Hey asshole, the money for social security and medicaid are taken out of every paycheck in America. They are a separate tax from the general taxation. We don't pay 'the government'. We all pay into the social security and medicaid funds. Just stop talking.-Sh1fty- wrote:
Apparently I can't be left alone after trying to leaveNic wrote:
Didn't you just shit on people who have been working their whole lives and paying into a benefit, for collecting that benefit? Seems you made the asshole comments. I'd expect to get something I paid for, wouldn't you?
Anyway, unless we're talking about SS from a company you've worked with, which I'm assuming we're not. I'm talking about being paid by the government after you reach xx age.
So, why should you pay the government to save up money for you when you need it then just save it yourself?
So, what the truth of the matter is....... The Social Security TAX, was designed as a "pretend" retirement system in which people paid in but odds were they would never live to collect. The age at which you could start collecting was higher then the life expectancy as I remember. Thusly SS was making a shit ton of money and had a huge surplus on paper. This is on paper because as we all know the government gets all tax dollars so no matter what they are labeled for it is really just income for the government and thus all the (surplus) was spent due to deficit spending. SS is not just a retirement system either, last I new it paid out to all sorts of "Social" programs: needles for druggies, college for knocked up chicks, money for kid who's parents die, money to disabled people, money to spouse of dead person..........-Sh1fty- wrote:
Apparently I can't be left alone after trying to leaveNic wrote:
Didn't you just shit on people who have been working their whole lives and paying into a benefit, for collecting that benefit? Seems you made the asshole comments. I'd expect to get something I paid for, wouldn't you?
Anyway, unless we're talking about SS from a company you've worked with, which I'm assuming we're not. I'm talking about being paid by the government after you reach xx age.
So, why should you pay the government to save up money for you when you need it then just save it yourself?
Way past that.-Sh1fty- wrote:
So if Congress stops draining the cash the system will work fine?
Dilbert_X wrote:
Compulsory extreme sports for retirees is my suggestion.
They should reban you to fix the problem.11 Bravo wrote:
this thread breaks all forum rules.
mods please deal with it
Damn Dolt, he has already said he needs to learn more about the system and conceded the point.JohnG@lt wrote:
Hey asshole, the money for social security and medicaid are taken out of every paycheck in America. They are a separate tax from the general taxation. We don't pay 'the government'. We all pay into the social security and medicaid funds. Just stop talking.-Sh1fty- wrote:
Apparently I can't be left alone after trying to leaveNic wrote:
Didn't you just shit on people who have been working their whole lives and paying into a benefit, for collecting that benefit? Seems you made the asshole comments. I'd expect to get something I paid for, wouldn't you?
Anyway, unless we're talking about SS from a company you've worked with, which I'm assuming we're not. I'm talking about being paid by the government after you reach xx age.
So, why should you pay the government to save up money for you when you need it then just save it yourself?
Go cry to a mod.The Jiggler wrote:
this thread breaks all forum rules.
mods please deal with it
or ban you since you are breaking the rulesJohnG@lt wrote:
They should reban you to fix the problem.11 Bravo wrote:
this thread breaks all forum rules.
mods please deal with it
This is exactly the kind of thing I need.Lotta_Drool wrote:
So, what the truth of the matter is....... The Social Security TAX, was designed as a "pretend" retirement system in which people paid in but odds were they would never live to collect. The age at which you could start collecting was higher then the life expectancy as I remember. Thusly SS was making a shit ton of money and had a huge surplus on paper. This is on paper because as we all know the government gets all tax dollars so no matter what they are labeled for it is really just income for the government and thus all the (surplus) was spent due to deficit spending. SS is not just a retirement system either, last I new it paid out to all sorts of "Social" programs: needles for druggies, college for knocked up chicks, money for kid who's parents die, money to disabled people, money to spouse of dead person..........
So yeah, it is just a tax that everyone is for because they THINK it has something to do with the government social money program for the elderly and NOBODY wants to not pay into that one. They even stroke this notion by sending out a peice of paper saying how much you will get because of what you have paid into the system, which is ZERO by the time I of age because the system will be bankrupt and it tells you right on their handy dandy sheet.
It is a tax, with the threat of "if you don't support this tax we will let you die on the street when you are too old to work". Of course this threat is empty because A: there will be no money when I am 68. B: If there was money it wouldn't be enough to buy the cat food needed to live on. C: they will just raise the eligible date to 85 or something. D: As it is if you are just living off Social Security you are better of being put in a retirement home anyway.
Ahh right, you're way better off listening to an idiot conspiracy theorist than people that study money for fun.-Sh1fty- wrote:
This is exactly the kind of thing I need.Lotta_Drool wrote:
So, what the truth of the matter is....... The Social Security TAX, was designed as a "pretend" retirement system in which people paid in but odds were they would never live to collect. The age at which you could start collecting was higher then the life expectancy as I remember. Thusly SS was making a shit ton of money and had a huge surplus on paper. This is on paper because as we all know the government gets all tax dollars so no matter what they are labeled for it is really just income for the government and thus all the (surplus) was spent due to deficit spending. SS is not just a retirement system either, last I new it paid out to all sorts of "Social" programs: needles for druggies, college for knocked up chicks, money for kid who's parents die, money to disabled people, money to spouse of dead person..........
So yeah, it is just a tax that everyone is for because they THINK it has something to do with the government social money program for the elderly and NOBODY wants to not pay into that one. They even stroke this notion by sending out a peice of paper saying how much you will get because of what you have paid into the system, which is ZERO by the time I of age because the system will be bankrupt and it tells you right on their handy dandy sheet.
It is a tax, with the threat of "if you don't support this tax we will let you die on the street when you are too old to work". Of course this threat is empty because A: there will be no money when I am 68. B: If there was money it wouldn't be enough to buy the cat food needed to live on. C: they will just raise the eligible date to 85 or something. D: As it is if you are just living off Social Security you are better of being put in a retirement home anyway.
Not what assholes like Dilderp and Dolt, etc. have to say.
by all means backup your stupidity on this subject. Is Social Security NOT a tax? Does it NOT go to a government that is trillions in debt? Does your sheet of paper NOT say you will get nothing when of age to retire?JohnG@lt wrote:
Ahh right, you're way better off listening to an idiot conspiracy theorist than people that study money for fun.-Sh1fty- wrote:
This is exactly the kind of thing I need.Lotta_Drool wrote:
So, what the truth of the matter is....... The Social Security TAX, was designed as a "pretend" retirement system in which people paid in but odds were they would never live to collect. The age at which you could start collecting was higher then the life expectancy as I remember. Thusly SS was making a shit ton of money and had a huge surplus on paper. This is on paper because as we all know the government gets all tax dollars so no matter what they are labeled for it is really just income for the government and thus all the (surplus) was spent due to deficit spending. SS is not just a retirement system either, last I new it paid out to all sorts of "Social" programs: needles for druggies, college for knocked up chicks, money for kid who's parents die, money to disabled people, money to spouse of dead person..........
So yeah, it is just a tax that everyone is for because they THINK it has something to do with the government social money program for the elderly and NOBODY wants to not pay into that one. They even stroke this notion by sending out a peice of paper saying how much you will get because of what you have paid into the system, which is ZERO by the time I of age because the system will be bankrupt and it tells you right on their handy dandy sheet.
It is a tax, with the threat of "if you don't support this tax we will let you die on the street when you are too old to work". Of course this threat is empty because A: there will be no money when I am 68. B: If there was money it wouldn't be enough to buy the cat food needed to live on. C: they will just raise the eligible date to 85 or something. D: As it is if you are just living off Social Security you are better of being put in a retirement home anyway.
Not what assholes like Dilderp and Dolt, etc. have to say.
Yup, Canada is in the same boat. I remeber a couple years back, the prime minister wanted to drain ours for some really stupid shit....Dilbert_X wrote:
The US has the same problem as most countries, people paid in their cash, govt spent it on stupid stuff, people are old and want their money back but the cupboard is bare. It is really a ponzi scheme.
Compulsory extreme sports for retirees is my suggestion.
It's not really a tax because you get the money back. It's forced savings. Is it misappropriated before you get it back? Yes. Is that irrelevant? Yes, because you do get the money in the end.Lotta_Drool wrote:
by all means backup your stupidity on this subject. Is Social Security NOT a tax? Does it NOT go to a government that is trillions in debt? Does your sheet of paper NOT say you will get nothing when of age to retire?JohnG@lt wrote:
Ahh right, you're way better off listening to an idiot conspiracy theorist than people that study money for fun.-Sh1fty- wrote:
This is exactly the kind of thing I need.
Not what assholes like Dilderp and Dolt, etc. have to say.
Enlighten me, seriously.
Here is some real good reading shifty http://moneywatch.bnet.com/retirement-p … heme/2595/ but don't just read the article because it is misleading, read the responses also.JohnG@lt wrote:
It's not really a tax because you get the money back. It's forced savings. Is it misappropriated before you get it back? Yes. Is that irrelevant? Yes, because you do get the money in the end.Lotta_Drool wrote:
by all means backup your stupidity on this subject. Is Social Security NOT a tax? Does it NOT go to a government that is trillions in debt? Does your sheet of paper NOT say you will get nothing when of age to retire?JohnG@lt wrote:
Ahh right, you're way better off listening to an idiot conspiracy theorist than people that study money for fun.
Enlighten me, seriously.
And no, the money doesn't go to fund drug addicts and other bullshit. Anyone collecting SSI is doing so because they can not work and have no other means of supporting themselves. This would be people who had an accident on the job, people who have brain damage, or people born retarded etc.
You would help your argument more if A) you were rational, B) had a clue and C) didn't try to insult me in every sentence. I know that's too much to ask.Lotta_Drool wrote:
Here is some real good reading shifty http://moneywatch.bnet.com/retirement-p … heme/2595/ but don't just read the article because it is misleading, read the responses also.JohnG@lt wrote:
It's not really a tax because you get the money back. It's forced savings. Is it misappropriated before you get it back? Yes. Is that irrelevant? Yes, because you do get the money in the end.Lotta_Drool wrote:
by all means backup your stupidity on this subject. Is Social Security NOT a tax? Does it NOT go to a government that is trillions in debt? Does your sheet of paper NOT say you will get nothing when of age to retire?
Enlighten me, seriously.
And no, the money doesn't go to fund drug addicts and other bullshit. Anyone collecting SSI is doing so because they can not work and have no other means of supporting themselves. This would be people who had an accident on the job, people who have brain damage, or people born retarded etc.
As Dolt tip toed around it is a TAX, a INCOME TAX, and the money goes to the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT just the same as INCOME TAX. They can play fuck fuck with calculators all they want and say the money is here or the money is there but as you know the Government has no money because it is like 12+ trillion in debt and collects like 2 trillion to little each year so there you have it.
And the money paid in today to SS is spent on cutting SS checks to SOMEBODY ELSE. Just try to withdrawl your social security savings dolt, it won't happen because you have ZERO. It is a tax that goes to that great big bubble in washington, which has no a dime, has never saved a dime, and always spends more than it makes. But if Dolt wants to send money to the Federal Goverment to SAVE for him, he should do that as much as he can.
See Shifty, here is the ignoramus that was insulting you. This is his response when called out on his Social Security Savings Program myth.JohnG@lt wrote:
You would help your argument more if A) you were rational, B) had a clue and C) didn't try to insult me in every sentence. I know that's too much to ask.Lotta_Drool wrote:
Here is some real good reading shifty http://moneywatch.bnet.com/retirement-p … heme/2595/ but don't just read the article because it is misleading, read the responses also.JohnG@lt wrote:
It's not really a tax because you get the money back. It's forced savings. Is it misappropriated before you get it back? Yes. Is that irrelevant? Yes, because you do get the money in the end.
And no, the money doesn't go to fund drug addicts and other bullshit. Anyone collecting SSI is doing so because they can not work and have no other means of supporting themselves. This would be people who had an accident on the job, people who have brain damage, or people born retarded etc.
As Dolt tip toed around it is a TAX, a INCOME TAX, and the money goes to the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT just the same as INCOME TAX. They can play fuck fuck with calculators all they want and say the money is here or the money is there but as you know the Government has no money because it is like 12+ trillion in debt and collects like 2 trillion to little each year so there you have it.
And the money paid in today to SS is spent on cutting SS checks to SOMEBODY ELSE. Just try to withdrawl your social security savings dolt, it won't happen because you have ZERO. It is a tax that goes to that great big bubble in washington, which has no a dime, has never saved a dime, and always spends more than it makes. But if Dolt wants to send money to the Federal Goverment to SAVE for him, he should do that as much as he can.
Spittle, why aren't you out trying to off senators if you hate the situation so much? Coward.
Last edited by Lotta_Drool (2011-01-12 18:22:37)
I'm not wrong at all. You're just repeating what Uncle Reagan told you. I have news for you, he was one of the worst presidents in American history.Lotta_Drool wrote:
See Shifty, here is the ignoramus that was insulting you. This is his response when called out on his Social Security Savings Program myth.
WOW Dolt, and you are one of the smarter people here. Just not good at admitting you are wrong and got full of yourself.
Well, the link I supplied was an article with a thread in which some economists were debating what we are in this thread. Obviously they are not quite as "Redneck" in their discription but they all agree.Nic wrote:
Or Shifty, instead of reading links from random forum warriors first, no offense spit, I wouldn't want him to learn from my random links from the get go. Go to a site like Wikipedia, it may not be perfect, but will probably give you a better idea of what it is supposed to be, than some random, already bias internet personality. Get a good general idea of what it is and then modify what you think by reading other stuff.
Don't just take some rant on a forum as your basis for belief.
Maybe it was a fair debate, maybe it wasn't, I didn't check it out. My point is, he should probably get some kind of a base knowledge of what it is before dropping in on a economists debate on it. Wouldn't you agree to that?Lotta_Drool wrote:
Well, the link I supplied was an article with a thread in which some economists were debating what we are in this thread. Obviously they are not quite as "Redneck" in their discription but they all agree.Nic wrote:
Or Shifty, instead of reading links from random forum warriors first, no offense spit, I wouldn't want him to learn from my random links from the get go. Go to a site like Wikipedia, it may not be perfect, but will probably give you a better idea of what it is supposed to be, than some random, already bias internet personality. Get a good general idea of what it is and then modify what you think by reading other stuff.
Don't just take some rant on a forum as your basis for belief.
