Guess who's planning to screw you out of EARNED entitlements? Surprised?

Well sure!!! I hate it with every fiber of my being, and know that if we finally do the right thing -- make abortion mandatory and not merely a choice -- then within a generation or three, we'll all be gone, so Canada and Mexico can fight over the real estate.

But, and as you intelligently pointed out, the recreational slaughter of them unborn miracles, would do exactly what we haters of this GD country want (Yeeeeeehaaaaw), but then in a momentary lapse of hatred for the Effing States of America, I pointed out that them religioso, baby-makin-machines south of the Rio Grande are helping ya'll out and totally undermining my wish that this friggin POS country be reduced to zero population.

Seems to me, ya'll should be welcoming the America-saving Mexican people with open arms. What's up, BVWC???

 

Paul Ryan?

 

We have a winner!!! Tell 'em what he's won, Johnny!!!

 

We have large swaths of the population under or unemployed. You think adding millions more would have been a good idea? Sounds like a recipe for more welfare. Same as amnesty.

 

No entitlements in the US are earned. $39 out of every $40 Medicare spends is paid for by our children. $1 out of every $2 SS spends is also stolen from our children.

They are handouts to buy votes. THAT IS ALL.

 

Sounds like one hell of a great investment!!! Now show me an index fund that returns 1/10th of that profit -- and not even subject to Capital Gains!!!!

Is this a great country or what??? Send them privatize-SS carpetbaggers packing!!!!

 

LOL, Obama trying to meet Republicans half way, if republicans would not demand these things, we would not need to meet them half way

 

I'll say. Can you guys make up your minds? Is it a Ponzi Scheme, or do we need more people to make it keep working? Is it an earned entitlement or simply another welfare program? And is it good or bad to cut it? It's like with medicare - conservatives have been screeching for 6 (*)(*)(*)(*)ing years that we need to cut social security and medicare. Hell, there was an uproar back in the 2010 fiscal cliff showdown when Obama refused to put cuts to either on the table. And now, Obama puts them on the table in an attempt to come to the middle, and we have people with very short memories spouting crap like this:

Why do you think Obama is putting this on the table, Pollycy? Come on, tell me. Why do you think he would betray his base and put cuts to earned entitlements on the table? It probably doesn't have anything to do with his political future - his base universally hates the idea. It all comes down to this:

 

It is a Ponzi scheme. Like any other Ponzi scheme, if you can get more people buying into it, you can keep it going a while longer.

 

Well who could have seen this coming?

 

"Ponzi scheme" or not, I'll make this prediction: all Obama and the Demos have to do to blow the Republicans completely out of their House majority status, and reduce their number overall in 2014 is to get off this treacherous nonsense of screwing people out of Social Security. A lot of you think it's not an EARNED entitlement, but if that is so then why do we see all this? --

http://www.ssa.gov/planners/

http://www.ssa.gov/estimator/

http://www.socialsecurity.gov/pubs/media/pdf/EN-05-10024.pdf

As you see, these aren't propaganda websites run by Republicans, Democrats, or any other faction. This is what we are given to understand is true, from the United States Government. And it has been true, for almost EIGHTY YEARS! We've been paying into it all our lives, and I still say that just going in and cutting it is, with no doubt, the very most stupid thing that Barack Obama has ever proposed (and that's saying quite a bit). Don't take my word for it -- ask the other 80,000,000 Baby Boomers who are only the first wave of people who Obama is going to SCREW! I've said it before, and I'll say it again -- BABY BOOMERS VOTE! We got rid of Johnson, we got rid of the Vietnam War, we got rid of Nixon, and we got rid of Carter. We were the last decently-educated generation to emerge from the American public school systems, and after all we've been through, we're in no mood to get ****ed by Obama or anyone else now!

 

It's not what I 'think'.

Imagine anything else that you earn that you cannot give or will to your children. Nothing ordinary, that's for sure. If you earned SS then it belongs to you to do with as you wish. That's clearly untrue.

Nobody that's written a huge mother of a check to the IRS on 4/15 for BOTH PARTS of 'self employment tax' want's to think it's a scam. But remember the top of Schedule SE sez 'TAX' plain and simple. And it's a dirty scam.

 

I think you are half serious about hating America.

How sad.

 

Only half??? Damn you, Sir. I despise mediocrity!!!! It's why I'm not a Conservative, the epitome of mediocrity!!!!!!

 

This doesn't have anything to do with what a person can, or cannot "will to his children"! None of today's "children and the grandchildren" has paid a dime into Social Security or any other mandatory government program. This is between each individual victimized taxpayer and the United States Government. That's the basis upon which the money is taken away from us, that's how the records for each individual account are kept, and that's how the benefits have been calculated for nearly 80 years!

We're talking about you (YOU!) and the United States Government. YOU paid in "X"- dollars, and, when you reach a minimum age of 62, you can collect on the basis of what YOU have paid in. There's no "mystery" in any of this... indeed, it's so simple that even a liberal Democrat should be able to understand it.

But not Obama! No, instead of FIRST demanding a total overhaul of the U. S. Tax Code to eliminate all loopholes, shelters, exclusions, and exemptions that benefit only the truly wealthy (liberal and conservative), Obama proposes to balance the budget on the backs of seniors on Social Security! You'd think that nobody but a hopelessly dense Republican, like "Crusader Rick" Santorum could dream up politically-suicidal idiocy like this, but, don't ever underestimate the fathomless stu-****ing-pidity of Barack Insane Obama!

 

I'd like to reiterate my question, Pollycy. Why do you think Obama is aiming to cut what you call "earned" entitlements?

 

because hed rather take, than cut spending...

 

no doubt, they asked for it, Obama met them halfway, now they will start to attack him for it, then Obama can remove it stating republicans don't want it...

 

This would be a clever strategy. Unfortunately, this is Obama we're talking about. He's actually serious about meeting republicans in the middle.

 

Sorry, didn't mean to ignore you... I got distracted last week by Obama's North Korean nuke appeasement by cancelling our own scheduled missile test, and then came the Boston blowup caused by Islamo-Nazis....

I can't understand why Obama, who's the living, breathing reincarnation of the great socialist "god", Frankie Roosevelt, would advocate cutting Social Security. Like I said, it is as senseless as it is unfair. As far as EARNED benefits versus handout-welfare goes -- do you really not see the difference?

When we are forced by the government to PAY into something all our lives, then we have EARNED our benefits. But, if you lay around on your ass for years, sinking further and further into the failure that you have made for yourself in life, and "poor-mouth" to the government for it to support you, that is being a parasite, and that "entitlement" is nothing but handout-welfare. Anybody with a triple-digit IQ can immediately tell the obvious difference, unless they don't want to....

I know things are very different for you in Germany, and there are many admirable, beneficial aspects to the way retirement is EARNED in Germany. But the U. S. isn't Germany, and our American Social Security System has been in existence since August 14, 1935!

 

We need to cut handout-welfare -- not EARNED Social Security benefits. I've been through this a hundred times.
We need to overhaul the entire U. S. Tax Code to eliminate all loopholes, shelters, and exemptions. Only then will the truly rich ever pay a "fair share" of the tax burdern. I've been through that a hundred times, too.

We need to pay EARNED Social Security benefits, and if the system has "financial problems" (even though it's fully funded until 2032), then the ****ing government needs to rescue it the same way it rushed to rescue all these criminally-negligent investment banker bastards who were "too big to fail"! Rescue a bunch of toxic mortgage traders, but cheat people on Social Security? Is that what Obama thinks he wants to do? Then he's even crazier than I have thought he is....

 

YUP! Obama! The ALLEGED Democrat. I will NOT ignore it but the media sure has...all that BS and blather about gun control and immigration, CRAP which has NOTHING to do with ME......and only Sanders and Grayson to speak out and defend older AMERICANS and the vicious attack on their EARNINGS!...no other DemoCowards will!!!

I have voted all my life for Democrats knowing well that it is really The Wealthy who run the world.
But I voted anyway hoping to stem the tide until I can get through this world.
Although I would never vote for a Republican, Republicans being one of the most evil entities in the world, I will NEVER vote again after having Obama attempt to Screw me over and steal my SS..

I do have to give Republicans credit...they are evil right up front....unlike Obama who slithered in and stabbed Americans in the back....

 

Social Security is taken from your pay checks and deposited into the Social Security Trust Fund. It does not go directly into the Federal government's general fund (ie, income taxes, etc.). The problem is the Federal government BORROWS all the money out of the Social Security Trust Fund. So a big chunk of the federal debt is to the SS Trust Fund.

So anything you do to change the way money goes in or out of the SS Trust Fund will not reduce the federal debt by one penny. Obama can cut grandma's SS checks every month, but it doesn't lower the federal debt.

Social Security is a neither an entitlement nor benefit program (like food stamps)... it is a retirement program that everybody has been paying into all of their lives.

Right now the SS Trust Fund is solvent (ie, has extra money) through the year 2033. There is no logical reason to reduce SS checks. Sorry Obama, you must find some other way to pay the money you owe to the SS Trust Fund. Furthermore it is NOT a bargaining chip with the Republicans. If Obama wants to lower social security payments, go ahead a try it. It only means that most people over age 55 or so will vote Republican in 2014/ 2016.

Obama has caught himself in his own, stupid trap.

 

Yes, Obama will and has lost votes for his FORMER party, the Democrat Party.

But only if people are aware of what he proposes...I talked to a 50-something friend and even though she's politically aware she didn't know about this proposal!....certainly no Democrats besides Sanders and Grayson are speaking out.....


Sanders: """This is not a minor tweak, as its proponents contend," Sanders scolded. "Under Obama’s proposal, according to the Social Security Administration, 65-year-old retirees would lose more than $650 a year by their 75th birthday,

and more than $1,000 a year would be cut from their benefits once they reach 85.

The proposed change would also affect more than 3.2 million disabled veterans receiving disability compensation benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Veterans who started receiving V.A. disability benefits at age 30 would have their benefits reduced by $1,425 a year at age 45, $2,341 at age 55 and $3,231 at age 65.

Benefits for more than 350,000 surviving spouses and children would also be cut."

 

I do see the difference; it's many republicans who don't. The pundits never made that difference before now. And yeah, if you imagine that Obama is a socialist who wants to advocate handouts on every turn, or a "new FDR", then no (*)(*)(*)(*), it doesn't make sense! This is what we've been saying the whole time. Why do you think Tom Tomorrow's webcomic has an entire running gag about "MiddleMan"?



The fact is that regardless of how hard you guys try to paint him as the most radical liberal socialist ever, he just ain't. That's why things keep happening that make no sense if you try to paint him that way.

Not according to Bush.

Not according to Ryan.

Horse(*)(*)(*)(*). The entire purpose of this exercise was to offer a compromise to the republicans. I'm sorry, but if you've forgotten that republicans have been clamoring for this for what is now approaching a decade, then you have a terrible memory.

Yes. The trap of trying to be a bipartisan when one party is fundamentally dishonest about their intentions.