Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 10-05-2007, 02:35 PM
 
2 posts, read 3,213 times
Reputation: 12

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by grew-up-3rd-culture View Post
I propose (being in my 30's at the moment) that Americans should vote to decrease the amount of money being dolled out on each social security check NOW, so when gen-X reaches retirement we have something for us! Your thoughts.
I took my mother in for 4 years because she couldn't live on her SS check. If you are so worried you should invest in a 401K, I am 44 and I expect no SS check when I get to that age. If you decrease the money more seniors will strave, shame on you for your selfishness!!!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-05-2007, 04:27 PM
 
19,198 posts, read 31,482,490 times
Reputation: 4013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moth View Post
Get off the Bush obsession.
I'd as soon have nothing to do with the man. It's only the fact that he's President that puts him on my radar at all. But stupidity in that role makes him a very legitimate target of criticism.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moth View Post
SS was dying before he arrived on the scene.
No, it wasn't, just as it's not now. In fact, in their 2000 report, the SS Trustees forecast that if we made no changes to the program at all, 100% of all scheduled benefits would be fully funded for the next 37 years.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moth View Post
Fine then. Big Money, as you call it (stuff yours in mattress?) is not influencing my outlook.
Reminder: You're not Bush.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moth View Post
-- You are in the DC area. Go to their very fine bookstore and indulge yourself.
-- As for links, the Washington Post has a very fine website. Go to it and indulge yourself. I am not going to fill up this thread with links which you will ignore anyway.
Way to back up those claims. Remarkably convincing...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moth View Post
A journalist trained in Economics.
Samuelson? No, no economics. BA in Government.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moth View Post
Its not my money? I cannot fathom a response to that level of insanity.
Perhaps more of your assumptions are wrong than you realize.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2007, 04:30 PM
 
19,198 posts, read 31,482,490 times
Reputation: 4013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeledaf View Post
Oh, I love posting this link. Some folks just don't want to look at it. Wonder why:
Well, there's not much reason for anyone to look at it over and over again every time you post it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2007, 04:39 PM
 
19,198 posts, read 31,482,490 times
Reputation: 4013
Quote:
Originally Posted by maryrae63 View Post
I took my mother in for 4 years because she couldn't live on her SS check. If you are so worried you should invest in a 401K, I am 44 and I expect no SS check when I get to that age. If you decrease the money more seniors will starve, shame on you for your selfishness!!!!!
Thank you for your service. This is a difficult challenge for any child to take on, and also for parents, whose last wish would be to become a burden to the children in their elder years. Unfortunately, you hit a nail or two on the head in reproaching selfisheness. Self, self, self has indeed become the mantra of a certain segment within our society...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2007, 07:26 PM
 
Location: Near Manito
20,169 posts, read 24,337,514 times
Reputation: 15291
Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista View Post
Well, there's not much reason for anyone to look at it over and over again every time you post it.
I assume, then, you've punched in the numbers and read the dismal truth.

Sorehead.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2007, 02:50 AM
 
19,198 posts, read 31,482,490 times
Reputation: 4013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeledaf View Post
I assume, then, you've punched in the numbers and read the dismal truth. Sorehead.
I'm not in the habit of consulting right-wing, robber-baron-defending, campground operators when I want the truth of any matter, dismal or not. As regards Social Security, for instance, I'd rather consult with one who has some actual expertise in that area. As it happens, I don't really have to go very far to do that...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2007, 08:01 PM
 
13,651 posts, read 20,783,612 times
Reputation: 7652
Quote:
I'd as soon have nothing to do with the man. It's only the fact that he's President that puts him on my radar at all. But stupidity in that role makes him a very legitimate target of criticism.
In many areas, yes. I did not vote for the man and think his presidency a failure. But I am not going to scapegoat him for something that is not his fault.

Quote:
Reminder: You're not Bush.
Thank you.

Quote:
Way to back up those claims. Remarkably convincing...
As opossed to quoting a few bureacracies that want to justify their worthless existence? Please.You asked and I pointed the way. Shall I pay for parking and dinner whilst you browse the store?

Quote:
Samuelson? No, no economics. BA in Government.
Yea from Harvard. Both are social sciences. The man is an astute writer of economic issues. Are you trained in economics or related? Are you claiming the man, who writes for the liberal Washington Post as well as Newsweek, is not qualifed?

Quote:
Perhaps more of your assumptions are wrong than you realize.
Knowing the money I earn is mine and my family's is no assumption, sir.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2007, 08:37 PM
 
384 posts, read 1,132,600 times
Reputation: 197
People relying on social security that are younger need to invest in their own retirement. Plain and simple.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2007, 08:38 PM
 
13,651 posts, read 20,783,612 times
Reputation: 7652
Amen Brother.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2007, 10:51 PM
 
Location: Near Manito
20,169 posts, read 24,337,514 times
Reputation: 15291
Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista View Post
I'm not in the habit of consulting right-wing, robber-baron-defending, campground operators when I want the truth of any matter, dismal or not. As regards Social Security, for instance, I'd rather consult with one who has some actual expertise in that area. As it happens, I don't really have to go very far to do that...
Oh, we see. You prefer to ignore the truth, throw a little mud, and consort with shakedown artists who nurse at the generous public dug.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:42 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top