Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute
Good one -- and what's interesting these same people who think nothing of paying $600 for a game player and $150 a month for unlimited text with their $500 iPhones and those $600 tattoos yet haven't worked a day in their lives or begun to pay off their $80,000 student loans so they could lay around in college and not have to work, want to throw all the former working people into the streets even though those working people paid into a very high tax or forced government retirement plan for many decades.
|
Granted, they have their priorities whacked, but Social Security is an insurance program, not a retirement plan, for people just like them who spend money on crap like iPhones.
Digitally...
Mircea
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough
There has been way touch emphasizes on going to college.
|
That is a reaction to very bad government policies, like quotas and so-called "anti-discrimination" laws.
I hire someone with no college degree, but 4 years of military experience in communication electronic repair at 3rd Shop. Then along comes a "minority" who screams "racism" and sues me because I wouldn't hire them, even though they had zero experience, or I did hire them, but started them at a lower rate of pay, because they had no training and no experience.
College degrees are simply union cards that help protect employers from Al Sharpton/Jesse Jackson Feminazi style discrimination law suits -- which cost a helluva lot of money to defend, even when you're innocent.
Things like that happen when the government attempts to engage in "social engineering."
Emphasizing...
Mircea
Quote:
Originally Posted by the_windwalker
Would you like to come to my residence, go over my assets with a fine-toothed comb, and point out my "wealth" to me? I've been having a real problem seeing it.
|
Look under the sofa cushions and behind the couch. There's probably $800,000 in change lying about.
Building wealth...
Mircea
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Homogenizer
Yes, and I'm suggesting the same point in both: the government (you) has no moral right to intervene in the movement of wealth. In the earlier post, I'm challenging the forced redistribution (Social Security) from young to old. In the latter post, I'm challenging a theft of wealth from the parents that rightfully belongs to the children. What point are you making?
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Homogenizer
I have no complaints about across the board welfare elimination. But Social Security is a far more evil form of welfare than the others because it's theft from children.
|
Uh, the point is that you're clueless.
Social Security is not a "forced redistribution" program. It is an end-of-life insurance program designed to function as an hedge to keep from living on the streets, drinking water out of a ditch and foraging for nuts and berries to eat in your old age.
This is probably pointless, since it's beyond your understanding, but in the hopes that some might be persuaded to dump out your Kool-Aid....
42 USC § 402 - Old-age and survivors
insurance benefit payments
(a)
Old-age insurance benefits Every individual who—
(1) is a
fully insured individual (as defined in section
414 (a) of this title),
(2) has attained age 62, and
(3) has filed application for old-age
insurance benefits or was entitled to disability
insurance benefits for the month preceding the month in which he attained retirement age (as defined in section
416 (l) of this title), shall be entitled to an old-age
insurance benefit for each month, beginning with—
Very obviously, there's some part of "
insurance" that you don't comprehend.
To continue demolishing your frivolous argument, let's look at a few facts.
First, the Silent Generation got saddled with a 520% FICA tax increase which they paid to make sure Social Security would be there for them, as well as future generations.
Second, the Baby Boomers took a 71% FICA tax increase in stride, which they gladly paid to make sure Social Security would be there for them and future generations.
Finally, the $2.6 TRILLION OASDI Trust Fund exists because the Silent Generation and Boomer Generation paid the FICA payroll taxes the got hit with.
Now what have Generation X-Box and Y-Work done to make sure Social Security will be there for them and future generations?
Absolutely nothing.
The last FICA tax increase was in 1990.
If Generation X-Box and Y-Work want Social Security to be there for them, then they'll have to suck it up and pay higher FICA payroll taxes -- just like everyone else did.
Social Security is presently recommending a 7.05% rate, which would be an increase of 0.85 and a whopping 13% FICA tax increase....
...gosh, you think Generation X-Box and Y-Work can handle that?
In reality it needs to be 9.2%, but even if it was raised to that, it would amount to a 48% FICA tax increase, which is not the 520% the Silent Generation got slammed with, and not the 71% the Boomers got hit with.
If you can point out where theft is taking place, go right ahead.
Debunking....
Mircea
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.
