Social Security, a retrospective
Top Comments
Video Responses
All Comments (32)
-
@wesrackley Worse, the whole country would be bankrupt and uncompetitive. Think Greece and Portugal. Almost everyone works for union "jobs" and the companies are going bankrupt due to the uncompetitiveness of the lazy and feckless labor forces. No one wants to work because they are guaranteed a wage as long as they show up.
Union greed for unearned money is the worse kind of greed. It ruins peoples work ethic, self esteem and ultimately leaves them unemployed and unemployable.
-
@wesrackley Its to bad that you feel that old people living with their families is a burden. So sad.
Unions are a relic of the past. We will see their extinction in our lifetime because they are no longer needed in the modern world of high tech jobs. Unions only help the unemployable, lazy, leaches of society get "jobs" and their union bosses get fat unearned pay checks.
Only you can increase your earned income. Only I can increase mine, by working harder, smarter, better and more efficiently.
-
@XCritonX I wonder what condition the SS liability would be in if people had been working for the last 30-40 years for wages based on contracts derived from collective bargaining?
-
Economic rationalism is the Ponzi scheme. Relying on the invisible hand of greed to heal all Ills. This economic train of thought is whats wrong with America first and foremost.
-
@XCritonX Look at it from the old person's perspective. Put yourself in their shoes. How would feel about becoming a burden to your family. The indignity after an independent life would be unbearable. So sad. We should do more to help people retire with dignity and peace of mind not less. We should be strengthening Union participation and increasing income on the organic level. The root of the problem is not entitlements. It is a system guided by greed and not compassion.
-
I think this is your best video libertypen!
-
The ghosts of FDR and LBJ didn't like this video.
-
@CTR831 The government's purpose is to protect our rights from people who would take them away. The state isn't supposed to give us anything, just protect those things which we already have.
The point of my question it that the government is constrained to only perform the actions outlined in the constitution. Military defense? Constitutional. Police? Constitutional. Building roads? Constitutional. Social security? Not constitutional.
-
@shamgar001 ... From the point that they are elected by the people and are supposed to be for the people... I don’t mean to be rude though your question does sound peculiar; I don’t understand your reason for your question? do you work for the government? Aren’t the government meant to protect the people that is why people pay taxes? Else they do not belong there.
In reality back when SS was invented 90% or more of old people would have lived with their families when they got old. Now 90% go to government run old people warehouses. Why? Because their families have been sold on the idea that old people are the governments responsibility.
XCritonX 1 year ago 44
Government should not be in the business of engineering a "happy old age," but rather be limited to just protecting our rights. The "happy old age" concept was simply a vote-buying mechanism, providing plenty of goodies and very little pain for the original voters, while condemning faceless future generations as beasts of burden. It was the king of all Ponzi schemes.
fzqlcs 1 year ago 23