Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Social security is not "entitlement" -- it is investment. I paid into social security for 30 years while I worked. This was mandatory savings to be returned later in life.
Nonsense. It's a tax, and a benefit.
There is no account balance to be "returned" later in life, there is simply a defined benefit that may or may not be paid out long enough to be more than you were taxed. There is no rate of return like an investment.
The reason the US economy is no longer serving the majority of its citizens is the endless wars we have been engaged in. Trillions of dollars that should have gone to investment and infrastructure has been squandered in other countries, leaving the US economy in nonproductive rubble. I had an economics professor 50 years ago who predicted it would happen. He was talking about Viet Nam back then. Bosnia, Iraq and Afghanistan were not even on the radar 50 years ago, but he was proven right.
But didn't WWII get us out of the Great Depression? Maybe all of these wars have saved the US economy from another Great Depression.
healthcare is consuming an enormous part of our GDP. Companies can't compete, because they have to build in the very high cost of healthcare for employees. In addition, our litigious society necessitates carrying expensive insurance to cover all the class action lawsuits, frivolous suits, etc.
Lawsuits come with the territory. No one sues a an empty wallet. Steps must be taken to protect anything of value. Always have, always will.
It's a victory for the propaganda machine that few Americans are aware of their own dilemma.
Remember, CONgress has no power to create money.
It can COIN MONEY (stamp bullion) or BORROW MONEY. [See Art. 1, Sec. 8, USCON]
It cannot create bullion.
As stated below, all "dollards" (dollar bills) are borrowed, at usury, into existence.
And to pay that interest requires more dollards to be borrowed.
Sure, it's nuts. BUT you consented.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetgraphics
Ironically, a war (or unWar) is an ideal excuse for deficit spending. And if you read Title 12 USC sec. 411, you will understand why deficits are unavoidable.
FWIW - there have been no "dollars" in circulation since 1933. Dollar bills are IOUs denominated in dollars, but are DEBT (negative value). The only way to authorize more dollar bills is to [you guessed it] increase the DEBT.
To compound that problem is the usury attached to borrowing the federal reserve notes into existence, which obviously requires even more dollar bills to pay the interest due.
Why can’t CONgress deal with this madness?
14th amendment, Section 4. THE VALIDITY OF THE PUBLIC DEBT of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, SHALL NOT BE QUESTIONED.
Now you know why they’re SILENT on Capitol Hill.
". . .Federal Reserve notes are not redeemable in gold, silver or any other commodity, and receive no backing by anything. This has been the case since 1933. The notes have no value for themselves, but for what they will buy. In another sense, because they are legal tender, Federal Reserve notes are "backed" by all the goods and services in the economy."
"Federal reserve notes are legal tender in absence of objection thereto."
MacLeod v. Hoover (1925) 159 La 244, 105 So. 305
All duly enumerated American socialists cannot object to the tender of the notes that THEY are obligated parties to. Oh, I forgot to mention that the mechanism by which YOUR labor and goods underwrite THEIR profligate bad checks is FICA / Social Security- which is 100% voluntary.
“The Social Security Act does not require an individual to have a Social Security Number (SSN) to live and work within the United States, nor does it require an SSN simply for the purpose of having one...â€
- - - The Social Security Administration
http://home.hiwaay.net/~becraft/ScottSSNLetter.pdf
Get your own personalized letter from the SocSecAdmin
. . .
Oh, and if you thought FICA was “insurance†for you, oops x 2.
In two important cases, Helvering v. Davis and Flemming v. Nestor, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Social Security taxes are simply taxes and convey no property or contractual rights to Social Security benefits. Benefits are at the sole discretion of Congress. It's really a "tax and bribe" scam.
Can you guess what would happen if a substantial number of Americans withdrew consent from FICA and thus ceased being obligated parties on those worthless notes?
They can legally object to their tender and demand constitutional lawful money ("gold and silver coin"). And what happens when the paper dollards cease being legal tender?
Billionaires become Zero-aires overnight.
Won't that be -ahem- interesting.
healthcare is consuming an enormous part of our GDP. Companies can't compete, because they have to build in the very high cost of healthcare for employees. In addition, our litigious society necessitates carrying expensive insurance to cover all the class action lawsuits, frivolous suits, etc.
I agree that "healthcare is consuming an enormous part of our GDP." Getting employers out of being middlemen for health insurance would force competition on the health insurance industry. This would create networks of health providers who compete on price, service, and quality.
Regarding medical lawsuits, there are many more cases that could go to court but medical malpractice attorneys only take the cases where they have a high probability of winning and a large payout.
Getting employers out of being middlemen for health insurance would force competition on the health insurance industry. This would create networks of health providers who compete on price, service, and quality.
You really need to get the AMA out of the loop. The same goes for all other licensing organizations which limit access to boost wages.
Rather to ensure complete control over the profession and high wages.
Has to be control. There is a long and arduous path to a medical degree. Has to be in order to enure the necessary and required responsibility to the patients and high quality care delivery. I won't be going to some doc with a cracker jack degree. And I wouldn't recommend it to anyone.
But I wouldn't mind those docs with cracker jack degrees practicing whatever it is that they do. As long it is ethical, in the patients best interest and they display their credentials. If patients agree with accepting what could very likely be substandard care, that is their choice.
As long it is ethical, in the patients best interest and they display their credentials.
Precisely. Let the patient decide what sort of credentials they are willing to pay for. Competition among training agencies would do a lot to improve service and reduce cost.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
