"Democrats Pound Republicans Over Their Push to Privatize and Cut Social Security"

Yes, I pointed out that some Cons have selective outrage, and it is true, just as some Libs have the same "issue". Thanks for continuing to help prove that point.

 

Women still lean towards the Liberal side and they will continue to.
Blacks are not flocking to the GOP they have heard enough from righties to know that racists within the GOP are still common.
Old people moved towards the Dems years ago, when I was growing up most retired Americans would lean right, in todays world most seem to lean left, thanks to the GOP.
But yet the right claims they do so anyway, unfortunately the right has yet to prove that claim. But nice partisan attack on your part, making outlandish claims seem to be something even thinking Cons cannot not avoid doing, kinda sad in my opinion.

 

Good post, and I completely agree. When a person nears their time to collect SS, it would be as any other investment, and don't gamble, and leave it alone. By holding off from collecting it, SS gains 8% per year all the way up to age 70, which would be a decent investment if you didn't have to start collecting it.

 

Oh please. This thread was created using the same lie liberals have been using to scare seniors for years and it is THEIR hands that are dirty here, not Rep's. So, save your "brightest man in the middle" snick until it actually sense, will you?
And by the way....before you shoot rather cheap, childish, shots at my character, you need to adjust your scope, because you missed by a wide margin. And be careful, you don't want to hurt yourself.

 

The lie about the "war on women" is not working how it was hoped, since women are saying they're unhappy with the left.

The lie about the GOP being "racist" is not succeeding, since blacks are saying they are unhappy with the left.

Can't say I give a F what makes you sad and what doesn't.

 

Well then looks like a hit a nerve there. But thanks again for proving that I was correct in pointing out some have a selective way at looking at who does what in politics. And just top address the Topic, I have heard Cons on here and in Washington talk about reforming SS for many years now, and there are more than a few on this board that have suggested eliminating it completely, so do not act as if the Dems are making this up. My point was and still is that Cons make the same sorts of claims on other issues and they repeat the same ones every election cycle. You know bringing balance to the discussion when people try saying it is a Dem tactic and ignoring that their own do the same, something obviously frowned upon by some here. Sad part is I actually believe you to be one of the more intelligent right leaning posters on this board and yet you could not simply admit that what I pointed out was correct or just ignored it, but instead you took it personal, so I guess, as I said, I hit a nerve. Good, maybe you will at least think about it. Now back to the topic

 

I never agreed with the "War on Women" the war on this and war on that mantra got old quickly. That said, I would say when it comes to Women's issues I would venture to guess that the Dems are more supportive than Repubs but since I cannot speak for women I will leave to them to decide who they believe is better in their opinion.

I have not seen any large numbers of Blacks making such statements, the rare example of a black person speaking out against the Dems does not equate to large numbers of blacks flocking to the GOP Banner. The fact is many Americans are disgusted with both the Dems and the Repubs in Washington, that is more than evident by the low polling numbers for the President and both houses of Congress. So will America wake up in time to figure out that neither Party is looking out for the interests of the People before it is too late, the answer is clear to me that no it will not happen, so long as everyone wants to ignore their own Parties flaws and point only at the other guys we are going to remain stuck with a government that does not represent the People and will continue to slide down hill until we hit bottom.

Then do us both a favor and simply skip over my posts in the future, as you obviously do not care to hear what I have to say, will not bother me in the least.

 

Fear lingering...Do Democrats have no shame? First they scare women by telling them that there is a war being waged against them because big bad Republicans want to take their birth control away. LIE Polls now show that this tired and old trick isn't working. By a slight margin, women favor Republicans in this election cycle.
Then they scare Blacks by telling them that there is a war being waged against them by big bad Republicans because they want to take your welfare from you. LIE. Republicans want Blacks to become self sufficient and live the American dream as other Blacks have found out by getting an education. What happens when you turn your back on Democrats? They threaten you Gestapo style... Nice people...
Without fear, you have NOTHING to offer except lies and corruption. You can thank your extremists----the Libs...

 

Ah yes, the ol' Al Gore "lock box" platform.

 

so let the government gamble on the stock market with their own money, and if they make a profit they can give it to social security, if they lose big, they can take it out of republican projects if it's such a sure thing republicans, why not gamble with it

 

Social security... i.e. the democrat slush fund.

Of course they wouldn't want it privatized. It would remove their ability to borrow against it to "balance the budget"

 

lol... Liberals don't want people in control of their own money.

How very authoritarian of you guys. Check out the city of Galvaston, TX that was allowed to opt out of Social Security years ago. Their returns have outpaced Social Security by over 1000%.

What a joke.

 

What is wrong with relying on the market for investments?

- - - Updated - - -

Apparently you have forgotten that SS is insolvent.

Any ideas on your side of the table for ensuring that my kids get the benefits when they are senior citizens that they are paying for now?

 

Basing your future retirement on the market is not a sound idea.

No it is not insolvent, no matter how many times people want to make that claim. The next generation will follow the same path, want more money; there is plenty of waste out there and why is it we sent almost 38,000,000,000 (nope that is not an error) to other nations in 2012 and I do believe Congress and a past President "borrowed" a bunch of money they need to earmark for repayment. Want to save SS, there are plenty of ways to get it done.

 

remove the caps and make everyone pay the same percent for every dollar they earn (rich or poor), problem solved

.

 

With people living 40% longer than a couple of centuries ago, many humans are working from 20 - 60 or just 40 years with life expectancy of 80 years. They are only working HALF their life, and half their adult life.

The expectation that people can put money into a "savings account" like social security that averages a return of about 2% which doesn't even keep up with inflation to live off of for 40 years is an unrealistic expectation.

THAT is insolvency.

Then, add insult to injury, we have a baby boomer bubble going through retirement in conjunction with family size decreasing, meaning less people contributing.

Lastly, the money sent to other countries should be GIVEN to the public to keep a system solvent that really isn't? Isn't that kind of like a band-aid over an amputated arm?

 

Just wealth distribution... once again.

If I earn 4,000,000 per year... I don't need your (*)(*)(*)(*)ty program that like most things is imposed to take care of people that couldn't figure out how to take care of themselves.

So you want to FORCE the high earners, who have absolutely no difficulty paying for their retirement without depending on anybody else, to pay in so the people that failed in life can be sustained?

Same old liberal story over and over and over and over and over again.

Wealth redistribution. Or theft by another P.C. name.

 

That's more of the left-wing hypocrisy I never understood. Whine and cry about other peoples' money for what reason? Because that's less they can take?

Bingo.

 

it's not about you, it's about the elderly in our society, we all should put the same % in from every dollar we earn to help support our elderly and disabled population

 

"
Check out the city of Galvaston, TX that was allowed to opt out of Social Security years ago. Their returns have outpaced Social Security by over 1000%.
"

so gamble social security funds and if the gov loses big, we will take it from other republican projects to make up the difference, sound good to me... win\win

 

I don't have to gamble. I can put in in insurance annuities and crush the return Social Security provides.

 

Here is how the "gamble" works.........................tell me where else you get guaranteed returns like this


First Financial Benefits invests the accounts conservatively, Mr. Gornto said. The company guarantees a minimum rate of return of 3.75 percent to 4 percent on the accounts to safeguard employees’ benefits against inflation and severe drops in market rates.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/18/u...y-works-in-galveston.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

 

No, you didn't hit a nerve, at least any of mine, but you did attempt (poorly) to characterize me. That's a bad idea. I hope YOU will at least think about that.

 

I'm not laughing at all because what you posted is nonsense. Unfortunately, I can't do a cut 'n paste here, but you can read it for yourself. Essentially, there are winners AND losers, depending on income and amounts of contributions. I believe if you just read the first page (Page 47) then look at the chart on Page 49, you'll actually learn something.

 

So the story is simply made up?