Originally Posted by Riot
I don't believe this. You diss the law repeatedly, then when you finally realize that what you've been dissing it for doesn't exist, you trash the law because it doesn't exist.
er, you said they were playing as they went, the fines are listed-but its your contention that they won't actually charge a fine. i'll wait and see from the powers that be, whether they follow what they passed.Seriously? Just stop making any pretense that your opinion about the law is remotely based upon any fact or objective observation regarding it's content.
a difference in opinion doesn't mean anything about what facts are contained in the bill, or what will ulimately occur.
Guess that's why it's going to the Supreme Court, as has been the intention from day one. The lower court decisions already made say "constitutional" outnumbers "not", but maybe the minority opinion will prevail in the high court as you guess.
You can either examine the math and predictions over decades from the government and from watchdog groups and believe it, or show where it's wrong. So show where it's wrong. Oh, wait! No, let's just dismiss it out of hand because we don't like what the answer is!
i posted in another thread extensive excerpts as well as the link to the cbo report about ss-you conveniently ignored all of that.
Social Security has been a success because we've run up against financial shortfall projections many, many times before, and we do tweek and fix them. The proof is there. We know the population, the amount of taxes taken in, changes over time, that why it's looked at regularly. This is just another one of those times, but we're not even really there yet - we have years.
Geeshus cripes, 'Zig, do you not realize that we've done this 'tweek' multiple times in the past? That over 40 times, the conservative wing of government has threatened and screamed falsely about the imminent financial demise of Social Security? That projections have changed since it's inception, it's regularly reviewed, and yes, multiple "tweeks" are routinely done to Social Security all the time to keep it solvent?
again, the tweak as you call it is more than that, especially when one considers the cbo report referenced above, and that the report was based on numbers including the tax break expiring, which it didn't-and of course on the ss witholding not being cut, which it was.
.
This sentence makes it clear you haven't looked even superficially at the long-term Social Security financing projections, based upon adjustments now and planned adjustments in the future, because the problem is due primarily to the baby boomer bubble (and was accurately predicted about 20 years ago), and the increasing population smooths out after that.
again, untrue. go read the cbo report in the other thread in this room.
Yeah - that's exactly why we should change things now. You want to completely eliminate the program? Fine. But I, and plenty of other Americans, don't care to see us become just another second-world country.
|