that everyone should manditorily step up to your moral highground - and redistribute wealth as you see fit. This is what an armed robber does (without the lecture): HE redistributes YOUR wealth as HE sees fit. Mind you I am not saying you CAN'T give your money to others (I do), but I think I should decide who gets what I earned
pargenta1 5 months ago
@pargenta1 Look spare me your bullshit. Even for young people, under normal growth 95% would never reach the maximum level for your distribution of wealth theory. But you do tend to exaggerate since many people die way before they get the money they put in. Oh my! A tragedy without a fix. hehehe Or you could privatize it but we both know if you offered the SS plan or privatize it, 95% of the public would not opt out of SS. But republicans are well sighted in on thier woulda coulda shoulda ideas.
teabaggersblow 5 months ago
@teabaggersblow
I am sorry, but I don't understand a word of what you wrote. If you are saying that the system will work if enough people die prior to receiving any benefit (thus leaving their "extra" wealth for the others) I am ok with that idea -like life insurance. The reality however is that people are "living too long" in the current format. There simply aren't enough people in the working half to pay for the non-working half - unless you take whopping amounts from the workers.
pargenta1 5 months ago
@pargenta1 IF you are to continue SS there are few options
1. start paying later in life (so more people die before receiving a cent - now you are talking about a lottery system where everyone pays a small amount and the "winners" get a great chuck the losers get nothing)
2. pay out less (so that everyone on the take gets something of what's left)
3. cap the total you can get (REALLY stick it to the really old)
4. Rape the working until they are literally working solely to retire
pargenta1 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@teabaggersblow
I am sorry, but I don't understand a word of what you wrote. If you are saying that the system will work if enough people die prior to receiving any benefit (thus leaving their "extra" wealth for the others) I am ok with that idea -like life insurance. The reality however is that people are "living too long" in the current format. There simply aren't enough people in the working half to pay for the non-working half - unless you take whopping amounts from the workers.
pargenta1 5 months ago
@teabaggersblow Can you at least try to be something other than a foul mouthed walking talking point memo? What, did you just get tired of agreeing with all the freaks at the Daily Kos about how pathetic your lives are and how oooohhh so much better everything would be if only Obama would go ahead and unilaterally impose communism? Loser.
kdouglaslee 5 months ago 8
@kdouglaslee Loser maybe but not a shitstained republican.
teabaggersblow 5 months ago
@kdouglaslee The reason pinko losers like that idiot get so foulmouthed is because they're losing the argument and they know it. He's kind of saying "I don't care if you've proven the administration's criminal actions! I'm still going to support Obama!!!"
Kind of like a religious fanatic.
QuartuvLarry 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Ron Paul's plan will balance the budget in 3 years without raising taxes!
Social programs remain untouched as the BIG problems are resolved.
Government employees will be phased out as they quit/retire or moved to other jobs. Learn more at /watch?v=IQAHziV3HoM
vechorik 4 months ago
@teabaggersblow Some people do die before they get any of THEIR money back. That's a misnomer too because the money isn't saved or invested. It's transferred immediately upon payment. It works nothing like insurance. It's a real scam for black men who tend to die in their 60's.
It used to be that a voluntary welfare society existed. It was composed of mutual-aid socieities, families, neighbors, charities, churches, fraternal org.'s, etc. That was replaced with fraud and force. It's failing.
joepeeler34 5 months ago
@joepeeler34 SS is solvent until 2037 without any changes and no robbing the trust fund by shitstained republicans. If you are not married and have no children that are minors then your SS money is left in the system to be spent as needed. Anyone that dies early under these conditions could lose all or part depending on how many living beneficiaries he/her has. Black men have a lower life expectancy and republicans want to raise the age limit to draw benefits to 67. So you make my point for me.
teabaggersblow 5 months ago
@teabaggersblow Keep believing those number emanating from the Ministry of Truth. Do you also believe its CPI number. The government CBO was off by a factor of 10 on the cost of Medicare over a 30-year period.
That number is dependent on very generous GDP numbers. It's also based on the Treasuries that SSA holds. It's already in the red because S.S. has taken in less money the last 2-years than it has payed out.
It's just government sophistry. Why do you have such faith in these fools?
joepeeler34 5 months ago
@teabaggersblow Repeat after me: There-Is-No-Trust-Fund. Wash, rinse, repeat.
The SS "fund" is full of instrument of debt. One agency of government owes another agency of government a credit. The govt. then claims it is a wash. It's absurd.
The same people who payed SS taxes now have to pay taxes again to pay for the same S.S. program. Do you understand? You don't seem to be following.
Under your force and fraud system people are getting robbed.
joepeeler34 5 months ago
@teabaggersblow If they don't raise age and means testing, everyone still gets a check. The currency will not have much purchasing power though. Govt. is paying for some of its liabilities by increasing the money supply thereby creating an inflation tax.
S.S. is indexed to the govt.'s CPI. The CPI is full of subjectivity. When pre-Boskin measures are used, the price inflation rate is over 10%. The govt. hasn't given COLA increases last two years. They are monetizing their liabilities.
joepeeler34 5 months ago
@joepeeler34 Republicans want to raise the age limit while dems want to raise the taxable income limit. I agree with you that blackmen and many whitemen should start benefits at 65. Women live much longer so maybe women should not start their benefits until a later date. But realistically that might not fly. Means testing is also an option.
teabaggersblow 5 months ago
@teabaggersblow I got news for you. There is a dime's worth of difference between the party establishments. They just play off each other. They are working behind the scenes to present a plan to raise the age and means test. They'll use commissions and a "Super Congress" as tactics and cover.
Maybe, just maybe, a free individual shouldnt' have to participate in a retirement scheme that has turned into a corrupt political patronage racket.
joepeeler34 5 months ago
@teabaggersblow You are also proving my point with your black and women examples about the inequitablity of the system.
When you say you want S.S. taxable income cap to be raised you are implicitly conceding the point that many of us have been making for decades. Namely, it's nothing more than a welfare transfer program
With real insurance risk is measured. Varying premiums are payed based on risk assessment. The premiums are then invested. It's tailored to the individual, not so with S.S.
joepeeler34 5 months ago
@joepeeler34 Call it what you want, as long as shitstained republicans don't steal SS blind, it will work way longer than any shitstained republican can live. Everytime shitstained republicans get power they prove to all Americans that government never works when they are behind the curtain pulling the levers.
teabaggersblow 5 months ago
@teabaggersblow Why do you focus on the political parties and individual personalities of the moment. That's not thought. I focus on ideas.
Did you understand my points on the alledged fund? I'll take your silence on the subject as acquiescense to reality if not.
The New Deal/Progressive era structure has been in place for generations with both parties playing about the edges of the same basic structure. They are both peddling a mixed economy with corporatism and socialism interjected.
joepeeler34 5 months ago
@teabaggersblow Moreover, you didn't challenge my claims about the government's CPI number. Are you familiar with hedonics, liberal substitutions, overweighting/underweigting, geometric weighting? All of these measures are subjectivity. In which direction do you think the bias will inevitably go?
If the old fixed basket of goods absent all the subjective measures is used, price inflation/dollar debasement is about 10%.
S.S. is indexed to govt.'s CPI. It showed no inflation last 2 years.
joepeeler34 5 months ago
@joepeeler34 I suppose shitstained republicans are for more anal than dems when it comes to how effective the American government can be. I really do not obsess over it because I can live handsomely on the retirement money I have already banked. SS will be the cherry on top.
teabaggersblow 5 months ago
@teabaggersblow And where is that "cherry on the top" coming from? Many well-off seniors get S.S. checks every month that were taken from a current worker who is in many instances far worse off than the beneficiary. Is that moral?
The cursing and namecalling is what I have come to expect sadly. I think it is a defense mechanism used by people who aren't confident in their ideas.
Fiat dollar debasement means your dollar denominated "assets" and govt. checks will be wiped out.
Cheers!
joepeeler34 5 months ago
@joepeeler34 R U mental shitstain? It came out my pocket. hehehehe
teabaggersblow 5 months ago
@teabaggersblow It's sad that you are anti-intellectual. You don't want to have a respectful dialogue. I suspect you are just young. You'll be embarrassed by your behaviour in ten-years time.
joepeeler34 5 months ago
@joepeeler34 heheh Ok dude think any shitstain republican thought that pops into your brain but I am in the golden years when it comes to my age. And again my social security that I will get, if shitstained republicans do not rob my future was banked by me paying taxes all these years. Look I have disliked shitstained republicans since forever. NOTHING in my political makeup will ever change. I dislike the shitstained republican party now more than ever.
teabaggersblow 5 months ago
@teabaggersblow
But but but... wasn't it Bill Clinton who made your SSecurity benefit taxable? & Isn't it Barack who failed to provide social security cost of living increases THREE YEARS IN A ROW - while every other U.S. President gave one every year?
Seems to me Barack cut $500 BILLION dollars from Medicare and made wheel chairs, dialysis machines, walkers, blind men's canes, & every other medical devices taxable to "improve" healthcare? Sounds like mean spirited tax on the poor to me.
mredstriumph 5 months ago
@teabaggersblow
But at least Barack didn't let GE get away with not paying ANY taxes on their $14 BILLION dollars in profits.. then give them a $3.2 Billion tax payer REFUND on the taxes it never paid to "Help Offset Cuts & Save U.S. Jobs” - while they outsourced 22,000 jobs from U.S. to China & India... OH... WAIT
YES HE DID!
Go over to huffpo & look - /scott-paul/should-ges-jeffrey-immelt_b_812132.html
Or give $500Mn tax payer dollars to Solyndra, or sell his senate seat
Oh YES HE DID!
mredstriumph 5 months ago
@teabaggersblow
"if you offered the SS plan or privatize it, 95% of the public would not opt out of SS."
But Congress did...
mredstriumph 5 months ago
@mredstriumph You are right shitstained republicans in the House all voted to end medicare and medicade as we know it. So I guess all shitstained republicans do their bidding for the insurance companies after they spent 8 years robbing from the social security trust fund. If you want to try to figure out whose side shitstianed republicans are on just call Met Life or the Hartford. lol hehehe Shitstained republicans never found an insurance or bank lobbyist they did not love.
teabaggersblow 5 months ago
@teabaggersblow
Seems to me a lot of people have been "robbing" the social security trust fund...
As I recall, it was Progressive Democrat Lyndon Johnson & his Democratically controlled House & Senate who made it part of the general fund just so they could spend it.
Jimmy Carter came along & changed the law so he could hand it out to immigrants who moved here at age 65.
Clinton came along & made SS taxable - w Al Gore casting the tie-breaking vote in t Senate.
Barak ended COLA increases
mredstriumph 5 months ago
@teabaggersblow
Heck, Reagan in 1984 had to pass a law to FORCE federal employees to pay into it or they'd still be exempt.
Kind of a moot point though, as Dems have changed the law to allow Alcoholics and Drug Addicts to qualify as "disabled" classes to make sure the cashflow didn't swing in any positive direction.
Maybe u should watch I.O.U.S.A. (available on youtube) written by Clinton's GAO. It's chock full of progressives lies & propaganda, but still manages to tell the truth abt SS.
mredstriumph 5 months ago
@mredstriumph
You will need to double the numbers and debt projections though - after all, it only came out in 2008 and since then Barry has been in charge with Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid with filibuster proof majorities in Congress to help him - so naturally, the involved deficits, debts, and liabilities have doubled.
You can check out USdebtclock - DOT - org for the updated numbers if you like.
Good thing Dems didn't raise taxes on millionaires in the 2 YEARS they controlled congress, eh?
mredstriumph 5 months ago
@mredstriumph All I know is if credit default swaps were not put into law while the powers that be(GWB) signed a bill to not allow prosecution of selling insurance without a license, all of this rhetoric would be academic. Do I believe the shitstained republicans willfully bankrupted our country? ............Of course I do. Do I believe dems could have stopped the carnage?....................Of course I do. Do both parties drink from the same trough.............Of course they do.
teabaggersblow 5 months ago
@teabaggersblow
Well... let's start at the beginning. Who INVENTED "Securitization" & "Mortgage Backed Securities"?
The U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development - February, 1970. Who created HUD? Progressive Democrats.
Who created the Fed, which in turn set interest rates ARTIFICIALLY LOW - which drove the 'Mortgage Bubble" - Progressive Dem Woodrow Wilson w filibuster proof Dem majorities in both houses.
Who SUED mortgage lenders to FORCE THEM to make those "predatory loans" ? Dems
mredstriumph 5 months ago
@mredstriumph
Who UNILATERALLY DEREGULATED the mortgage industry - INCLUDING Graham Leach Bliley / Glass Steagle? Progressive Democrats
Who ATTACKED REGULATORS as "racist' to STOP any attempt to regulate the mortgage industry? Progressive Democrats.
Who is once again DE-REGULATING the mortgage industry & pressuring banks to make "predatory" loans? Progressive Democrats
Who sued Citibank & "organized" at bankers homes? Barak H Obama
Case: Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank
State IL
mredstriumph 5 months ago
@mredstriumph
"Credit Default Swaps" - are simply insurance policies against a 'Credit Default"
What constitutes a "Credit Default"?
How about legions of people suddenly DEFAULTING on their mortgages because of all the factors I just mentioned.
Well why would banks suddenly make bad loans? Doesn't 'bad loan' = giving $ away?
Ans - 1 - because Dems pressured & sued to FORCE them
Ans - 2 - because FANNIE MAE & FREDDIE MAC (Both INVENTED & RUN by Progressive Democrats) - then BOUGHT 'EM
mredstriumph 5 months ago
@mredstriumph
"Credit Default Swaps" themselves were made by major Obama contributor Morgan Stanley in the early days of the Clinton Administration.
Near as I can tell, there never was ANY law against this kind of insurance (nor dictating where they could be sold), Nor am I aware of a CDS EVER being sold by any "unlicensed" person - since selling insurance policies as a private citizen 1 - doesn't work / won't sell, 2 - isn't something I've ever seen done.
Perhaps you can fill me in?
mredstriumph 5 months ago
Comment removed
mredstriumph 5 months ago
Comment removed
mredstriumph 5 months ago
@mredstriumph Who made credit default swaps legal you shitstained republican? W did shitstain. Gramm(R) got the bill passed in an all republican congress.
teabaggersblow 5 months ago
@teabaggersblow
What are u on about blow? If u are talking about Gramm-Leach-Bliley, that was 1999.
Now I'm CERTAIN u don't know this, but the Governor of Texas doesn't get a vote in the Federal Legislature. Further, It was WJ Clinton who lobbied, supported, & signed GLB w 84% of Dems in the Senate & 75% of Dems in the House - not that those little details matter to u.
Just for future reference, George W Bush's term began January 20 2001, &Gore was re-re-re-re-counting chads till 12/22/01
mredstriumph 5 months ago
@mredstriumph GWB signed a bill after entering office to not allow prosecution of selling credit default swaps without a license. It is nothing more than insurance and all insurance transactions need a license. Funny how we will never get the skinny on who and how much money was bet in the derivatives scam. I have heard anywhere from $60T-$300T. So these rich fat cat elites that own these derivatives can call in their makers anytime or anywhere. Shitstained republicans make us feel all warm huh?
teabaggersblow 5 months ago
@teabaggersblow
I asked u 2clarify yourself many times. I heard he signed "A bill" doesn't cut it
"the skinny on who & how much was bet in the derivatives scam. I heard $60T-$300T"
Fannie Mae is WHO collapsed+ran the scam. Google CNN Bailout Tracker 2see4yourself. Check FNMA stock pr. B.Frank & C.Dodd are your fat cats. The world's most notorious derivatives trader, George Soros, bankrolled O's campaign - Cui bono? The 'risk' in the 'bet' was US homes having value. Dem undid that - Cui bono?
mredstriumph 5 months ago
@mredstriumph Grow the fuck up you shitstained piece of unamerican shit. I don't work for shitstained republicans. If you want answers do like I did . Dig it up. Nobody especially me gives a fuck how hard you yell. Republicans have been shitstains on my rights as American for many many years. And stupid teatard fucks like you keep swallowing the corporate cum.
teabaggersblow 5 months ago
@teabaggersblow
It's obvious that you didn't "dig it up". What you did is "made it up" and now you've painted yourself into a corner and gotten yourself angry.
No one is watching, and no one really cares how silly you've made yourself look, so why act like your little world is ending? It's hardly personal.
mredstriumph 5 months ago 12
@mredstriumph Whatever you think. People like you shitsatined republicans would rather lie than admit you have been deceiving americans for decades. Fuck a shitstained republican.
teabaggersblow 5 months ago
@teabaggersblow
When someone politely asks you to identify the bill you base your entire opinion on, you call the request a lie.
Sad.
mredstriumph 4 months ago
@mredstriumph R U talking about the Commodities Modernization Act? Yea Gramm(R) initiated and got republicans to go along lock stock and barrel.
teabaggersblow 4 months ago
@teabaggersblow
So here we go again. The commodities Modernization Act of 2000 was once again passed by Bill Clinton. Only 4 congressmen voted against it, & two were Republicans.
(Remember how I explicitly told you Bush's term started on January 20, *** 2001 *** ? Now you know why... FAILED again .. u charming Democrat u)
I hate to tell you, but no Commodity Futures Modernization Act has ever made anyone stop paying their mortgage, nor bankrupted 2 Federal Agencies run by Congress. = FAIL.
mredstriumph 4 months ago
@mredstriumph Yes here we are again you ignorant shitstained republican. GWB later signed a bill that made it legal to sell insurance without a license. Or the bill, Clinton signed meant nothing. It is against the law to sell insurance unless you are licensed to do so. Anti trust laws would have been violated. So GWB made it impossible for a bank or person to be prosecuted for selling derivatives. hehehehe I guess you fucking shitstained republicans forget about that. How convenient!
teabaggersblow 4 months ago
@teabaggersblow
So Progressive Democrats sue banks, obliterate lending standards, buy the bad loans away from lenders, & community organize to make sure they get made, but it's the INSURANCE AGENT who's at fault when it implodes?
Genius, there is nothing WRONG with buying an insurance policy. It's the RESPONSIBLE thing to do when you see a looming danger to insure yourself against.
mredstriumph 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mredstriumph
WSJ - "2/3 of ALL bad mortgages were bought by govt agencies or required by government regulations"
tinyurl -DOT - com/ylcxb4n
NYT 9/29/99 "Under increasing pressure by Clinton Admin.. Dept Housing Urban Dev propose by 2K1, 50% Fannie/Fred portfolio=loans 2 low-mod-income borrowers"
tinyurl -DOT - com/ye9tjst
The graph is irrefutable & self explanatory
tinyurl -DOT- com/yekh2eo
No policy in 2002, 2004, 2006 inflated the mortgage bubble in mid 1990's. End of story.
mredstriumph 4 months ago
@mredstriumph Hey dumbfuck derivatives is a hedge on a bad mortgage rated at AAA. The very thing the shitstined republican party was in favor of. Musical mortgages. Loan to high end speculators(83% of the bad mortgages) and watch the mortgages go belly up. But have insurance where you the bank get the mortgages for pennies on the dollar and then wait to fuck the consumer again. Fuck a shitstained republican and fuck the mega banks that keep taking away the rights of the American people.
teabaggersblow 4 months ago
@teabaggersblow
Hey dubmfkuc a derivative is ANYTHING that derives it's value from something else. It can be ANYTHING: a stock, a bond, a currency, an index, even an INSURANCE POLICY AGAINST A LOAN.
A DOLLAR BILL IS A DERIVATIVE - it derives it's value from a promise from the govt
Mortgage DE-Regulation was PARTY LINE - And Democrats FORCED IT:
/watch?v=Lr1M1T2Y314
Proof:
tinyurl - DOT - com/3mbewvm
Just what do you think "COMMUNITY ORGANIZING" is?? It's FORCING "PREDATORY LOANS" on banks!
mredstriumph 4 months ago
@mredstriumph You are just another republican shitstain that lies and tells anyone with a third grade IQ how to become a shitstained republican. Buying insurance on mortgages that is not worth the paper it is printed on and bundling it with other worthless mortgages and then selling them to dumbfucks like you is a shitstained republican idea that cratered the world's economy. Pull that shitstained republican head out of your ass, you little shitstained republican wordsmith.
teabaggersblow 4 months ago
@teabaggersblow
What's not "worth the paper it's printed on" is the U.S. Dollar - and this has been the Democrat Progressive Plan for over a century
"The best way to destroy the capitalist system is to debauch the currency. By a continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens." - Progressive Democrat (&Obama) Economist - John Maynard Keynes
Housing Charts don't lie blow, YOU DO
tinyurl - DOT - com/3mbewvm
mredstriumph 4 months ago
@mredstriumph What are you mental? Change the subject when your shitstained republican lies mean nothing to anybody. Go find some third grader you can bwainwash with your shitstained republican ideas.
teabaggersblow 4 months ago
@teabaggersblow
You can argue with me all you want, but you can't argue with video. It's right here for all to see.
/watch?v=Lr1M1T2Y314
/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs
And the housing charts PROVE what I'm saying is true.
tinyurl - DOT - com/3mbewvm
tinyurl - DOT - com/yekh2eo
mredstriumph 4 months ago
@mredstriumph Pull that shitstained republican leaning brain out of your shitstained ass and just go back to when Bush came into office. Look at all the bills he and the republican lead congress passed. Don't be a shitstained republican fool. Learn from history or be doomed to repeat it.
teabaggersblow 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mredstriumph In 2004 Bush and your shitstained republicans passed a bill relaxing regulations leveraging loans by 30-40 times their value.By 2006 only 17% of the subprime mortgages were for low to moderate income groups. Yet 83% of subprime loans were initiated for high income groups. Hell we got high end warehouses right here in Houston that are finished but the doors were never opened. Shitstained republicans thinking that predatory lending never happened is mistaken.
teabaggersblow 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
mredstriumph 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mredstriumph (reformated)
Once again REALITY is the EXACT OPPOSITE of what you say it is..
Republicans tried to STOP this. They tried to REGULATE:
2003: tinyurl - DOT - com/cmf3u8
2005: tinyurl - DOT - com/5gvopc
2007: tinyurl - DOT - com/3ugawft
Where are DEMOCRAT DE-Regulation efforts? N/A - 0 - NONE EXIST.
DEMOCRATS & REGULATION:
/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs
mredstriumph 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mredstriumph (reformated)
The "mega bank" taking away the rights of the American people was solely a PROGRESSIVE DEMOCRAT CREATION: tinyurl - DOT - com/2folrv
mredstriumph 4 months ago
It is not made up if you really know how SS works.
MrDutch2009 3 months ago
@pargenta1 It is really kind of funny .........you being so anal about the payouts. Many SS payees die early without underage children or wife and lose all that is left. Other people whether they are lucky or just healthier go for a longer period than most and suck their benefits and other's money dry. Sp what is your anal point anyway. Just raise the amount you can be taxed on. R U one of those shitstained republicans? I would be careful and not be branded with such a load of crap.
teabaggersblow 5 months ago
@teabaggersblow Why would we want to give more money to a Ponzi scheme? Why should a free individual be forced into such a destructive scheme?
S.S. results in far less savings. It is out of savings that credit for capital investment derives. That is how prodcutivity levels are raised. That increases supply. Increased supply means more purchasing power. That means higher real wages. How much poorer is everyone because of the discouragement of savings? It's incalculable.
joepeeler34 5 months ago
@teabaggersblow "Hurting the fund." You mean hurting the redistribution scheme.
There is no fund. It is a welfare transfer program. The make-believe fund is full of U.S. Treasuries--instruments of debt. Think about that. They took money and replaced it with I.O.U.'s to be payed for on the backs of the very same people who have already been taxed once for S.S.
If those bonds were foreign bonds to be payed for by others, then SSA could claim a legitimate fund.
joepeeler34 5 months ago
Steven I don't know how you put up with these idiot trolling liberals.
This video was awesome.
chaohellsing 5 months ago
The More you know.....
valcan321 5 months ago
@siradon2000 squoinked: "Seniors survived long before SS"
I'm sure /some/ did: the independent wealthy most likely. The rest lived and died in abject poverty.
pewterbot9 5 months ago
@pewterbot9 Maybe you don't realize this, but social security was meant to be used as a primary retirement fund. Excuse me, but how do you think people planned for retirement? Do you think they believed they would just work until they died? Or do you think that they realized they would eventually be unable to continue working? I know this is a foreign word to you, but the elderly still recognize it. We call it saving. Not just borrowing, and paying down a loan, but saving money.
siradon2000 3 months ago
@siradon2000 squoinked: "Maybe you don't realize this, but social security was meant to be used as a primary retirement fund."
Yes, and I totally agree.
"how do you think people planned for retirement?"
Before WWII, most citizens were too piss-poor to save anything towards retirement. What's your point, you seem to be agreeing with me, yet arguing at the same time. It's your time of month perhaps?
pewterbot9 3 months ago
@MsSarahJ56 squoinked: "helping one another should be volunteery not required or demanded."
Just like it was in the Dark Ages. Plagues anyone?
pewterbot9 5 months ago
@RomanV101 remarked: "But you extremist right wingers don't want the TRUTH."
So they mark you as "spam" in order to bury your savvy comment. LOSERS!
pewterbot9 5 months ago
@RomanV101 remarked: "But you extremist right wingers don't want the TRUTH."
So they mark you as "spam" in order to bury your savvy comment. LOSERS!
pewterbot9 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KitKabudo squoinked: "Was he attacked by union thugs?"
More likely, he's not producing enough anti-progressive videos, so his neocon overlords keep him in a cage all night, to torture him.
pewterbot9 5 months ago
This is good, but why make a point at the expense of the person on the phone?
aaron8862006 5 months ago
@DeadpoolAndFriends squoinked: "i stood up and clapped mid way through this video."
No doubt spooging all over the monitor in the process.
pewterbot9 5 months ago
@pewterbot9 lol I'm still trying to clean it up.
DeadpoolAndFriends 5 months ago
@DeadpoolAndFriends squoinked: "lol I'm still trying to clean it up."
'Scuse me but...looks like you've confused diarrhea for sperm. :D
pewterbot9 2 weeks ago