social security

Kill everyone who owns a Hall & Oates record.

[clyde]

Why not kill both groups?

No. I refuse to kill members of my family no matter how many times they've pissed on my toilet seat. I am not an animal.

[MaTH716]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

Kill everyone who owns a Hall & Oates record.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

Kill everyone who owns a Hall & Oates record.

I can't go for that (no can do) ... oops ... BANG!!!!

[somerfrost]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

wow
So if I read this correctly, not only should the wealthy pay more into social security, (their "fair share"), but they should also get zero benefits?
your sense of fairness doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
this type of argument is always used to derail legitimate refrom of the program. its not going to be fixed simply by taking more from the wealthy. the big problem is the the declining number of workers supporting a larger population of retirees.

Never said the rich should pay more only if cuts must be made, the wealthy should be first and yes that is a socialist idea...so what?

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by somerfrost

Never said the rich should pay more only if cuts must be made, the wealthy should be first and yes that is a socialist idea...so what?

This is the United States, and socialism sucks. We don't want it. You want socialism? Go to Cuba, or China, or anywhere "red" enough.

Socialism is akin to a bunch of bums saying that they want more of someone else's money -- somebody who worked for it. Just like that mugger waiting around the next dark alley.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by joeydb

This is the United States, and socialism sucks. We don't want it. You want socialism? Go to Cuba, or China, or anywhere "red" enough.

Socialism is akin to a bunch of bums saying that they want more of someone else's money -- somebody who worked for it. Just like that mugger waiting around the next dark alley.

Good lord, you don't have a clue what Socialism is. Or Communism. You're just spitting out words you've heard.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Riot

Good lord, you don't have a clue what Socialism is. Or Communism. You're just spitting out words you've heard.

Let's make this simple: Whatever you want to call the "system" where the top 5% paying over 54% of the bill is NOT ENOUGH, I am opposed to it.

[somerfrost]

Originally Posted by joeydb

This is the United States, and socialism sucks. We don't want it. You want socialism? Go to Cuba, or China, or anywhere "red" enough.

Socialism is akin to a bunch of bums saying that they want more of someone else's money -- somebody who worked for it. Just like that mugger waiting around the next dark alley.

Really, I didn't realize that I was living in the US. Who are "we"? It's interesting that you can define Socialism in such simplistic terms. Sounds like something directly from the era of Joe McCarthy,

[AeWingnut]

Originally Posted by somerfrost

Really, I didn't realize that I was living in the US. Who are "we"? It's interesting that you can define Socialism in such simplistic terms. Sounds like something directly from the era of Joe McCarthy,

and Joe McCarthy was right

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by somerfrost

Every time it is suggested that the rich pay their fair share there is a cry of "unfair" from the Republicans. I don't care whether you call it a tax or a loaf of bread, the bottom line is that Social Security needs repair and you can do so by taking away from those who don't need it or those who do, wipe away all the political crap and it's that simple. Call it Socialism if it make you feel better but if you have a six digit yearly income you simply don't need social security, if you rely on that monthly check to survive...you sorta do!

like i said, if you only pay it back to those who 'deserve' it, it's no longer what it was set up to be. if we aren't paying enough to keep it solvent, raise the withholding-don't lower it like what was done for this year! and don't let the gov 'borrow' from it, then we have to pay that back as well.