SS can pay every claim if the government did not deregulate it. The govn't should not be allowed to take money out. SS is a big savings account contribute: now, withdraw later. You pay it so you can retire. In the 80s under republicans the act was changed. Money that you paid for SS could be used on other things. On the old plan you had 110% return investment(people dying before reciving benefits). Now there's no money left because the reps took it. It's a scam.
SS is the biggest bunch of bullshit that ever got started...It totally allows the gov to control you. Go to Galveston county Texas, where they opted OUT of SS from the government in the early 80s and now they are thriving with retirees making much more on their investments than SS produced for them. And for those who say the stock market is bad for SS, then allow a person to invest in CDs...ha ha.....libs...you lose!
@Marksnotebook Good one! The SS trust fund invests in.....................NOTHING. Why? Because there is nothing in the SS trust fund bunk worthless paper............thanks a lot ALGORE.
Obama takes $40billion dollars from social security.. You work for GE or Daves bake shop they tax deduct your money calling Social Security Union Tax. Dave sets on Welfare and you work. Dave lauges while he calls you a scab. You paid nothing. A federal workers own child is a excuse for govt. to deposit large sums of money in social security to make it strong as McDonalds called it a loss on the W2 form. Where is the $40billion I guess Obama has got this in the bag. politics did not pay
Social Security isn't a ponzi scheme - it is a poorly run insurance company. It runs the risk of becoming a disaster given the ideas that are put forward in Washington. We outline a solution which doesn't make it a good deal, but at least it will fix the ponzi myth. FixSSNow.Org.
@deficithawker So would the increase in payments into the SS system include an increase in income???? If not then you are bascially admitting that this is no longer a system that pays out basically what you pay in, now it would be more like a welfare type program......gee, just what The United States of Ameritard need more of.
Stand up 4 your RIGHTS Americans.~ The REPUBLICANS have been FOOLING YOU for the last 30 yrs. SOCIAL SECURITY*, (SS) , is NOT an entitlement! SS HAS A $2.6 TRILLION SURPLUS SS CAN pay every claim at least until 2030.~ SS DOES NOT increase the federal budget by one cent! Tell the REPUBLICAN GANGSTERS & THEIR WALLSTREET BANDIT FRIENDS that you will FIGHT any PRIVATIZATION OF your SS pension.~You will FIGHT ANY REDUCTION IN BENEFITS. YOU will FIGHT any change in AGE REQUIREMENT FOR SS BENEFITS!
@poindexterwitkowsky Surplus my butt. The fact is the lockbox has Non fungible T-bills that cannot be sold like regular T-bills.
So where do we find the money if there is a shortfall in SS money in vs money out? Well of course we print more debt. National debt ............20 trillion by 2016.....Ameritards......fuck yeah!!!!!!
Social Security is an insurance fund. Like any insurance fund. Do Repubs want to get rid of all insurance? All insurance is a ponzi scheme. it's all exactly the same. I've been adding to my SS funds all my life. so has everyone else. Why do the Republicans want to steal money we have already invested in SS?
@shellius Ok, then what is your solution? Social Security will soon be regularly taking in less than it pays out. When that scenario comes to pass and changes have not been made to fix the shortcoming............the shortfall will have to come out of the General Budget.
@tickyul That's cute. You think they'd keep their grubby hands off social security funds and save it for us. The first cent of a surplus that didn't go to retirees went to the general budget.
@MaskedMumblr Well, President Johnson signed that change into law. Now we have a SS trust fund with basically ZERO fungible assets. I mean what do you expect, the creeps saw money they could grab....of course they took it. The SS trust fund could have had trillions in real assets such as gold, sliver, platinum, dollars, yen, Blue chip stocks, very secure real estate investment.....hehehe, that did not happen because this country is retarded and insane.
@shellius Call it what you want, there are no fungible assets in Al Gore's lockbox. So we will eventually have to either make changes to the SS system or start printing Kaboodles of money....or maybe both.
Why don’t u just blurt out the truth like I do...stop trying to be Politically Correct...
~!~
THE UNITED STATES MAFIA IS SIMPLY SHOVING ANOTHER TAX UP OUR ASS
~!~
& ALL the S>S> money is going to the FUCKING MEXICANS & their ANCHORE BABBIES& the 44th OUSS STAIN is the devil incarnate hell bent on destroying this ONCE GREAT COUNTRY ...thats right folks...[THE ANIMAL IN THE WHITE HOUSE ] IS ALLOWING AMERICA TO BE RAPED IN OUR COLLECTIVE ASSESS
I agree, was it not 10trillion already that The Government Borrowed from SS? that is our Money!!! We the people, and we have to pay it back to our selves? sounds like a loan to our selves form our selves, I.E Federal Reserves let us borrow our money with an interest rate and we pay it back!!!, this is ridiculous!!
@briggs9187 Exactly, they are gauranteeing a government entitlement-Social Security (debt) with a trust fund (Government Treasuries) based on government debt, that makes me feel really poorly about the future of SS.
@tickyul I personally want to stop paying into it, I don't need it since I don't want it, I prefer to take that money and add it to my savings, 401k or IRA and use it for my retirement my self...but they wont let me, I hear you when you say it was set for them to guarantee income and payment to the Fed from lending us our own money.
@briggs9187 Yeah, I Agree with you totally. The Bush proposal to let people VOLUNTARILY invest a small portion of their SS into 401k type funds was a start in the right direction. The cries from special interests disintergrated any chance of even a small reform. I would prefer to have individual accounts, opened at birth, contribute up to 100k a year tax free, cannot touch it until you are 62-65 yo. This country refuses to correct massive problems that really require attention, pretty pathetic.
Its amazing, the so called 'informers' on television are so miss educated. That fat woman was absurd but nowhere near that idiotic Englishmen," They're trying to tax success that's all they do, they want your money!!!!111" twat.
Maybe it's true. After all, the govt does not need to run an insurance program for the citizenry to be insured. Consider auto insurance. In all states (maybe 1 or 2 exceptions), you are required to buy auto insurance if you drive. The govt doesn't sell auto insurance, but they make you buy it from someone who does. Why not have the federal govt require everyone to buy a minimum value annuity from whomever rather than having the govt run the annuity?
You do understand the subject here is old age insurance, not health insurance, right? Anyway..
-Hippocratic oath
Hospitals can take care of poor patients with or w/o govt insurance.
-Discrimination
You can discriminate in pricing. Singles pay more per person than marrieds. Older pay more than younger. Its about risk.
-Inelasticity
Medicine isnt the only inelastic good. Food is very inelastic and its a free market. Reality belies your assertion that inelastic markets cant be free.
@oterj0 Sorry it was unclear, I was responding to someone else about HC and crossed points, but to addresses your response:
- Hospitals need to bill someone for the treatment, that's ultimatly tax.
- No you can't. They have regulated bandwidth of price. But in reality women for e.g should pay like 2x as much. (much like in auto insurance men pay 2x as much).
Its In-elasticity vs cost ofc. I don't have the chars to detail the obvious. Water >> HC in inelasticity but water's cost is << HC.
No worries, just got confused when I read it. In response:
Hospitals dont need to bill anyone; they choose to provide services or not. If they be obliged by oath to perform services, then they do so w/o regard to payment. Its a question for their mgmt, not Congress.
Price regulation is the problem. Why shouldnt more expensive people cost more to insure?
Agreed. Water may not be very expensive, but food is. Food is a fair analogy and the market for food is unsocialized.
Think about that practically. A man comes in after being hit by a car. His name is not unknown. He needs $20K of care before you even know his name. You would end up with a hosp. that killed ppl bc of ID checks.
- Like I said for better or for worse. This is a whole other debate up there with 'Isn't it a waste treating people over 70...'
I disagree. The basic food to avoid death is practically free in the west. There is enough in the supermarket trash alone. There is no equal in HC.
Well, if a hospital chooses not to help people without some form of ID, that's the hospital's perogative. We are also free to donate to hospitals that do help those without insurance as well as refuse to go to hospitals that don't.
Fair enough, it is another question, but it is important. No free market pricing means risky health choices are rewarded more than otherwise would be. The whole system is stressed as a result.
I guess we agree to disagree on the food/HC comparison.
If a hospital wants to require ID and/or proof of insurance prior to providing services, I support the hospital's right to do so. Likewise, if a hospital chooses to provide service for all, I support said hospital doing so. Hospitals that serve the poor can be (and are) supported by private charity.
Yes, but it's an important question. Limiting prices for insurance forces the healthy to subsidize the sick (moreso than they would otherwise). Doesn't encourage healthy living.
@oterj0 ah the charity clause. The health industry is massive. Charity would not scratch the surface of costs.
A hospital that provides care after proof of ID does not work. What if a child is hit outside of school? What if your on a bus in a pile up? You are dead before they spend at least a few 100 to 1000's stabilising you. Not to mention Doctors would NEVER follow an id rule. Its like asking a marine not to 'waste' a $6m blackhawk to save his buddy... its never happening.
When the govt provides everything for society, of course we shouldnt expect charity to do much. People are allowed to dissociate themselves from human suffering courtesy of the govt. In a less socialistic society, people will give more to charity. The proof is comparing average charitable contributions in the US vs Europe. Charity is better for the giver and receiver than the impersonal govt teet.
Doctors can choose to implement an ID rule or not. I dont need to make that decision.
@oterj0 Ok, I can't spell this out anymore. A Dr MUST render assistance immediate to anyone who needs it anywhere/any-time. If you collapsed at a restaurant and a Dr dining next to you did nothing that would be actually illegal in many countries. So it would rest on hospital management to impose a rule, which ofc no doctor could follow without going to prison in many countries or be struck off an accredited register in EVERY other. So that can NEVER be a solution to 'dealing with' the uninsured.
Under the current constraints of law, that is true. What I'm suggesting is that the current laws are wrong, designed to further the dependency on govt for solutions. A hospital must provide services, therefore, it must incur cost without discrimination and without recourse for the uninsured, therefore, it must go to the govt to recuperate the cost. The govt is the beginning and the end. It exists to further its own existence, not to solve problems.
-Its not just the law its an oath. The oath is a few 1000yrs old, way before 'government'. It's taken Day 1 of med school. If you don't take it they don't teach you.
Lets say you remove all criminal penalties.... then a doctor would STILL loose accreditation. That is from a private body. Without accreditation a doctor could not get insurance or sit the regular exams to keep up with the latest treatments. In short, they're fucked. (1/2)
Then the problem is solved. Govt need not do anything, because oath (and the fear of losing accredidation) binds doctors to provide service to the poor. What more is there to talk about?
@oterj0 Wow, you get it now. That's how it did work in the past. Hospitals now days want 'residents' and they want to pass on the cost in helping these people. So they pass it on to the government or go bust. So you would have America would go back to the 1700's?
You talk about 'natural equilibrium' do you know what that is? It's people dying at 40-50 while some live very comfortably and get every need attended too. If you want that move to somalia.
The major function that govt serves in helping improve the lives of people is providing order. Life in America is better than life in Somalia because we have an orderly society, not because we have XYZ options in our HC plans. Cuba has free HC, but one would be hardpressed to argue the standard of living is better there. Just, orderly society makes for constructive behavior that helps society at large, not programs.
@oterj0 I know why Somalia has a worse standard of living. The point is you can truly be free. Most business hire their own police force. Its the libertarians dream. You could start your fantasy hospital there :)
About your interpretation of government; You can hold that interpretation without evidence if you like.
@CmdrTobs Big deal, most big business in the USA have to hire their own security force, or, they would see half of their inventory walk out the door. This country is so full of ciminals, you lose whatever is not bolted into the cement.
@oterj0 You do realise charitable funding is highly variable. Typically depressed ones donations fall of a cliff. By telling people to rely on charity. You are doing 2 things: -You be letting down people (starve / die of illness) in hard times unnecessarily.
- Your increasing costs, charity ignores preventative medicine. Only America has people on kidney dialysis in 'Emergancy rooms'
This is one of the reasons America spends a massive 16% of GDP on HC.
No, America has people on dialysis in emergency rooms, because its illegal to not provide HC to these people. Its because of the govt that people do not value preventative care. Why should they? It costs money, whereas in the instance they have major health issues, the hospital will be legally obliged to help them. If we must have that system, then we MUST have legal penalties for not having insurance. I prefer no mandates on hospital or individual, but its both or neither, not half.
@oterj0 Wrong, wrong & wrong. You see, you are actually doing what Socialists and Communist do. You are making sweeping assumptions about ppls behaviour and psychology. If this were the case, why is a America the fattest nation on earth and single government payer countries ALL healthier? Why so many fat people? After all ER, is not actually treatment and if you do survive a trip you're essentially bankrupted.
So why so many fatties? Because your theory is BS. People are irrational & greedy.
Are you telling me that short term saving is not the rationale that leads people to avoid getting insurance? Its not a sweeping assumption.
While I agree that weight is the major problem with Americans' health, youre assuming that HC has something to do with it. Americans are fat because food is too cheap. Euros pay through the nose for food courtesy of VAT. Maybe we should scrap this HC talk and just implement a VAT. Good health and good HC are not the same thing.
Reread. At not one point did I say the weight of Americans proves anything about American healthcare, what the hell would I be saying, doctors are injecting fat? lolz. What I am saying is if the logic you outlined was true Americans already would be taking better care of themselves, i.e NOT the fattest country on earth.
Britain has 17.% VAT . But due to import and other factors Britain has some of the most expensive food. (0/1)
@oterj0 I know this first hand. France has loads more farmland everything is fresher and cheaper. Not to mention the tax on alcohol in the UK is insane. But guess what. We are the 2nd fatest nation on earth. And if you isloate scottland.... it is fatter than America.
So why? Well. Britain is th 51st state. It has for obvious reasons readily imported American based fast food & culture. We make all the same mistakes the US made in diet education and habbits.
Europe(not uk) regulate the fck out of places like McDonalds, They even ban adverts aimed at kids too that have kids addicted.
Low VAT is the BEST thing about the US, and Right wing properganda tanks like the 'cato institute' have convinced people like you to adopted in my opinion the WORST thing about Europe.
The 51st state idea holds for a whole string of statistical gulfs between Europe and Britain; teenage age pregnancies is another example.
@oterj0 Charity is a just in time measure. People only become aware and give when they SEE the hardship. Nobody gets homeless help as they're loosing there house, only whey the have lost it.
What if all the money pouring into Hati was given years ago in the form infrastructure projects? A lot of African agriculture is killed off by free grain aid. All the problems you apply to 'government' (that are bogus in most cases) are prevalent in large scale charity.
Stepping back from this specific issue, the problem I have with govt is that the goal is the futile attempt to fight the equilibrium distribution of resources. By fighting the most efficient path to equilibrium, govt forces the system to take a less efficient path. We arrive at the same point, but with a smaller pie for all. Govt trying to solve HC means we require care for all in hospitals, which means people dont pay for prevention, which exacerbates the system. It's futility.
@oterj0 The numbers in way support your theory. America is 1# in HC spending.
Even if you subtracted emergency room costs America still spends more than any country on earth. In fact the Government contribution is more than Frances per person. That has a much healthy population by all facts and figures.
By your assumptions:
- The French should be less healthy as there is no 'stick' for being unhealthy
@oterj0 Judging by that insane comment I see you have decided to pick a hard libertarian 'freedom to choose' position. I advice you to be weary and pick positions that work in reality , rather than make reality subscribe to your theory.
You seem like an intelligent person but what you just said was mind blowing stupid. That's the problem with rigid ideology over continuous objective analysis of the evidence of a given situation. Rigid theories are for the intellectually lazy.
I am not rigidly ideological. Its rigidly ideological to assume that private charity could never meet the needs of the poor. I dont know if you fall in this camp, but Ive actually had someone respond that we should strive to be a society where charity is moot. I don't want to live in a society where compassion is moot. The govt is impersonal and does not provide the lessons of humility and generousity that charity does.
PS
Should I be weary or wary? I'm not running a marathon...:)
@oterj0 Its not an assumption I KNOW. If charity could, why is there 100,000 children a year dying from beriberi?? How comes people are still starving in Africa and Asia? In fact, how comes there is ANY homelessness in west?
You are an ideologue of the highest magnitude, if this was another debate I would be enduring your diatribe on '3rd word slackers living of hand outs'. But when it supports your agenda it 'Works!!'
Please, do some more reading. Keep your mind open. You're still young.
I can make the same statements about govt. Neither govt nor charity will end human suffering. It's the human condition, probably designed to encourage us to be more compassionate. Govt is the less efficient path to the same end.
Yeah, yeah, go ahead and assume time will make my heart and my brain equally soft. I am very comfortable with my compassion for my fellow man and as the years pass, I get more anti-govt. I always test ideas and do change bad ones. I think you're projecting.
@oterj0 ... More vapid quasi religious assumptions used to patch over the flaws in your broken theory.
The idea of nationhood rather than city-hood. Single government rather than feudal selflessness is why suffering has practically ended in the west compared to traditional zero government tribal societies. It is no accident that the most powerful technologies all happened since people started mutually supporting each other under the idea of nation.
@oterj0 I agree with you, big changes needed for SS. I think a good idea would be to have individual SS accounts set up at birth, you can start putting in (your family can contribute) at birth, no withdrawls until 62........over 6 decades of saving...wow. As of now the thing is truly just a Ponzi Scheme.
Yes, the problem will be that no one receiving SS benefits will ever support ending the ponzi scheme. While you'd think the contributors would want to end it, it's taken away via withholding before people even realize they earned the money. As far as a govt program goes, SS was designed well, because it's nearly impossible politically to alter. It will either bankrupt us or maybe the boomers will wake up and do something good for the country for once.
@oterj0 Uh.......Uh, this system must be changed for it to survive. The 2.5 trillion in special SS t-bills have the Stench of Vegas all over them. Why is it that this country cannot make any logical needed changes anymore, beyond pathetic. The insane people running this failing country mainly care about staying in power and establishing their ideology.....no matter how toxic it is for the country. I feel that Ameritards deserve all of the crap coming down the pike, it will hit them in the face.
WTF>!! I'm so fucking poor. I made 16,000 last yrs. I believe I'm under the poverty line but I'm still am able to own my own car, 1995 Camry, but its still a car. I pay my own rent and bills. I have money to go out to bars and smoke cigarettes. I paid for my own community college with no Pell grant money at all. Still I'm fine.... I don't understand the big deal.
hello doth, - If U R single, then so-called Poverty Level is about $11,000/yr DA!? - Makes No sense,- the CONGRESS $Bails the Criminals whom caused the Economic Terrorist CRISIS,- and do next to Nothing to help the U.S. Citizens whon are hurting the most!? Sounds like U R a positve person, and doing o'k. - Keep it up. Have a gr*t 2010. - jw
@oterj0 Stop the space program.....huh? Man pushes boundaries, this is what advances our society. Remember Nicolosa Tesla and Benjamin Franklin? You may not understand the need to learn more and more about the universe, but, trust me there is a benefit when we do.
You may not understand the need to give me a bunch of money from the federal treasury, but trust me, there is a benefit to it. Sorry, that's not a good enough argument to keep the space program.
@oterj0 I'm not sure exactly where the conversation started between you guys but Space Program is very important to any nation that wants to excel in the economic growth. You have to thank space programs from helping us develop satellite for our GPS, Internet, etc. The thing is 19th century scientists had no clue how electromagnets would be useful but almost everything electrical probably has one. Research is the basis for development of industry, and space is the next step of the journey.
you can have fundamental research without a space program. Sure, something good will come out of spending 10s of billions a year, but that doesn't mean it was the most cost effective way to get that technology.
@oterj0 Oh, great....a member of the Flat Earth Society. Don't you value science and the advances that it brings to society?? I mean, people who are at the top 2 percent in intelligence go into these fields (science) at do things that make life better for humans. The space program has a lot of high level scientists working on things that will ADVANCE the human race. Do not be sooo short sighted.
imagine if the world's smartest people worked in for profit industries instead of the govt. How much more economic activity could this country create if we didn't have the brain drain that is govt bureaucracy.
@oterj0 Well, now you are bringing up a different point. Lots of Scientists and engineers toil away for years doing work that pushes society forward. Maybe I could side with your argument if you meant that the technical people at Nasa should be doing their thing in the private sector, eliminating the excess bureaucrats is good too. But, the Usa needs all of the scientist and engineers and other technical types we can get, we must advance as time goes by.
It's really simple. If you want more engineers and scientists, pay them more. I used to be an engineer, but switched to a commercial job, because....it pays more. I'll gladly go back into engineering if there's opportunity for more money. All this talk about science and engineering is just funny. People are easy to motivate, and although Obama can read a teleprompter like no one else, a stump speech won't do it. It is and always has been about money.
@oterj0 Funny, you are a wisecracker. Uh, this country has quiet a few problems with reference to just doling out money. One: the national debt wil be...uh, let's see...14 TRILLION at the end of the year. Two: there is downward pressure on salaries in the engineering fields, China and India are cranking them out faster than Tasty bread, they will fill engineering needs a lot cheaper than the USA. Finally, people in this country are getting more and more retarded, even engineers.
@tickyul If we outsource everything then what value will our dollar have? Do you think India and China will do our jobs because they like being our slave? We have the best engineers in the world... I can tell right now you don't have a clue whats going on.
@Paladin1warrior The fact of the matter is The United States Of Ameritard is becoming less and less competitive in the global economy, that means a lowered quality of life for most. Remember, the BILLIONS of people that China and India have, lots more potential to produce Engineers and other professionals. Look for more and more INSOURCING as the USA as Ameritards place less and less value on education. Look at nursing, we have to import Filipinos to fill our needs for cheap nurses....yikers.
@tickyul I doubt it. For one thing I expect more deportation and less immigration when people get pissed off about high unemployment. ANd the engineers are second rate. The techs are what they really want. The doctors are third rate and a lawsuit liability.
They raise taxes on SS aka taxes on business and employment all for bullshit reasons. The run a "defecit" spend mor emoney than they have and then inflate(print) the money and detsroy lives. The taxes cause a decrease in wages, investment, employment, and standards of living and hamperer all future creation of it and then inflation kicks in with a doubling of all of the above.
it's always the same story with wealthy people: oh poor me in my large house, expensive cars and amazing vacations, those damn poor people in their tiny homes, lousy diets, and inadiquite health care are robing me blind. if it weren't for these ingrates i could spend another week in the hawai. when will these leaches stop exsisting so i can afford bigger boat?! fucking poor people! not everyone can be wealthy, poor people toil to enrich the wealthy, that's capitalism, winners and loosers.
You are a fucking liar.Almost of this country is not near the "poverty line" and those underneath the imaginary poor line are fat, have many vehicales, plasma tvs, and cell phones. Along with a computer at home and an ipod and a damn labtop Technically I'm one of them!
i make $30,000+ a year, i don't have a laptop, i own a 11 year old beat up pick up truck with 265,000 miles, i don't own a plasma screen tv and i can't afford to fix my pc (this one does not belong to me). i have a wife and child to support with another on the way, and $28 dollars in the bank. since your one of them, tell me how you fat techies can afford buy a home, pay your taxes, and provide for a family, on top of owning all these luxuries you describe.
All I hear is you complaining that you never rose to the occasion life gave you. 'Fat techies' are you describe them, spend considerable time learning important skills and there is demand for their high profile skills. All I hear you is your jealousy that other people were able to rise to the occasion. If you believe life has been unfair to you, then maybe you should start rethinking your actions. You make 30,000 a year a have another kid on the way. Great job. Don't blame others for your life.
i believe you misinterpreted my point. i'm in no way dissatisfied with my life. i'm buying a home and raising a family, which is far more enriching that a house full "nice things". my life is a good one. i'm able to provide for my family as the sole income earner enabling my wife to raise my kids, and i'm doing it in the worst economic period the nation has faced in 80 years. the question is how does one do those things AND afford a house full of luxuries. there is no fair, just life.
@uzijohn You said it feller, just take an axe and cut no matter what.....Baby Momma Bennies included. It is going to happen sooner or later, might as well get a head start on things. I think we will see riots as a result, but....oh well.
If you don't make the tough decisions early, you'll be forced to make the ugly ones later,
Long term plans don’t get you re-elected, so the future is traded for the present, this has caused an entire generation to be sold into debt slavery, its time we face the truth
@uzijohn Yes, the crooks running this country mainly worry about staying in office, kicking the can down the road is the best they can do. I really do not see much of a future for this country, more and more areas will resemble places like Detroit or Oakland. The best thing to do is find an area in this country that won't degenerate too much, major cities will be the epicenter of the national disaster.
I agree, we have a tough decade (or more) ahead, cities and states with pro-business environments will do better, half of the countries new jobs were created in "business friendly" Texas and they're aggressively pursuing companies to relocate.
I've learned REAL economics at the Mises(dot)org website, they have a Youtube page "Misesmedia" and teach Austrian economic theory, Peter Schiff, Thomas Woods Jr. and Murray Rothbard are the best speakers, Ron Paul is also involved.
@uzijohn Expect this failing country to further degenerate, possibly a major race war or an IRA type guerilla war against Big Brother. As for Texas, it is becoming more and more Mestizo, that means less and less whites...the people who have created and maintained the greatest societies in the world....yikes.
People seem so suspicious of government and bureaucracy. That is what freedom is all about, you are free to let the vultures and parasites to suck all of your personal earnings from you at the expense of your tireless labor in order to support the people. Don't you people understand the government, is like a dear and loving uncle who shows constant compassion, care and sensitivity while they squander your wealth with a cheery smile, rosy cheeks, it is for your own good, Obama loves you.
0:244 I concur . The cost of " Delivery of Service" is primarily spent on the Beuracray administering the program. at least 80% is spent on Operational.Costs i.e.( including upper management salaries.) the rest goes to the people that genuinely require funds for the most basic of needs.
...cont . 3:33 I agree that the safety net of Social Security needs to protect the integrity of the recipient, as well as the integrity of the "burdened" TAX payer...No MONEY,..No funny" )-:) The money spent by the recipients of Social Security eventually gets recycled back into the Community... Unless of course the Money is taken Off Shore, by the "well to do". so to speak. My opinion; don't blame the families who are trying to survive. Thank you
The US is absolutely screwed economically, no matter what Washington does, it is inevitable. Glad I got to enjoy the younger half of my life in the 20th century , as the 21st century....Epic Fail!!
Go ahead Gen X and Y "conservatives", vote to try and fuck most of us seniors (your Moms and Dads) out of Medicare and SS, should they need it to survive.
The US will be completely owned by China militarily and economically within the next decade or two anyway.
It's also interesting to note that if people were allowed to just take the amount of money that goes into Social Security, and put it into an index stock fund-- which is the simplest sort of investment, that is, it doesn't require any brains at all to do that-- a person who's retiring today would be getting in the neighborhood of about eight thousand dollars a month. Think about that. Eight thousand dollars a month. And it wouldn't be coming out of anybody else's pocket.
Social Security is just wrong, plain and simple. I don't care how many little old ladies spent 60 years contributing to it. It's philanthropy at the point of a gun.
A generational war is coming. The younger generation is going to revolt at paying ever-increasing taxes to subsidize the elderly's retirement.
The only way to "fix" Social Security is to phase it out.
"The problem with Social Security IS Social Security!...It's a ponzi scheme!!!"
Jonathon is absolutely dead on. Almost all of the financial pundits out there talk about "reforming" the system because it's not working right. They make surface arguments such as caps vs. rates, spending is out of control, the Democrats this or that, blah blah blah.
Who cares?! The moral argument against Social Security is superior to all economic ones just as with anything in life.
Hoenig is so right here. Social Security as a principle, is immoral. And Social Security in practice, is a Ponzi scheme! Private retirement accounts is the only rational replacement for it!
ABSOLUTELY! This is the largest ponzi scheme ever perpetuated by mankind and enforced at the point of the Government's massive gun. WE THE PEOPLE are WE THE PROBLEM. We the People are also the solution. We just aren't willing to face the truth.
Well, considering that almost every other major TV station is left-leaning then what is the problem. It is a free market. People watch what they want.
the job of a news network is to give people an unbiased, complete view of events that are happening so people can use the info to develop their own leftist or rightist opinion. it is not to try to convince people to lean left or right.
All Democrat tax increases on the rich and corporations,get passed down to the poor. The wealthy business owner & corporations aren't going to take a cut in pay. Social Security gives us a 1% return. My savings account at my bank gives me a 3% return. Bonds and stock returns 7% historically. Most Senior Citizens get about $1,000/month from Soc. Sec. If we opt out of Soc. Sec. we could retire with $4,000 per month with our own investments/savings accounts. Bad outcomes when Democrats "plan."
that is a good point, but it doesn't degrade from the fact that Fox is a rightist, biased network. i said fox is biased and right-leaning, i didn't say democrats were better.
hey nice video! my names Faith, kinda feelin bored if any1 wants to join me on cam or wana chat i will be signed on at __ PLAY-CAM...dot...COM __ my user ID there is Faith_ypnldz chat soon xx its FR33 to j0in! mwah
There may not be enough people working in the US to pay ss taxes, but hey, we've gone global. While many US citizens are going down the tubes, corp amer is raking in more profits worldwide than ever. The government will have to tax corp amer. And the same corp amer that has screwed over American workers will have to pay. If they don't... hey maybe that's what the new detention centers are really for... old poor people. p.s. the govt will tax corp amer for govt pensions and benefits 1st. :-)
who sends this this is a true thing that happens! its not a chain letter! its kinda scary at first but it really works!! paste this message into 3 comments and press ALT F4 and your crushes name will appear on the screen!!! its soo wierd
While abolishing the ponzi scheme is the best outcome, I'd be completely satisfied with a voluntary opt out provision, provided no general tax revenue could be used to improve SS solvency in the future. If I can opt out, then I will have no interest in seeing SS fail, which is the current situation. Would you support a voluntary opt out? Why or why not?
Well, I'm asking your opinion from a philosophical POV. Should an insurance/retirement system like SS be mandatory or should people be allowed to opt out?
it's simple... lowering taxes in war time causes a recession...
end the war and stop tax cuts and we will be fine in a few years in terms of finance... but put a heavy spending Obama in the White house, and so long recession and hello to something worse (if we are in Iraq...)
It's OK for you all to realize the cause & effect relationship of past decisions by Dems or Repubs. Just don't think one side deserves all the blame. They are BOTH guilty.
first off, we can't afford 1 billion a day in Iraq either. We are borrowing that money from China to fund that war. There won't be enough money in existence to support social security indefinitely. EVER!
Former Maryland Lt. Gov., issued a statement Sunday: "I respect Caroline and Teddy's decision, but I have made a different choice," she said. "While I admire Sen. Obama greatly, I have known Hillary Clinton for over 25 years and have seen firsthand how she gets results. As a woman, leader and person of deep convictions, I believe Hillary Clinton would make the best possible choice for president."
Um, republicans not only didn't help the US in WWI or WWII, they were actually helping the enemy! Dubya's grandfather Prescott not only attempted to depose FDR and turn America into a fascist regime, he financed Hitler even AFTER Pearl Harbor.
Fascism in what sense; where governments merge to control the world by force? Or where free & fair trade creates markets of distribution of clean water, food as well as clothes, shoes and medicine.
Look... I am not into control or domination or subjugation I just want my government to be as local as possible to protect me from evil and to stay out of my bedroom and business. That is why I am a Republican not a socialist one-world government Democrat.
One world govt? From the people who created the 40 hr work week, child labour laws, the clean air act, etc? Your GOP funkies have more in common with Putkin than Washington or Lincoln.
Do you need to write out equations because your Cro-magnon mind can't express thoughts in sentence form? What's fascist about wanting to end a govt run ponzi scheme?
Its one giant ponzi scheme, the money isn't even there since they used it for the war, they are just IOUs that the Federal Reserve ponzi scheme uses to devalue our currency by printing more money, the result is the collapse of the U.S. dollar, not Social Security.
I am an Accountant I have 2 years of work experience, I get paid $38k/yr,I have a stay at home wife and a son and I will be a dad in 5 months,in 2007 I paid 3k to social security and 6k taxes.I am a big supporter of the Fair Tax.I say get rid of Social Security worry about the future generations.The older generation are too stubborn to worry about us the younger people.I tell you what I will gladly pay for your social security but I refuse to put the burden on my children and grandchildren.
When was the last time you had a fire engulf your house? Never? Well then, why are we wasting money on a Fire Department in every city for? I say we abolish the Fire Departments. They are a drain of our tax money!
(sounds stupid? Well, replace "fire engulf your house" with "find yourself in poverty" and "Fire Department" with "Social Security". Both agencies serve the same purpose really -- to keep people from losing everything they own and ending up in the street)
Is that all you have for an answer? Social Security is just as vital to society as a fire department or a police force.
Are you one of those strict "constitutionalists"? I suppose you think we should relegalize slavery because the Founding Fathers didn't outlaw it in their time.
No one is advocating abandoning those in need like parentless children or the disabled. That is contrary to what a Conservative is. The Republicans have saved more lives than any other political party the world has seen. It was the Dems that tried to protect their human property. It was the Dems that filibustered the first civil rights bill written by Republicans.
Social Security is a failed outdated socialist program. The Rise Up America Plan is the closest thing to a fix that I can find
Oh, render onto me a freaking break. Where do you think will happen to those elderly & disabled people once you yank Social Security away from them? Expect them to grovel every day at the church for a chunk of stale bread?
Boy is your head in the sand.... Do you think reforming SS would stop payments to those who are currently receiving them?
Republicans stopped slavery, stopped WWI & WWII, we saved Kuwait, and freed Afghanistan and Iraq. We de-nuked N. Korea, Libya and Iran. We won the cold war... What have the leftist done except kill 180,000,000 people.
-Socialism = high taxes, high regulation, and a bankrupt Ponzi Scheme called Social Security that sucks 15% out of every working class persons paycheck.
- American Leftist hate out sourcing to the rest of the world but accuse the Republicans of having a bad reputation with other socialist governments except France, Germany England and Australia the eastern bloc and Japan S Korea should I go on?
Um, you DO know that not only did republicans NOT stop WWI or WWII, but the republicans actually FINANCED the enemy, even during times of war. Your precious Dubya's grandfather was not only plotting to wage a coup against FDR and turn America into a fascist police state like Nazi Germany, but he financed Hitler's war machine, even after Pearl Harbor.
SS can pay every claim if the government did not deregulate it. The govn't should not be allowed to take money out. SS is a big savings account contribute: now, withdraw later. You pay it so you can retire. In the 80s under republicans the act was changed. Money that you paid for SS could be used on other things. On the old plan you had 110% return investment(people dying before reciving benefits). Now there's no money left because the reps took it. It's a scam.
Capitanvolume 15 hours ago
Was reaganomics a ponzi scheme also?
TheLastOfTheFinest80 2 weeks ago
At least you can opt out of a Ponzi scheme. SS is a fraud. Even the name is deceptive - it's designed to suck in well-meaning idiots.
ComicPenius 4 months ago
SS is the biggest bunch of bullshit that ever got started...It totally allows the gov to control you. Go to Galveston county Texas, where they opted OUT of SS from the government in the early 80s and now they are thriving with retirees making much more on their investments than SS produced for them. And for those who say the stock market is bad for SS, then allow a person to invest in CDs...ha ha.....libs...you lose!
Marksnotebook 7 months ago in playlist MIX 2
@Marksnotebook Good one! The SS trust fund invests in.....................NOTHING. Why? Because there is nothing in the SS trust fund bunk worthless paper............thanks a lot ALGORE.
tickyul 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Obama takes $40billion dollars from social security.. You work for GE or Daves bake shop they tax deduct your money calling Social Security Union Tax. Dave sets on Welfare and you work. Dave lauges while he calls you a scab. You paid nothing. A federal workers own child is a excuse for govt. to deposit large sums of money in social security to make it strong as McDonalds called it a loss on the W2 form. Where is the $40billion I guess Obama has got this in the bag. politics did not pay
redviper2GAMER 8 months ago
Social Security isn't a ponzi scheme - it is a poorly run insurance company. It runs the risk of becoming a disaster given the ideas that are put forward in Washington. We outline a solution which doesn't make it a good deal, but at least it will fix the ponzi myth. FixSSNow.Org.
joetheeconomist 9 months ago
@deficithawker So would the increase in payments into the SS system include an increase in income???? If not then you are bascially admitting that this is no longer a system that pays out basically what you pay in, now it would be more like a welfare type program......gee, just what The United States of Ameritard need more of.
tickyul 10 months ago
Stand up 4 your RIGHTS Americans.~ The REPUBLICANS have been FOOLING YOU for the last 30 yrs. SOCIAL SECURITY*, (SS) , is NOT an entitlement! SS HAS A $2.6 TRILLION SURPLUS SS CAN pay every claim at least until 2030.~ SS DOES NOT increase the federal budget by one cent! Tell the REPUBLICAN GANGSTERS & THEIR WALLSTREET BANDIT FRIENDS that you will FIGHT any PRIVATIZATION OF your SS pension.~You will FIGHT ANY REDUCTION IN BENEFITS. YOU will FIGHT any change in AGE REQUIREMENT FOR SS BENEFITS!
poindexterwitkowsky 11 months ago 5
@poindexterwitkowsky Surplus my butt. The fact is the lockbox has Non fungible T-bills that cannot be sold like regular T-bills.
So where do we find the money if there is a shortfall in SS money in vs money out? Well of course we print more debt. National debt ............20 trillion by 2016.....Ameritards......fuck yeah!!!!!!
tickyul 10 months ago
@poindexterwitkowsky
MFW you are completely wrong. SS is WORSE than a ponzi scheme... atleast you aren't FORCED into a ponzi scheme.
TheMango121 1 month ago
Social Security is an insurance fund. Like any insurance fund. Do Repubs want to get rid of all insurance? All insurance is a ponzi scheme. it's all exactly the same. I've been adding to my SS funds all my life. so has everyone else. Why do the Republicans want to steal money we have already invested in SS?
Because they are goddam theives.
shellius 1 year ago
@shellius Ok, then what is your solution? Social Security will soon be regularly taking in less than it pays out. When that scenario comes to pass and changes have not been made to fix the shortcoming............the shortfall will have to come out of the General Budget.
tickyul 1 year ago
@tickyul That's cute. You think they'd keep their grubby hands off social security funds and save it for us. The first cent of a surplus that didn't go to retirees went to the general budget.
MaskedMumblr 11 months ago
@MaskedMumblr Well, President Johnson signed that change into law. Now we have a SS trust fund with basically ZERO fungible assets. I mean what do you expect, the creeps saw money they could grab....of course they took it. The SS trust fund could have had trillions in real assets such as gold, sliver, platinum, dollars, yen, Blue chip stocks, very secure real estate investment.....hehehe, that did not happen because this country is retarded and insane.
tickyul 10 months ago
@shellius Call it what you want, there are no fungible assets in Al Gore's lockbox. So we will eventually have to either make changes to the SS system or start printing Kaboodles of money....or maybe both.
tickyul 10 months ago
Social Security is a democrat scam gone mad!
bwh3200 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
you can get a comfortable life with them bbw naneedj.info
sonika763 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Why don’t u just blurt out the truth like I do...stop trying to be Politically Correct...
~!~
THE UNITED STATES MAFIA IS SIMPLY SHOVING ANOTHER TAX UP OUR ASS
~!~
& ALL the S>S> money is going to the FUCKING MEXICANS & their ANCHORE BABBIES& the 44th OUSS STAIN is the devil incarnate hell bent on destroying this ONCE GREAT COUNTRY ...thats right folks...[THE ANIMAL IN THE WHITE HOUSE ] IS ALLOWING AMERICA TO BE RAPED IN OUR COLLECTIVE ASSESS
HoodwinkedbyanAngel 1 year ago
I agree, was it not 10trillion already that The Government Borrowed from SS? that is our Money!!! We the people, and we have to pay it back to our selves? sounds like a loan to our selves form our selves, I.E Federal Reserves let us borrow our money with an interest rate and we pay it back!!!, this is ridiculous!!
briggs9187 1 year ago
@briggs9187 Exactly, they are gauranteeing a government entitlement-Social Security (debt) with a trust fund (Government Treasuries) based on government debt, that makes me feel really poorly about the future of SS.
tickyul 1 year ago
@tickyul I personally want to stop paying into it, I don't need it since I don't want it, I prefer to take that money and add it to my savings, 401k or IRA and use it for my retirement my self...but they wont let me, I hear you when you say it was set for them to guarantee income and payment to the Fed from lending us our own money.
briggs9187 1 year ago
@briggs9187 Yeah, I Agree with you totally. The Bush proposal to let people VOLUNTARILY invest a small portion of their SS into 401k type funds was a start in the right direction. The cries from special interests disintergrated any chance of even a small reform. I would prefer to have individual accounts, opened at birth, contribute up to 100k a year tax free, cannot touch it until you are 62-65 yo. This country refuses to correct massive problems that really require attention, pretty pathetic.
tickyul 1 year ago
@briggs9187 No, more like 2.6 Trillion. Do not worry, that money is safely tucked away in Al Gore's SS lockbox.
tickyul 1 year ago
Its amazing, the so called 'informers' on television are so miss educated. That fat woman was absurd but nowhere near that idiotic Englishmen," They're trying to tax success that's all they do, they want your money!!!!111" twat.
CmdrTobs 1 year ago
@CmdrTobs
Maybe it's true. After all, the govt does not need to run an insurance program for the citizenry to be insured. Consider auto insurance. In all states (maybe 1 or 2 exceptions), you are required to buy auto insurance if you drive. The govt doesn't sell auto insurance, but they make you buy it from someone who does. Why not have the federal govt require everyone to buy a minimum value annuity from whomever rather than having the govt run the annuity?
oterj0 1 year ago
@oterj0 Yep, the auto insurance argument. Key differences:
-You can't not treat people. (Hippocratic oath). They will go to ER.
-When you insure people (for better or for worse) you can't discriminate in price, like you can with an auto. Would you like women to pay 2x?
-Unlike car repair, the demand for parts (medicines & treatments) is completely inelastic (No Human 'irreparable wrecks')
These 3 factors stop a competitive private market for health insurance being like the car one.
CmdrTobs 1 year ago
You do understand the subject here is old age insurance, not health insurance, right? Anyway..
-Hippocratic oath
Hospitals can take care of poor patients with or w/o govt insurance.
-Discrimination
You can discriminate in pricing. Singles pay more per person than marrieds. Older pay more than younger. Its about risk.
-Inelasticity
Medicine isnt the only inelastic good. Food is very inelastic and its a free market. Reality belies your assertion that inelastic markets cant be free.
oterj0 1 year ago
@oterj0 Sorry it was unclear, I was responding to someone else about HC and crossed points, but to addresses your response:
- Hospitals need to bill someone for the treatment, that's ultimatly tax.
- No you can't. They have regulated bandwidth of price. But in reality women for e.g should pay like 2x as much. (much like in auto insurance men pay 2x as much).
Its In-elasticity vs cost ofc. I don't have the chars to detail the obvious. Water >> HC in inelasticity but water's cost is << HC.
CmdrTobs 1 year ago
@CmdrTobs
No worries, just got confused when I read it. In response:
Hospitals dont need to bill anyone; they choose to provide services or not. If they be obliged by oath to perform services, then they do so w/o regard to payment. Its a question for their mgmt, not Congress.
Price regulation is the problem. Why shouldnt more expensive people cost more to insure?
Agreed. Water may not be very expensive, but food is. Food is a fair analogy and the market for food is unsocialized.
oterj0 1 year ago
@oterj0
Think about that practically. A man comes in after being hit by a car. His name is not unknown. He needs $20K of care before you even know his name. You would end up with a hosp. that killed ppl bc of ID checks.
- Like I said for better or for worse. This is a whole other debate up there with 'Isn't it a waste treating people over 70...'
I disagree. The basic food to avoid death is practically free in the west. There is enough in the supermarket trash alone. There is no equal in HC.
CmdrTobs 1 year ago
Comment removed
oterj0 1 year ago
@oterj0 ah you removed it.
CmdrTobs 1 year ago
@CmdrTobs
reposted. I hit "post" accidentally and had a half finished thought.
oterj0 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@CmdrTobs
Well, if a hospital chooses not to help people without some form of ID, that's the hospital's perogative. We are also free to donate to hospitals that do help those without insurance as well as refuse to go to hospitals that don't.
Fair enough, it is another question, but it is important. No free market pricing means risky health choices are rewarded more than otherwise would be. The whole system is stressed as a result.
I guess we agree to disagree on the food/HC comparison.
oterj0 1 year ago
@CmdrTobs
If a hospital wants to require ID and/or proof of insurance prior to providing services, I support the hospital's right to do so. Likewise, if a hospital chooses to provide service for all, I support said hospital doing so. Hospitals that serve the poor can be (and are) supported by private charity.
Yes, but it's an important question. Limiting prices for insurance forces the healthy to subsidize the sick (moreso than they would otherwise). Doesn't encourage healthy living.
oterj0 1 year ago
@oterj0 ah the charity clause. The health industry is massive. Charity would not scratch the surface of costs.
A hospital that provides care after proof of ID does not work. What if a child is hit outside of school? What if your on a bus in a pile up? You are dead before they spend at least a few 100 to 1000's stabilising you. Not to mention Doctors would NEVER follow an id rule. Its like asking a marine not to 'waste' a $6m blackhawk to save his buddy... its never happening.
CmdrTobs 1 year ago
@CmdrTobs
When the govt provides everything for society, of course we shouldnt expect charity to do much. People are allowed to dissociate themselves from human suffering courtesy of the govt. In a less socialistic society, people will give more to charity. The proof is comparing average charitable contributions in the US vs Europe. Charity is better for the giver and receiver than the impersonal govt teet.
Doctors can choose to implement an ID rule or not. I dont need to make that decision.
oterj0 1 year ago
@oterj0 Ok, I can't spell this out anymore. A Dr MUST render assistance immediate to anyone who needs it anywhere/any-time. If you collapsed at a restaurant and a Dr dining next to you did nothing that would be actually illegal in many countries. So it would rest on hospital management to impose a rule, which ofc no doctor could follow without going to prison in many countries or be struck off an accredited register in EVERY other. So that can NEVER be a solution to 'dealing with' the uninsured.
CmdrTobs 1 year ago
@CmdrTobs
Under the current constraints of law, that is true. What I'm suggesting is that the current laws are wrong, designed to further the dependency on govt for solutions. A hospital must provide services, therefore, it must incur cost without discrimination and without recourse for the uninsured, therefore, it must go to the govt to recuperate the cost. The govt is the beginning and the end. It exists to further its own existence, not to solve problems.
oterj0 1 year ago
@oterj0 ahhhrrrgghhhh
Ok, one last time.
-Its not just the law its an oath. The oath is a few 1000yrs old, way before 'government'. It's taken Day 1 of med school. If you don't take it they don't teach you.
Lets say you remove all criminal penalties.... then a doctor would STILL loose accreditation. That is from a private body. Without accreditation a doctor could not get insurance or sit the regular exams to keep up with the latest treatments. In short, they're fucked. (1/2)
CmdrTobs 1 year ago
@oterj0 (2/2) you would have an easier time getting to priests to report to the police after confession.
CmdrTobs 1 year ago
@CmdrTobs
Then the problem is solved. Govt need not do anything, because oath (and the fear of losing accredidation) binds doctors to provide service to the poor. What more is there to talk about?
oterj0 1 year ago
@oterj0 Wow, you get it now. That's how it did work in the past. Hospitals now days want 'residents' and they want to pass on the cost in helping these people. So they pass it on to the government or go bust. So you would have America would go back to the 1700's?
You talk about 'natural equilibrium' do you know what that is? It's people dying at 40-50 while some live very comfortably and get every need attended too. If you want that move to somalia.
CmdrTobs 1 year ago
@CmdrTobs
The major function that govt serves in helping improve the lives of people is providing order. Life in America is better than life in Somalia because we have an orderly society, not because we have XYZ options in our HC plans. Cuba has free HC, but one would be hardpressed to argue the standard of living is better there. Just, orderly society makes for constructive behavior that helps society at large, not programs.
oterj0 1 year ago
@oterj0 I know why Somalia has a worse standard of living. The point is you can truly be free. Most business hire their own police force. Its the libertarians dream. You could start your fantasy hospital there :)
About your interpretation of government; You can hold that interpretation without evidence if you like.
CmdrTobs 1 year ago
@CmdrTobs Big deal, most big business in the USA have to hire their own security force, or, they would see half of their inventory walk out the door. This country is so full of ciminals, you lose whatever is not bolted into the cement.
tickyul 1 year ago
@oterj0 You do realise charitable funding is highly variable. Typically depressed ones donations fall of a cliff. By telling people to rely on charity. You are doing 2 things: -You be letting down people (starve / die of illness) in hard times unnecessarily.
- Your increasing costs, charity ignores preventative medicine. Only America has people on kidney dialysis in 'Emergancy rooms'
This is one of the reasons America spends a massive 16% of GDP on HC.
CmdrTobs 1 year ago
@CmdrTobs
No, America has people on dialysis in emergency rooms, because its illegal to not provide HC to these people. Its because of the govt that people do not value preventative care. Why should they? It costs money, whereas in the instance they have major health issues, the hospital will be legally obliged to help them. If we must have that system, then we MUST have legal penalties for not having insurance. I prefer no mandates on hospital or individual, but its both or neither, not half.
oterj0 1 year ago
@oterj0 Wrong, wrong & wrong. You see, you are actually doing what Socialists and Communist do. You are making sweeping assumptions about ppls behaviour and psychology. If this were the case, why is a America the fattest nation on earth and single government payer countries ALL healthier? Why so many fat people? After all ER, is not actually treatment and if you do survive a trip you're essentially bankrupted.
So why so many fatties? Because your theory is BS. People are irrational & greedy.
CmdrTobs 1 year ago
@CmdrTobs
Are you telling me that short term saving is not the rationale that leads people to avoid getting insurance? Its not a sweeping assumption.
While I agree that weight is the major problem with Americans' health, youre assuming that HC has something to do with it. Americans are fat because food is too cheap. Euros pay through the nose for food courtesy of VAT. Maybe we should scrap this HC talk and just implement a VAT. Good health and good HC are not the same thing.
oterj0 1 year ago
@oterj0 No, Worng and wrong.
Reread. At not one point did I say the weight of Americans proves anything about American healthcare, what the hell would I be saying, doctors are injecting fat? lolz. What I am saying is if the logic you outlined was true Americans already would be taking better care of themselves, i.e NOT the fattest country on earth.
Britain has 17.% VAT . But due to import and other factors Britain has some of the most expensive food. (0/1)
CmdrTobs 1 year ago
@oterj0 I know this first hand. France has loads more farmland everything is fresher and cheaper. Not to mention the tax on alcohol in the UK is insane. But guess what. We are the 2nd fatest nation on earth. And if you isloate scottland.... it is fatter than America.
So why? Well. Britain is th 51st state. It has for obvious reasons readily imported American based fast food & culture. We make all the same mistakes the US made in diet education and habbits.
more (2/3)
CmdrTobs 1 year ago
Europe(not uk) regulate the fck out of places like McDonalds, They even ban adverts aimed at kids too that have kids addicted.
Low VAT is the BEST thing about the US, and Right wing properganda tanks like the 'cato institute' have convinced people like you to adopted in my opinion the WORST thing about Europe.
The 51st state idea holds for a whole string of statistical gulfs between Europe and Britain; teenage age pregnancies is another example.
CmdrTobs 1 year ago
@oterj0 Charity is a just in time measure. People only become aware and give when they SEE the hardship. Nobody gets homeless help as they're loosing there house, only whey the have lost it.
What if all the money pouring into Hati was given years ago in the form infrastructure projects? A lot of African agriculture is killed off by free grain aid. All the problems you apply to 'government' (that are bogus in most cases) are prevalent in large scale charity.
CmdrTobs 1 year ago
@CmdrTobs
Stepping back from this specific issue, the problem I have with govt is that the goal is the futile attempt to fight the equilibrium distribution of resources. By fighting the most efficient path to equilibrium, govt forces the system to take a less efficient path. We arrive at the same point, but with a smaller pie for all. Govt trying to solve HC means we require care for all in hospitals, which means people dont pay for prevention, which exacerbates the system. It's futility.
oterj0 1 year ago
@oterj0 The numbers in way support your theory. America is 1# in HC spending.
Even if you subtracted emergency room costs America still spends more than any country on earth. In fact the Government contribution is more than Frances per person. That has a much healthy population by all facts and figures.
By your assumptions:
- The French should be less healthy as there is no 'stick' for being unhealthy
Yet the opposite is true.
- The French should pay more.
Yet the opposite is true.
CmdrTobs 1 year ago
@oterj0 Judging by that insane comment I see you have decided to pick a hard libertarian 'freedom to choose' position. I advice you to be weary and pick positions that work in reality , rather than make reality subscribe to your theory.
You seem like an intelligent person but what you just said was mind blowing stupid. That's the problem with rigid ideology over continuous objective analysis of the evidence of a given situation. Rigid theories are for the intellectually lazy.
CmdrTobs 1 year ago
@CmdrTobs
I am not rigidly ideological. Its rigidly ideological to assume that private charity could never meet the needs of the poor. I dont know if you fall in this camp, but Ive actually had someone respond that we should strive to be a society where charity is moot. I don't want to live in a society where compassion is moot. The govt is impersonal and does not provide the lessons of humility and generousity that charity does.
PS
Should I be weary or wary? I'm not running a marathon...:)
oterj0 1 year ago
@oterj0 Its not an assumption I KNOW. If charity could, why is there 100,000 children a year dying from beriberi?? How comes people are still starving in Africa and Asia? In fact, how comes there is ANY homelessness in west?
You are an ideologue of the highest magnitude, if this was another debate I would be enduring your diatribe on '3rd word slackers living of hand outs'. But when it supports your agenda it 'Works!!'
Please, do some more reading. Keep your mind open. You're still young.
CmdrTobs 1 year ago
@CmdrTobs
I can make the same statements about govt. Neither govt nor charity will end human suffering. It's the human condition, probably designed to encourage us to be more compassionate. Govt is the less efficient path to the same end.
Yeah, yeah, go ahead and assume time will make my heart and my brain equally soft. I am very comfortable with my compassion for my fellow man and as the years pass, I get more anti-govt. I always test ideas and do change bad ones. I think you're projecting.
oterj0 1 year ago
@oterj0 ... More vapid quasi religious assumptions used to patch over the flaws in your broken theory.
The idea of nationhood rather than city-hood. Single government rather than feudal selflessness is why suffering has practically ended in the west compared to traditional zero government tribal societies. It is no accident that the most powerful technologies all happened since people started mutually supporting each other under the idea of nation.
You 'end' provably ended in the 1700's.
CmdrTobs 1 year ago
@oterj0 I agree with you, big changes needed for SS. I think a good idea would be to have individual SS accounts set up at birth, you can start putting in (your family can contribute) at birth, no withdrawls until 62........over 6 decades of saving...wow. As of now the thing is truly just a Ponzi Scheme.
tickyul 1 year ago
@tickyul
Yes, the problem will be that no one receiving SS benefits will ever support ending the ponzi scheme. While you'd think the contributors would want to end it, it's taken away via withholding before people even realize they earned the money. As far as a govt program goes, SS was designed well, because it's nearly impossible politically to alter. It will either bankrupt us or maybe the boomers will wake up and do something good for the country for once.
oterj0 1 year ago
@oterj0 Uh.......Uh, this system must be changed for it to survive. The 2.5 trillion in special SS t-bills have the Stench of Vegas all over them. Why is it that this country cannot make any logical needed changes anymore, beyond pathetic. The insane people running this failing country mainly care about staying in power and establishing their ideology.....no matter how toxic it is for the country. I feel that Ameritards deserve all of the crap coming down the pike, it will hit them in the face.
tickyul 1 year ago
Paulocbn-Your right! Alexis is hot!
DaddyFreddie 1 year ago
The fundamental difference between Social Security and Bernie Madoff's ponzi scheme is that the victims of Madoff had a choice.
Pootstank4 1 year ago
cut benefit by 110%, make the fuckers that abuse the system pay back.
Visfen 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Watch youtube video: The Health Care Bill: What they DON'T want you to know!
wethepeopleUSA2012 2 years ago
WTF>!! I'm so fucking poor. I made 16,000 last yrs. I believe I'm under the poverty line but I'm still am able to own my own car, 1995 Camry, but its still a car. I pay my own rent and bills. I have money to go out to bars and smoke cigarettes. I paid for my own community college with no Pell grant money at all. Still I'm fine.... I don't understand the big deal.
dothisdrug 2 years ago
hello doth, - If U R single, then so-called Poverty Level is about $11,000/yr DA!? - Makes No sense,- the CONGRESS $Bails the Criminals whom caused the Economic Terrorist CRISIS,- and do next to Nothing to help the U.S. Citizens whon are hurting the most!? Sounds like U R a positve person, and doing o'k. - Keep it up. Have a gr*t 2010. - jw
jward52 2 years ago
i see alot of starving people and homeless, some people just really cant work. also prisons will fill up.
they gotta stop the billions on space programs
and give it to ss
lllwastelll 2 years ago
How about stop space program and SS. We don't need either.
oterj0 2 years ago
@oterj0 Stop the space program.....huh? Man pushes boundaries, this is what advances our society. Remember Nicolosa Tesla and Benjamin Franklin? You may not understand the need to learn more and more about the universe, but, trust me there is a benefit when we do.
tickyul 1 year ago
@tickyul
You may not understand the need to give me a bunch of money from the federal treasury, but trust me, there is a benefit to it. Sorry, that's not a good enough argument to keep the space program.
oterj0 1 year ago
@oterj0 I'm not sure exactly where the conversation started between you guys but Space Program is very important to any nation that wants to excel in the economic growth. You have to thank space programs from helping us develop satellite for our GPS, Internet, etc. The thing is 19th century scientists had no clue how electromagnets would be useful but almost everything electrical probably has one. Research is the basis for development of industry, and space is the next step of the journey.
Achilles9924 1 year ago
@Achilles9924
you can have fundamental research without a space program. Sure, something good will come out of spending 10s of billions a year, but that doesn't mean it was the most cost effective way to get that technology.
oterj0 1 year ago
@oterj0 Oh, great....a member of the Flat Earth Society. Don't you value science and the advances that it brings to society?? I mean, people who are at the top 2 percent in intelligence go into these fields (science) at do things that make life better for humans. The space program has a lot of high level scientists working on things that will ADVANCE the human race. Do not be sooo short sighted.
tickyul 1 year ago
@tickyul
imagine if the world's smartest people worked in for profit industries instead of the govt. How much more economic activity could this country create if we didn't have the brain drain that is govt bureaucracy.
oterj0 1 year ago
@oterj0 Well, now you are bringing up a different point. Lots of Scientists and engineers toil away for years doing work that pushes society forward. Maybe I could side with your argument if you meant that the technical people at Nasa should be doing their thing in the private sector, eliminating the excess bureaucrats is good too. But, the Usa needs all of the scientist and engineers and other technical types we can get, we must advance as time goes by.
tickyul 1 year ago
@tickyul
It's really simple. If you want more engineers and scientists, pay them more. I used to be an engineer, but switched to a commercial job, because....it pays more. I'll gladly go back into engineering if there's opportunity for more money. All this talk about science and engineering is just funny. People are easy to motivate, and although Obama can read a teleprompter like no one else, a stump speech won't do it. It is and always has been about money.
oterj0 1 year ago
@oterj0 Funny, you are a wisecracker. Uh, this country has quiet a few problems with reference to just doling out money. One: the national debt wil be...uh, let's see...14 TRILLION at the end of the year. Two: there is downward pressure on salaries in the engineering fields, China and India are cranking them out faster than Tasty bread, they will fill engineering needs a lot cheaper than the USA. Finally, people in this country are getting more and more retarded, even engineers.
tickyul 1 year ago
@tickyul If we outsource everything then what value will our dollar have? Do you think India and China will do our jobs because they like being our slave? We have the best engineers in the world... I can tell right now you don't have a clue whats going on.
Paladin1warrior 1 year ago
@Paladin1warrior The fact of the matter is The United States Of Ameritard is becoming less and less competitive in the global economy, that means a lowered quality of life for most. Remember, the BILLIONS of people that China and India have, lots more potential to produce Engineers and other professionals. Look for more and more INSOURCING as the USA as Ameritards place less and less value on education. Look at nursing, we have to import Filipinos to fill our needs for cheap nurses....yikers.
tickyul 1 year ago
@tickyul I doubt it. For one thing I expect more deportation and less immigration when people get pissed off about high unemployment. ANd the engineers are second rate. The techs are what they really want. The doctors are third rate and a lawsuit liability.
Paladin1warrior 1 year ago
They raise taxes on SS aka taxes on business and employment all for bullshit reasons. The run a "defecit" spend mor emoney than they have and then inflate(print) the money and detsroy lives. The taxes cause a decrease in wages, investment, employment, and standards of living and hamperer all future creation of it and then inflation kicks in with a doubling of all of the above.
deltapunk21 2 years ago
it's always the same story with wealthy people: oh poor me in my large house, expensive cars and amazing vacations, those damn poor people in their tiny homes, lousy diets, and inadiquite health care are robing me blind. if it weren't for these ingrates i could spend another week in the hawai. when will these leaches stop exsisting so i can afford bigger boat?! fucking poor people! not everyone can be wealthy, poor people toil to enrich the wealthy, that's capitalism, winners and loosers.
darththc 2 years ago
You are a fucking liar.Almost of this country is not near the "poverty line" and those underneath the imaginary poor line are fat, have many vehicales, plasma tvs, and cell phones. Along with a computer at home and an ipod and a damn labtop Technically I'm one of them!
deltapunk21 2 years ago
i make $30,000+ a year, i don't have a laptop, i own a 11 year old beat up pick up truck with 265,000 miles, i don't own a plasma screen tv and i can't afford to fix my pc (this one does not belong to me). i have a wife and child to support with another on the way, and $28 dollars in the bank. since your one of them, tell me how you fat techies can afford buy a home, pay your taxes, and provide for a family, on top of owning all these luxuries you describe.
darththc 2 years ago
All I hear is you complaining that you never rose to the occasion life gave you. 'Fat techies' are you describe them, spend considerable time learning important skills and there is demand for their high profile skills. All I hear you is your jealousy that other people were able to rise to the occasion. If you believe life has been unfair to you, then maybe you should start rethinking your actions. You make 30,000 a year a have another kid on the way. Great job. Don't blame others for your life.
HapaLife 2 years ago
i believe you misinterpreted my point. i'm in no way dissatisfied with my life. i'm buying a home and raising a family, which is far more enriching that a house full "nice things". my life is a good one. i'm able to provide for my family as the sole income earner enabling my wife to raise my kids, and i'm doing it in the worst economic period the nation has faced in 80 years. the question is how does one do those things AND afford a house full of luxuries. there is no fair, just life.
darththc 2 years ago
Cut all benefits by at least one third,
This should have been done 20 years ago,
I would also raid congresses retirement fund, yes it's too small to help, but it's just the principal
uzijohn 2 years ago
@uzijohn You said it feller, just take an axe and cut no matter what.....Baby Momma Bennies included. It is going to happen sooner or later, might as well get a head start on things. I think we will see riots as a result, but....oh well.
tickyul 1 year ago
@tickyul,
If you don't make the tough decisions early, you'll be forced to make the ugly ones later,
Long term plans don’t get you re-elected, so the future is traded for the present, this has caused an entire generation to be sold into debt slavery, its time we face the truth
uzijohn 1 year ago
@uzijohn Yes, the crooks running this country mainly worry about staying in office, kicking the can down the road is the best they can do. I really do not see much of a future for this country, more and more areas will resemble places like Detroit or Oakland. The best thing to do is find an area in this country that won't degenerate too much, major cities will be the epicenter of the national disaster.
tickyul 1 year ago
@tickyul,
I agree, we have a tough decade (or more) ahead, cities and states with pro-business environments will do better, half of the countries new jobs were created in "business friendly" Texas and they're aggressively pursuing companies to relocate.
I've learned REAL economics at the Mises(dot)org website, they have a Youtube page "Misesmedia" and teach Austrian economic theory, Peter Schiff, Thomas Woods Jr. and Murray Rothbard are the best speakers, Ron Paul is also involved.
uzijohn 1 year ago
@uzijohn Expect this failing country to further degenerate, possibly a major race war or an IRA type guerilla war against Big Brother. As for Texas, it is becoming more and more Mestizo, that means less and less whites...the people who have created and maintained the greatest societies in the world....yikes.
tickyul 11 months ago
Just end social security and be done with it...
BStudmuffiin 2 years ago
People seem so suspicious of government and bureaucracy. That is what freedom is all about, you are free to let the vultures and parasites to suck all of your personal earnings from you at the expense of your tireless labor in order to support the people. Don't you people understand the government, is like a dear and loving uncle who shows constant compassion, care and sensitivity while they squander your wealth with a cheery smile, rosy cheeks, it is for your own good, Obama loves you.
toliveindiscontent 2 years ago 2
0:244 I concur . The cost of " Delivery of Service" is primarily spent on the Beuracray administering the program. at least 80% is spent on Operational.Costs i.e.( including upper management salaries.) the rest goes to the people that genuinely require funds for the most basic of needs.
phfrankh 2 years ago
...cont . 3:33 I agree that the safety net of Social Security needs to protect the integrity of the recipient, as well as the integrity of the "burdened" TAX payer...No MONEY,..No funny" )-:) The money spent by the recipients of Social Security eventually gets recycled back into the Community... Unless of course the Money is taken Off Shore, by the "well to do". so to speak. My opinion; don't blame the families who are trying to survive. Thank you
phfrankh 2 years ago
that alexis chic is hot
paulocbn 2 years ago 3
the guy that said the least had the most interesting things to say.
McSav187 3 years ago
Yeah, Social Security is a ponzi scheme.
sgobserver 3 years ago 3
@sgobserver
And you'll be right there at the nearest Soc. Sec. office on your 67th birthday, DEMANDING your check.
mhirtes12 1 year ago
thats right,THE US will be in danger owned by CHINA..!,I am ready with mandarin from 2 an half!hi..,ironically!
dgezta 3 years ago
The US is absolutely screwed economically, no matter what Washington does, it is inevitable. Glad I got to enjoy the younger half of my life in the 20th century , as the 21st century....Epic Fail!!
Go ahead Gen X and Y "conservatives", vote to try and fuck most of us seniors (your Moms and Dads) out of Medicare and SS, should they need it to survive.
The US will be completely owned by China militarily and economically within the next decade or two anyway.
Better learn Mandarin!!
ph1sts 3 years ago
"epic fail" ...old idiot talking like a young idiot.
naderjunction 3 years ago
It's also interesting to note that if people were allowed to just take the amount of money that goes into Social Security, and put it into an index stock fund-- which is the simplest sort of investment, that is, it doesn't require any brains at all to do that-- a person who's retiring today would be getting in the neighborhood of about eight thousand dollars a month. Think about that. Eight thousand dollars a month. And it wouldn't be coming out of anybody else's pocket.
TELEVISIONARCHIVES 3 years ago
Social Security is just wrong, plain and simple. I don't care how many little old ladies spent 60 years contributing to it. It's philanthropy at the point of a gun.
A generational war is coming. The younger generation is going to revolt at paying ever-increasing taxes to subsidize the elderly's retirement.
The only way to "fix" Social Security is to phase it out.
DyShez 3 years ago
"The problem with Social Security IS Social Security!...It's a ponzi scheme!!!"
Jonathon is absolutely dead on. Almost all of the financial pundits out there talk about "reforming" the system because it's not working right. They make surface arguments such as caps vs. rates, spending is out of control, the Democrats this or that, blah blah blah.
Who cares?! The moral argument against Social Security is superior to all economic ones just as with anything in life.
DyShez 3 years ago
Hoenig is so right here. Social Security as a principle, is immoral. And Social Security in practice, is a Ponzi scheme! Private retirement accounts is the only rational replacement for it!
DogmaFight 3 years ago 3
ABSOLUTELY! This is the largest ponzi scheme ever perpetuated by mankind and enforced at the point of the Government's massive gun. WE THE PEOPLE are WE THE PROBLEM. We the People are also the solution. We just aren't willing to face the truth.
DyShez 3 years ago 3
Fox is the most right-wing, republican, opinionated news network ever to be commisioned. Has anyone else noticed this.
COBMIMDDS30STMJHEAA 3 years ago
Well, considering that almost every other major TV station is left-leaning then what is the problem. It is a free market. People watch what they want.
tedfreeway 3 years ago
Not having an orgasm whenever Dubya appears in public is not "left-leaning."
PubliusAfricanus 3 years ago
the job of a news network is to give people an unbiased, complete view of events that are happening so people can use the info to develop their own leftist or rightist opinion. it is not to try to convince people to lean left or right.
COBMIMDDS30STMJHEAA 3 years ago
All Democrat tax increases on the rich and corporations,get passed down to the poor. The wealthy business owner & corporations aren't going to take a cut in pay. Social Security gives us a 1% return. My savings account at my bank gives me a 3% return. Bonds and stock returns 7% historically. Most Senior Citizens get about $1,000/month from Soc. Sec. If we opt out of Soc. Sec. we could retire with $4,000 per month with our own investments/savings accounts. Bad outcomes when Democrats "plan."
dove1004 3 years ago
that is a good point, but it doesn't degrade from the fact that Fox is a rightist, biased network. i said fox is biased and right-leaning, i didn't say democrats were better.
COBMIMDDS30STMJHEAA 3 years ago
Yes my friend...Millions of us know this! We will not let them win!
bygonejohn 3 years ago
oh waa! "I have to pay a tax to help my fellow man" boo hoo! waaa waaa! cry me a fucking river!
rad4life1 3 years ago
i enjoy propaganda for idiot assholes.
headachehaver 3 years ago
Morons and thieves
aint that the truth
TijoKJose 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
hey nice video! my names Faith, kinda feelin bored if any1 wants to join me on cam or wana chat i will be signed on at __ PLAY-CAM...dot...COM __ my user ID there is Faith_ypnldz chat soon xx its FR33 to j0in! mwah
gerber2022 3 years ago
There may not be enough people working in the US to pay ss taxes, but hey, we've gone global. While many US citizens are going down the tubes, corp amer is raking in more profits worldwide than ever. The government will have to tax corp amer. And the same corp amer that has screwed over American workers will have to pay. If they don't... hey maybe that's what the new detention centers are really for... old poor people. p.s. the govt will tax corp amer for govt pensions and benefits 1st. :-)
CynNichol 3 years ago
Social Security is a tax, nothing else.
mongobobo 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
who sends this this is a true thing that happens! its not a chain letter! its kinda scary at first but it really works!! paste this message into 3 comments and press ALT F4 and your crushes name will appear on the screen!!! its soo wierd
royalman33 3 years ago
yepyep abolish the social security and see what happens :D
Darusdei 3 years ago
Replace it with a mandatory private system and the world will change... starting with the working poor and middle-class becoming rich.
Of course you have to work...
JeffersDodge 3 years ago
Yeah, you really dont sound like a ass now.
Wouldnt be SOOO great to link the social security up with todays stock market.
Lobos222 2 years ago
..it is being "abolished" via INFLATION ;-)
the taxation is a joke!
America is so broke, all taxes aren´t even enough to cover 53 Trillion Dollars of debt!
If America doesn´t abolish the FED, the game might soon be over.
blattmacher 3 years ago
@Darusdei
While abolishing the ponzi scheme is the best outcome, I'd be completely satisfied with a voluntary opt out provision, provided no general tax revenue could be used to improve SS solvency in the future. If I can opt out, then I will have no interest in seeing SS fail, which is the current situation. Would you support a voluntary opt out? Why or why not?
oterj0 1 year ago
@oterj0, Well my opinions doesnt really matter since im not a u.s. citizen.
and if one must draw a conclusion, these "news" that you americans have is no place to look any information :D
Darusdei 1 year ago
@Darusdei
Well, I'm asking your opinion from a philosophical POV. Should an insurance/retirement system like SS be mandatory or should people be allowed to opt out?
oterj0 1 year ago
@Darusdei
Sadly, you have a point.
mhirtes12 1 year ago
I have an idea, save for your own damn retirement freeloaders.
genus3041 3 years ago
it's simple... lowering taxes in war time causes a recession...
end the war and stop tax cuts and we will be fine in a few years in terms of finance... but put a heavy spending Obama in the White house, and so long recession and hello to something worse (if we are in Iraq...)
cowboycarl04 3 years ago
Congress and the Senate have paid into social security since 1986.
careylowell 3 years ago
It's OK for you all to realize the cause & effect relationship of past decisions by Dems or Repubs. Just don't think one side deserves all the blame. They are BOTH guilty.
RodCornholio 3 years ago 2
You can't fix it. It's a pyramid scheme.
benjleeru 4 years ago
If we can afford one billion a day in Iraq, we can afford to prop up SS.
careylowell 3 years ago
first off, we can't afford 1 billion a day in Iraq either. We are borrowing that money from China to fund that war. There won't be enough money in existence to support social security indefinitely. EVER!
benjleeru 3 years ago
@benjleeru .
We could put Bernie Madoff in charge of SS. He's proven his abilities in managing ponzi/pyramid schemes.
oterj0 1 year ago
The Subprime Mortgage Crisis is also a Ponzi Scheme.
XionXXXX 4 years ago
Moron
firmitas68 3 years ago
Kathleen KENNEDY Townsend, SUPPORTS HILLARY
Former Maryland Lt. Gov., issued a statement Sunday: "I respect Caroline and Teddy's decision, but I have made a different choice," she said. "While I admire Sen. Obama greatly, I have known Hillary Clinton for over 25 years and have seen firsthand how she gets results. As a woman, leader and person of deep convictions, I believe Hillary Clinton would make the best possible choice for president."
WHY IT DID NOT GET MEDIA COVERAGE ?
loismarill 4 years ago
Um, republicans not only didn't help the US in WWI or WWII, they were actually helping the enemy! Dubya's grandfather Prescott not only attempted to depose FDR and turn America into a fascist regime, he financed Hitler even AFTER Pearl Harbor.
mhirtes12 4 years ago
FOX = Tool of FASCIST FUTURE
michael2B 4 years ago
Throughout history Socialism has always transformed itself into a Fascist Government. USSR, Nazi Germany, Iran, Iraq, Japan, China.
Never has a socialist country ever succeeded and all fascist governments have evolved from socialist governments.
Conservative economic policies have proved to be the most compassionate economic model in the history of the world.
HitleryClinton 4 years ago
So well since GLobalism is just socialism for capitalists we must all be headed for fascism
michael2B 4 years ago
Fascism in what sense; where governments merge to control the world by force? Or where free & fair trade creates markets of distribution of clean water, food as well as clothes, shoes and medicine.
Look... I am not into control or domination or subjugation I just want my government to be as local as possible to protect me from evil and to stay out of my bedroom and business. That is why I am a Republican not a socialist one-world government Democrat.
HitleryClinton 4 years ago
One world govt? From the people who created the 40 hr work week, child labour laws, the clean air act, etc? Your GOP funkies have more in common with Putkin than Washington or Lincoln.
careylowell 3 years ago
@michael2B
Do you need to write out equations because your Cro-magnon mind can't express thoughts in sentence form? What's fascist about wanting to end a govt run ponzi scheme?
oterj0 1 year ago
"If you're in the luckiest 1 per cent of humanity, you owe it to the rest of humanity to think about the other 99 per cent."
-- Warren Buffett
mhirtes12 4 years ago
He does and we do.... but not by compulsion.
HitleryClinton 4 years ago
Its one giant ponzi scheme, the money isn't even there since they used it for the war, they are just IOUs that the Federal Reserve ponzi scheme uses to devalue our currency by printing more money, the result is the collapse of the U.S. dollar, not Social Security.
XionXXXX 4 years ago
I am an Accountant I have 2 years of work experience, I get paid $38k/yr,I have a stay at home wife and a son and I will be a dad in 5 months,in 2007 I paid 3k to social security and 6k taxes.I am a big supporter of the Fair Tax.I say get rid of Social Security worry about the future generations.The older generation are too stubborn to worry about us the younger people.I tell you what I will gladly pay for your social security but I refuse to put the burden on my children and grandchildren.
sakiusad 4 years ago
Dear Idiot,
When was the last time you had a fire engulf your house? Never? Well then, why are we wasting money on a Fire Department in every city for? I say we abolish the Fire Departments. They are a drain of our tax money!
(sounds stupid? Well, replace "fire engulf your house" with "find yourself in poverty" and "Fire Department" with "Social Security". Both agencies serve the same purpose really -- to keep people from losing everything they own and ending up in the street)
mhirtes12 4 years ago
Dear Stupid,
Learn math then learn about the U.S. Constitution...
MyMilitary 4 years ago
Is that all you have for an answer? Social Security is just as vital to society as a fire department or a police force.
Are you one of those strict "constitutionalists"? I suppose you think we should relegalize slavery because the Founding Fathers didn't outlaw it in their time.
mhirtes12 4 years ago
No one is advocating abandoning those in need like parentless children or the disabled. That is contrary to what a Conservative is. The Republicans have saved more lives than any other political party the world has seen. It was the Dems that tried to protect their human property. It was the Dems that filibustered the first civil rights bill written by Republicans.
Social Security is a failed outdated socialist program. The Rise Up America Plan is the closest thing to a fix that I can find
ReformSocialSecurity 4 years ago
Oh, render onto me a freaking break. Where do you think will happen to those elderly & disabled people once you yank Social Security away from them? Expect them to grovel every day at the church for a chunk of stale bread?
Republicans COST lives, not save them!
mhirtes12 4 years ago
Boy is your head in the sand.... Do you think reforming SS would stop payments to those who are currently receiving them?
Republicans stopped slavery, stopped WWI & WWII, we saved Kuwait, and freed Afghanistan and Iraq. We de-nuked N. Korea, Libya and Iran. We won the cold war... What have the leftist done except kill 180,000,000 people.
HitleryClinton 4 years ago
With a name like "HitleryClinton", everyone already knows what a biased idiot you really are 9not to mention unoriginal).
mhirtes12 4 years ago
With all the nobility I try to convey to you you still resort to personal attacks.....
Amazing and typical... when out done or pushed up against the wall leftist resort to personal attacks....
HitleryClinton 4 years ago
Take a deep breasth and think what you just stated..
Republicans started the Civil War
- Canada and swine flu stopped WW1
- Russia ended ww2
- Nkorea still has nukes
- Wars not won in Afghanistan/Iraq
- GOP - has ruined the American economy, the American world reputation, collapased the US dollar ........ Rep are many things surely not dreamers????
michael2B 4 years ago
-Socialism = high taxes, high regulation, and a bankrupt Ponzi Scheme called Social Security that sucks 15% out of every working class persons paycheck.
- American Leftist hate out sourcing to the rest of the world but accuse the Republicans of having a bad reputation with other socialist governments except France, Germany England and Australia the eastern bloc and Japan S Korea should I go on?
HitleryClinton 4 years ago 2
-So what you are saying is Slavery is good?
-It does not surprise me that you would stick up for mother russia that killed 100,000,000 innocent people
-N Korea has Nukes because of ill Clinton
-Democracy reigns in Afghanistan and Iraq. More people die every year in the streets of LA SF & NY.
HitleryClinton 4 years ago
Um, you DO know that not only did republicans NOT stop WWI or WWII, but the republicans actually FINANCED the enemy, even during times of war. Your precious Dubya's grandfather was not only plotting to wage a coup against FDR and turn America into a fascist police state like Nazi Germany, but he financed Hitler's war machine, even after Pearl Harbor.
mhirtes12 4 years ago