Social Security and Medicare are . . . ENTITLEMENTS???

Ok, it's not.
Stop taking it from everyone.

 

I'll make a bet if I can prove I have a farm and you can prove I don't loser has to hand till my garden spot with a fork, about 3 acres...

I made damn good money as a mason contractor..

 

They just hand it over freely after I finish a job.

 

Oh, I get it. Another internet rich guy who just loves to pay high tax rates. Haven't heard that before

 

I am having a great year for income since I had my spinal lamina surgery in 2017...It's nice to be able to walk again....

 

I am self-employed and pay FICA that is all after deductions and expenses...Farmers get bank since they get a fuel rebate and all we get is a tax deduction per diem for mileage..

 

But Social security will need to be adjusted or kill off the boomers...

 

Let's be clear: Social Security os fully paid for with a huge surplus to boot! The problem is what Congress does with the money from the sale of SS Treasury securities after they get it. Same for any Medicare Fund Treasuries.

 

I just read, from SS site?, that it is funded to 2030. And something drastic will need to be done in 2030, if nothing before.
But R's won't bring up any debate.

 

1) you don’t have to take anything away from the folks currently on the programs, per se

2) I don’t know all the ideas or ways we can make them go from unsubstaibale to substaibable. I am however open to the debate in Congress, Why aren’t you?

 

To sustain S.S. and all socially beneficial programs, including education and Medicare, we need tax revenue. The right likes to object that the top 5% (or whatever) of income earners pay 90% of the taxes. And that is true. But why?

If the median real wage had been kept rising as the incomes of the rich have and workers maintained a constant share of the income distribution, the rich wouldn't be paying 90% of the federal income taxes today. But the right is trying to help shift as much wealth as possible from the people to the rich few. The failing economic policies have resulted in roughly half the country (1) not qualifying for payment of income taxes, and (2) qualifying for public assistance. This is not the fault of that half the country. It is the fault of the failing economy caused by failing capitalism. And it leaves the country needing revenue to maintain S.S., Medicare, and Medicaid. So to further their nefarious goal, the right then declares the PROGRAMS to be the problem instead of the ECONOMY!! And their proposal is to harm those whose incomes have been lost to the rich, even more with cuts to programs. And they drive their effort with claims of half the country being "lazy" and "greedy" and "wanting free stuff".

It's all just an attack on the people for the benefit of the rich. And eventually they will be coming after you and me. So DON'T BUY INTO IT!!!

 

Per Se? What does that mean? Some may have to give up something?

Where did I say I wasn't?
McConnell is the leader of Senate. He sets the lead and the agenda.
Where's his plan, his debate?

Until you have reforms in place, one doesn't go cutting revenue as he has done. But that is what R's do, cut revenue and borrow more. They've been doing that since Reagan. Deficits always go up under R leadership. Debt increases also.

 

Respecting one's self is all too often a means of rationalization to escape underlying guilt. If you INDEED provide assistance for ANY in need, I commend you for that, but my reference to Matthew 25 was focused primarily on the verse "as you do unto the LEAST of my brethren, you do unto me". . . . These are the words of Jesus, clearly stating that responses for need for assistance should NOT be dependent on merit.

You are right; it is your money, and other than taxes and other financial responsibilities, you are legally entitled to use it as you wish, as EVERYONE else is. The problem is that there is a finite quantity of financial capital in this world, and the few who are the MOST successful at exploiting others and hoarding it for themselves hold the lion's share of that capital, leaving the rest of the world to fight over table scraps. As the rich get richer, the poor get poorer. . . . Benevolence is not compatible with greed.

Regardless of the claims that "I made this myself", our Constitution and infrastructure have enabled success for MANY who were not necessarily deserving it, and they are upsetting the balance of our economy. Other than restricting unfair practices of these entities, the only plausible recourse is to impose higher taxes on them to counter this effect.

The meaning of responsibility is not limited ONLY to one's obligation to oneself. With a population of over 300 million, as individuals, our only chance to make a REAL difference is through government, with our votes. Patriotism has NOTHING to do with self-interests or selective assistance.

"Tough love" is not love at all.

 

GOOD POST!!!

Yet, among other things, regarding those who exploit the system, why do we lower their taxes???

 

Are you suggesting that I should have broken the law?

 

The "ladder of success" has lost its bottom rungs. . . . In order to qualify for an AVERAGE one-bedroom apartment in the United States, a single person needs an income of $54,000, or $26 an hour. If evicted for inability to meet payments during any time during the specified duration of the lease, current law allows the apartment complex to sue for the total sum of payments that would be expected until the contractual expiration of the lease.

 

But of course- WE are the economy. It's not an evil entity preying on us; it is the simple process of trading services, bartering with the added ease of a currency. IF you have nothing to sell, you have a hard time buying. However, even the least talented can have valuable skills- dependency, the ability to follow instructions, honesty, the will to work. A job applicant that has only those skills has an advantage over many applying for entry or basic jobs. This is attitude- an extremely valuable asset that anyone could bring to the table.

I've had a good number of psychologists in my seminars relating to reprogramming your own thinking; most asking not only how, but how I learned to do it. I'm not a psychologist, but more than one has told me it was impossible even while admitting I was successful at it. I do know a little about psychology and what limits people. I also know that changing yourself is something most people will never do, even with clear instructions on how it can be done. As one psychologist told me- that takes more courage than most people can find.

The factors limiting most people are not things they don't know or can't do- it is the trash they already believe that is false, and simply can't let go of, and it stands firmly in the way of changing their understanding of life. To put it in a simple fashion we all have certain things I will call fundamental principles in the subconscious, that are like tools that interpret information. Not unlike a yardstick or scale, telling you what something weighs. If your version of that one of those principles is faulty, you will be in conflict with someone with a correct one or a different flaw. These are not things you think on and decide about, they are imprinted very early in life and determine your personality. They limit your options, your ability to think in alternative ways. This is why for some, life is like a stuck record- no matter what they change, the same results keep happening. The problem is they aren't able to change the parameters that limit their options, and all those options have the same outcome. There are only a few principles involved; I have lived by them for about 40 years, and I can write them on the back of a business card. Not complicated to learn, but they do not work if they don't replace what you already have in place. Sort of like the BIOS on your computer that tells the system what each string of code means.

I know that sounds strange. One psychologist that attended once told me that my material was a lot like that written by Ellis, which meant nothing to me. Eventually I looked that person up, he was a widely respected psychologist who had a unique view of things. Died in 2007, Dr Albert Ellis. His work and concept is online- https://www.goodtherapy.org/famous-psychologists/albert-ellis.html

I do have sympathy for those who are unable to find their way. Sympathy in terms of understanding how it happens- but not in terms of taking care of them so they won't ever have to grow. Part of my vision for the nation, or the world- is that more people will develop the ability to master themselves, and find their own potential.

 

Sorry you missed the boat here. Your FIRST responsibility is to yourself- and if you meet it, you will not be a burden on society or other people. What is everyone did that, took care of just ONE person- themselves?

Then if you do not take care of yourself, develop the strength, ability and resources that exceeds your personal needs, what exactly will you have of any value to help anyone else with? Mutual sympathy? Pity?

As for tough love not being love-

Ever try to help a drug addict? Ever worked with recovery programs? I have. Every addict agrees with you. Every ex-addict thinks you are wrong.

 

You need to look into that relationship where you think exploiting and getting tax breaks are hand in hand. I think you will find that is more political slander than fact- designed to make people think that those who succeed are always cheating, always using the little guy.

Fact is that the top 10% of taxpayers are paying 70% of the total tax income. Doesn't sound like a sweet deal to me, and I'm one of them. They are the ones being exploited.

 

McConnell is and always has been a political whore bought and paid for by international corporations and bank swindlers. So is Shumer. Both houses of congress are totally infested with scumbag sellouts on both sides of the aisle.

 

1) yes some might depending on the agreement and law that comes out

2) this entire debate started because you and your fellow Dems got bent out of shape because McConnell said reform was in the agenda. Anytime anyone says that some Dems claim the GOP is trying to kill grandma

 

Nope, I suggested you should have also invested instead of depending on Govt for your retirement support.

 

Until they put out a plan. They are. As you say, some grandmas may have to give something up. You admit it in 1) and then deny in 2).

 

When did I admit the GOP was gonna kill grandma? Giving something up, changing things, doesn’t mean grandma is gonna die. Geez, I wish I lived in the black or white world you lived in. Life would be simple.

 

Until they put out a plan they are killing grandmas? How? The current system isn’t the GOPs. It’s true they have to put out something, it’s true that some folks might lose things, to save the entire thing, but that doesn’t mean anyone dies. Why can’t libs have honest debates to try and fix the unsubstaibale programs?