newfie
Well-Known Member
They better because the Dems sure won't do anything to help
Political gain over rides the needs of the populace.
Political gain over rides the needs of the populace.
oldngray
nowhere special
They would need a time machine to go back and fix the problems with Obamacare. It was planned to fail and mess up things so bad single payer would look like a better option.
Now that some people are getting "free" or subsidized insurance (paid for by others) they won't want to go back to paying their own way.
The math never did add up which is why the Dems forced it through Congress while they could.
Now that some people are getting "free" or subsidized insurance (paid for by others) they won't want to go back to paying their own way.
The math never did add up which is why the Dems forced it through Congress while they could.
bottomups
Bad Moon Risen'
Who new healthcare could be so complicated?
bottomups
Bad Moon Risen'
Kinda like the Repubs with the last tax reform bill?
oldngray
nowhere special
No.
bottomups
Bad Moon Risen'
You mean the one that pays for itself and won't add to the deficit?
oldngray
nowhere special
It is working.
bottomups
Bad Moon Risen'
Agreed. The budget deficit is increasing but the rich and corporations are paying less.
I'm talking about the percentage of the states total population that is receiving assistance. VT look . You like millions of other Americans spent their entire lives killing themselves making somebody else rich and now that the physicality of the job has taken it's toll you discover that you have absolutely nothing and will be dependent on the social programs that we evil communist/socialist pinko liberals passed into law. It's not socialism It's about bringing balance to the equation and the history books are full of examples of what happens when there's no balance.
How is that possible with government revenue actually increasing after the tax cut? Oh yeah, they had to compromise with Democrats and spend more to get their military spending. Too many Republicans wanted less spending to get budget passed, so they had to turn to free spending Democrats. Have to put this out there over and over because Democrats want to put the deficit completely on Republicans and we know it's a bipartisan effort. Just as the huge increases in our debt under Obama was funded by a Republican majority for 6 years. Now the Democrats will again be in charge of the purse strings so let's see if they do any better.
"Repeal and replace. Repeal and replace" . There was "repeal" alright but there was no "replace" . Why? because there was never going to be a "replace"
oldngray
nowhere special
VT, you keep hollering for spending cuts but you never say specifically where. BTW At the closing of the US governments 2017-18 fiscal year on 9-30 the ending deficit was 800 billion. One third higher than the previous year. And now that the economy is slumping with GDP growth projection 2.5% at best next year the 2018-19 deficit is expected to top one trillion
But you specifically bring up Texas to ridicule when California and New York have higher percentages of their populations on Medicaid. I just checked those but no doubt other states have higher percentages too. By the way, I knew and know what I'd be getting under SS. It's not found money and it's always been part of my strategy for retirement. Yes, I'm paying a physical toll for physical work. I quit early enough so that it hopefully won't be as bad as if I worked until I'm 67. But it's a fact that should be drilled into kids heads from an early age...SS isn't enough for a decent retirement in the U.S.. If they want to retire someday they need to start saving every week of their working lives and increase that as their pay goes up over time. Everything else needs to be second in priority. I wish I had listened to that but blew way too much in my earlier years. And most won't do that and will find themselves in a bind eventually.
What's your point? Republicans controlled the money the last 6 years of Obama's administration and the deficit declined. But it went up in a compromise with Democrats this year. At least this year revenue increased in spite of Democrats claiming the tax cuts would reduce revenue. If the Democrats are concerned about the deficit then they are now in position to do something about it. They control the purse strings for at least the next two years.
Exactly WHERE do we start cutting? Of course your answer would be ......"cut everywhere else but don't cut in places where i would be negatively impacted" .
Well first off Social Security is a separate program that should be required to have a hands off policy instead of the government using those funds for other things. Agree? Second there are ridiculous things being funded that shouldn't be. A congressman puts together a book of these every year to demonstrate how badly our money is being spent. Third it's recognized that there's a huge amount of waste and fraud going on but nothing ever seems to be done about it. Probably because it allows many in government to dip their hands into the til. Fourth there should be limits in place that require the government to work within those limits. And finally people shouldn't look to the government to pay their way when they are young and able bodied. No excuse for not working these days. My brother, who's very liberal, said to me one time that if the only job available is McDonald's then they might as well stay home and collect benefits. No, they should work at McDonald's. If people want better for their kids than the menial jobs they have they will start pushing their kids to study. As long as they have a halfway decent life at government expense there's little incentive to do more.
newfie
Well-Known Member
Especially when politics are involved
newfie
Well-Known Member
You lost this argument already let the dead dog rest in peace
newfie
Well-Known Member
A woman dies at age 65 before collecting one benefit check. She and her employer paid into the system for almost 50 years and she collected NOTHING. Keep in mind all the working people that die every year who were paying into the system and got nothing.
And these governmental morons mismanaged the money and stole from the system, so that it's now going broke.
BEAUTIFUL! And they have the audacity to call today's seniors "vultures" in an attempt to cover their ineptitude. DISGRACEFUL!
The real reason for renaming our Social Security payments is so the government can claim that all those social security recipients are receiving entitlements thus putting them in the same category as welfare, and food stamp recipients.
THIS IS WORTH THE FEW MINUTES IT TAKES TO READ AND DIGEST!
friend.Y.I. By changing the name of SS contributions, it gives them a means to refute this program in the future. It's free money for the government to spend under this guise.
The Social Security check is now (or soon will be) referred to as a Federal Benefit Payment ?
I'll be part of the one percent to forward this. I am forwarding it because it touches a nerve in me, and I hope it will in you.
Please keep passing it on until everyone in our country has read it.
The government is now referring to our Social Security checks as a "Federal Benefit Payment."
This is NOT a benefit. It is OUR money , paid out of our earned income! Not only did we all contribute to Social Security but our employers did too ! It totaled 15% of our income before taxes.(This should be enough for you to forward this message, If not read on.)
If you averaged $30K per year over your working life, that's close to $180,000 invested in Social Security.
If you calculate the future value of your monthly investment in social security ($375/month, including both you and your employers contributions) at a meager 1% interest rate compounded monthly, after 40 years of working you'd have more than $1.3+ million dollars saved.
This is your personal investment. Upon retirement, if you took out only 3% per year, you'd receive $39,318 per year, or $3,277 per month.
That's almost three times more than today's average Social Security benefit of $1,230 per month, according to the Social Security Administration. (Google it – it's a fact). And your retirement fund would last more than 33 years (until you're 98 if you retire at age 65)! I can only imagine how much better most average-income people could live in retirement if our government had just invested our money in low-risk interest-earning accounts.
Instead, the folks in Washington pulled off a bigger Ponzi scheme than Bernie Madoff ever did (or Lyndon Johnson).
They took our money and used it elsewhere. They "forgot"(oh yes, they knew) that it was OUR money they were taking. They didn't have a referendum to ask us if we wanted to lend the money to them ... and they didn't pay interest on the debt they assumed. And recently they've told us that the money won't support us for very much longer. (Isn't it funny that they NEVER say this about welfare payments?)
But is it our fault they misused our investments? And now, to add insult to injury, they're calling it a benefit, as if we never worked to earn every penny of it. This is stealing!
Just because they borrowed the money, doesn't mean that our investments were for charity!
Let's take a stand. We have earned our right to Social Security and Medicare. Demand that our legislators bring some sense into our government.
Find a way to keep Social Security and Medicare going for the sake of the 92% of our population who need it.
And these governmental morons mismanaged the money and stole from the system, so that it's now going broke.
BEAUTIFUL! And they have the audacity to call today's seniors "vultures" in an attempt to cover their ineptitude. DISGRACEFUL!
The real reason for renaming our Social Security payments is so the government can claim that all those social security recipients are receiving entitlements thus putting them in the same category as welfare, and food stamp recipients.
THIS IS WORTH THE FEW MINUTES IT TAKES TO READ AND DIGEST!
friend.Y.I. By changing the name of SS contributions, it gives them a means to refute this program in the future. It's free money for the government to spend under this guise.
The Social Security check is now (or soon will be) referred to as a Federal Benefit Payment ?
I'll be part of the one percent to forward this. I am forwarding it because it touches a nerve in me, and I hope it will in you.
Please keep passing it on until everyone in our country has read it.
The government is now referring to our Social Security checks as a "Federal Benefit Payment."
This is NOT a benefit. It is OUR money , paid out of our earned income! Not only did we all contribute to Social Security but our employers did too ! It totaled 15% of our income before taxes.(This should be enough for you to forward this message, If not read on.)
If you averaged $30K per year over your working life, that's close to $180,000 invested in Social Security.
If you calculate the future value of your monthly investment in social security ($375/month, including both you and your employers contributions) at a meager 1% interest rate compounded monthly, after 40 years of working you'd have more than $1.3+ million dollars saved.
This is your personal investment. Upon retirement, if you took out only 3% per year, you'd receive $39,318 per year, or $3,277 per month.
That's almost three times more than today's average Social Security benefit of $1,230 per month, according to the Social Security Administration. (Google it – it's a fact). And your retirement fund would last more than 33 years (until you're 98 if you retire at age 65)! I can only imagine how much better most average-income people could live in retirement if our government had just invested our money in low-risk interest-earning accounts.
Instead, the folks in Washington pulled off a bigger Ponzi scheme than Bernie Madoff ever did (or Lyndon Johnson).
They took our money and used it elsewhere. They "forgot"(oh yes, they knew) that it was OUR money they were taking. They didn't have a referendum to ask us if we wanted to lend the money to them ... and they didn't pay interest on the debt they assumed. And recently they've told us that the money won't support us for very much longer. (Isn't it funny that they NEVER say this about welfare payments?)
But is it our fault they misused our investments? And now, to add insult to injury, they're calling it a benefit, as if we never worked to earn every penny of it. This is stealing!
Just because they borrowed the money, doesn't mean that our investments were for charity!
Let's take a stand. We have earned our right to Social Security and Medicare. Demand that our legislators bring some sense into our government.
Find a way to keep Social Security and Medicare going for the sake of the 92% of our population who need it.
