User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 7:55:56 AM EST
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I know it won't happen. Social Security will be the last program still being funded before the inevitable collapse. Because we let SS recipients vote, our representatives will never do the needful. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: While I agree with you completely, that will not happen. Too many "well just give me MY money back" people out there, that vote. We boiled the frog slowly and now we have to turn the heat down so slowly that it's virtually imperceptible. That has the best chance of succeeding politically. There's numerous ways to accomplish that, but everyone gets at least a few bites of the shit sandwich, even if you spread it out over 100 years or more. But we won't do that either. No one wants to be responsible about it. Just kick the can down the road and lie. I know it won't happen. Social Security will be the last program still being funded before the inevitable collapse. Because we let SS recipients vote, our representatives will never do the needful. So which party should they vote for? Most polls show SS age people vote majority Republican while the majority of people that complain about SS vote dem.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 7:59:50 AM EST
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: meh I like the flat/fair tax but it isn't the only solution. Social security would be solvent if they did away with the cap on it. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Flat 21% tax is the only REAL way to tackle the issue... but poors don't love their country enough to pay for it. meh I like the flat/fair tax but it isn't the only solution. Social security would be solvent if they did away with the cap on it. Would they also remove the cap on payouts? Or are you just pushing for more redistribution? I think I know the answer. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 8:11:03 AM EST
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Social Security and Medicare should not be included in the general budget since they are funded by a separate tax. Medicaid is welfare and should not be confused with Medicare. Will someone please explain to me how ending SS will balance the budget? I assume that you will not only stop benefits eliminate the tax. After all you are trying to cut your taxes. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: For anyone who can't read a simple chart or look at actual budget outlays versus revenues; it's simple, at our current level Mandatory Spending(Things like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid) + interest payments outpace or are near balanced with our entire revenue stream. This means the entire discretionary budget (defense and everything else) is being borrowed. You could slash 100% of discretionary spending and we'd still be broke. Because current or soon to be Social Security recipients say "Fuck You, Pay Me". No dream of the "Trust Funds" is going to change this. You cannot tax your way out of this. Social Security and Medicare should not be included in the general budget since they are funded by a separate tax. Medicaid is welfare and should not be confused with Medicare. Will someone please explain to me how ending SS will balance the budget? I assume that you will not only stop benefits eliminate the tax. After all you are trying to cut your taxes. Try reading and analyzing the chart.  Attached File Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 8:14:47 AM EST
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: How about we just abolish democrats Kthxbye. Fixt |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 8:17:39 AM EST
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So which party should they vote for? Most polls show SS age people vote majority Republican while the majority of people that complain about SS vote dem. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: While I agree with you completely, that will not happen. Too many "well just give me MY money back" people out there, that vote. We boiled the frog slowly and now we have to turn the heat down so slowly that it's virtually imperceptible. That has the best chance of succeeding politically. There's numerous ways to accomplish that, but everyone gets at least a few bites of the shit sandwich, even if you spread it out over 100 years or more. But we won't do that either. No one wants to be responsible about it. Just kick the can down the road and lie. I know it won't happen. Social Security will be the last program still being funded before the inevitable collapse. Because we let SS recipients vote, our representatives will never do the needful. So which party should they vote for? Most polls show SS age people vote majority Republican while the majority of people that complain about SS vote dem. Neither party has any plank or policy that mentions reducing Social Security. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 8:18:51 AM EST
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Me too. I pay a guy good $ to legally minimize my taxes to the maximum. It's the American Way. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Don’t describe something as a contract if it isn’t. Also yes, I make any and all efforts to avoid paying taxes whenever possible. Fuck that shit. Me too. I pay a guy good $ to legally minimize my taxes to the maximum. It's the American Way. It might surprise you that I don’t like paying taxes. I take advantage of Muni and capital gains to keep my taxes down. I have a CPA who does my taxes. SS is a Social Contract. If you think it isn’t, run for office and pledge to abolish it. I don’t think you will get very far. Very few people want to steal from their parents, grandparents and other relatives. Good luck getting the gray panthers to support you. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 8:22:55 AM EST
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Those stupid stimulus checks during the covid era. There were even threads here during it with people discussing what gun to get with it. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I hope I manage to refuse when I get there. I managed to toss the stupid stimulus checks in the shredder when they sent them to me. I'm pretty sure it wound up in the litter pan and got peed on by my cats. They sent you stimmy checks and you didn't ask for them? How does that happen? Asking for a friend. My, uh, friend never got a stimmy dime, asked-for or not. Those stupid stimulus checks during the covid era. There were even threads here during it with people discussing what gun to get with it. What did you accomplish by destroying the Covid stimulus checks? If you didn’t want the money, you could have given it to a charity. I would imagine for most of us GD Billionaires, the checks were simply a tax refund. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 8:36:13 AM EST
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: For anyone who can't read a simple chart or look at actual budget outlays versus revenues; it's simple, at our current level Mandatory Spending(Things like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid) + interest payments outpace or are near balanced with our entire revenue stream. This means the entire discretionary budget (defense and everything else) is being borrowed. You could slash 100% of discretionary spending and we'd still be broke. Because current or soon to be Social Security recipients say "Fuck You, Pay Me". No dream of the "Trust Funds" is going to change this. You cannot tax your way out of this. Social Security and Medicare should not be included in the general budget since they are funded by a separate tax. Medicaid is welfare and should not be confused with Medicare. Will someone please explain to me how ending SS will balance the budget? I assume that you will not only stop benefits eliminate the tax. After all you are trying to cut your taxes. Try reading and analyzing the chart. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/40084/Screenshot_2024-02-06_183926_png-3124075.JPGhttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/40084/Screenshot_2024-02-06_183503_png-3124076.JPG What is your point? The charts do not clearly separate SS taxes from other taxes. Assume SS benefits cost $1.2T. If we assume SS taxes raise $1.1T than 0.1T is taken from the SS Trust Fund. If you eliminate the benefits you save 1.2T assuming you continue to the SS taxes and take from the SS Trust Fund. Wait, you don’t want to pay the SS taxes? You just lost 1.1T in income. Don’t worry, you can still take the SS Trust Fund. That will save money this year. SS should be looked at as a separate budget. It is funded by its own taxes and does not use general tax revenue. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 8:45:24 AM EST
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If the government is planning to loot an entire generation of their lives savings, they might not want to start with Gen X. Our formative years were the cold war....we spent the 80's obsessed with the apocalypse...we spent the 90's prepping for existential disaster....we have read every dystopia novel....we idolize the underdog and root for lone wolf. If I were going to steal from someone, I might choose to start with an easy target....not the guys who when they were 16 years old already in the gym, training....learning to fight....going home watching the terminator and listening to thrash metal. It’s even worse than the dollar value. They’d be essentially stealing your irreplaceable time. Stealing the vacations you could have taken. The better food you could have eaten. The hiatus between jobs you could have spent with your family. They’d be taking your life, in arrears. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 8:59:58 AM EST
[#10]
'The case for using subsidies for retirement plans to fix social security' In theory the perks are intended to boost the nation's retirement savings by incentivizing workers to contribute more. But they come at a cost. According to estimates by the US Treasury, the tax benefits on such plans cost the government between $185 billion and $189 billion in 2020. There it is, the idea that tax breaks, COST the government money. They believe they have a right to your money. Taxation is theft. If you don't get it by now, you never will. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 9:10:51 AM EST
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What is your point? The charts do not clearly separate SS taxes from other taxes. Assume SS benefits cost $1.2T. If we assume SS taxes raise $1.1T than 0.1T is taken from the SS Trust Fund. If you eliminate the benefits you save 1.2T assuming you continue to the SS taxes and take from the SS Trust Fund. Wait, you don’t want to pay the SS taxes? You just lost 1.1T in income. Don’t worry, you can still take the SS Trust Fund. That will save money this year. SS should be looked at as a separate budget. It is funded by its own taxes and does not use general tax revenue. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: For anyone who can't read a simple chart or look at actual budget outlays versus revenues; it's simple, at our current level Mandatory Spending(Things like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid) + interest payments outpace or are near balanced with our entire revenue stream. This means the entire discretionary budget (defense and everything else) is being borrowed. You could slash 100% of discretionary spending and we'd still be broke. Because current or soon to be Social Security recipients say "Fuck You, Pay Me". No dream of the "Trust Funds" is going to change this. You cannot tax your way out of this. Social Security and Medicare should not be included in the general budget since they are funded by a separate tax. Medicaid is welfare and should not be confused with Medicare. Will someone please explain to me how ending SS will balance the budget? I assume that you will not only stop benefits eliminate the tax. After all you are trying to cut your taxes. Try reading and analyzing the chart. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/40084/Screenshot_2024-02-06_183926_png-3124075.JPGhttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/40084/Screenshot_2024-02-06_183503_png-3124076.JPG What is your point? The charts do not clearly separate SS taxes from other taxes. Assume SS benefits cost $1.2T. If we assume SS taxes raise $1.1T than 0.1T is taken from the SS Trust Fund. If you eliminate the benefits you save 1.2T assuming you continue to the SS taxes and take from the SS Trust Fund. Wait, you don’t want to pay the SS taxes? You just lost 1.1T in income. Don’t worry, you can still take the SS Trust Fund. That will save money this year. SS should be looked at as a separate budget. It is funded by its own taxes and does not use general tax revenue. Can't speak to Felicia's specific point, since he asked us to make our own interpretation, but the charts separate collection of SS with Medicare as Payroll Taxes ($1.5T). And, it also shows that SS plus Medicare spending is $1.95T. That doesn't seem to balance, though, by about $0.45T. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 9:22:01 AM EST
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What is your point? The charts do not clearly separate SS taxes from other taxes. Assume SS benefits cost $1.2T. If we assume SS taxes raise $1.1T than 0.1T is taken from the SS Trust Fund. If you eliminate the benefits you save 1.2T assuming you continue to the SS taxes and take from the SS Trust Fund. Wait, you don’t want to pay the SS taxes? You just lost 1.1T in income. Don’t worry, you can still take the SS Trust Fund. That will save money this year. SS should be looked at as a separate budget. It is funded by its own taxes and does not use general tax revenue. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: For anyone who can't read a simple chart or look at actual budget outlays versus revenues; it's simple, at our current level Mandatory Spending(Things like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid) + interest payments outpace or are near balanced with our entire revenue stream. This means the entire discretionary budget (defense and everything else) is being borrowed. You could slash 100% of discretionary spending and we'd still be broke. Because current or soon to be Social Security recipients say "Fuck You, Pay Me". No dream of the "Trust Funds" is going to change this. You cannot tax your way out of this. Social Security and Medicare should not be included in the general budget since they are funded by a separate tax. Medicaid is welfare and should not be confused with Medicare. Will someone please explain to me how ending SS will balance the budget? I assume that you will not only stop benefits eliminate the tax. After all you are trying to cut your taxes. Try reading and analyzing the chart. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/40084/Screenshot_2024-02-06_183926_png-3124075.JPGhttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/40084/Screenshot_2024-02-06_183503_png-3124076.JPG What is your point? The charts do not clearly separate SS taxes from other taxes. Assume SS benefits cost $1.2T. If we assume SS taxes raise $1.1T than 0.1T is taken from the SS Trust Fund. If you eliminate the benefits you save 1.2T assuming you continue to the SS taxes and take from the SS Trust Fund. Wait, you don’t want to pay the SS taxes? You just lost 1.1T in income. Don’t worry, you can still take the SS Trust Fund. That will save money this year. SS should be looked at as a separate budget. It is funded by its own taxes and does not use general tax revenue. It separates out the revenue quite clearly. It even explains which portion of revenue is from SS taxes and such.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 9:24:20 AM EST
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Hey guys, did you know SS is only payed on approximately the first $140K you make? Above that, nothing. There is a simple answer here to save SS but nobody wants to address it. Wonder why. 168,600 this year. That took 2 seconds to google. It didn’t cross 100k until 2008. When is enough of my money enough for you? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 9:27:28 AM EST
[#14]
Somehow, prior to 1935, people managed to plan for retirement without a Government check being the plan.
Which is impossible today somehow. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 10:00:43 AM EST
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Somehow, prior to 1935, people managed to plan for retirement without a Government check being the plan. Which is impossible today somehow. To be fair, the program was set up for those most vulnerable. Old age then at 65 would be around 80 today. Let alone people drawing today at 62. The Medicare HI fund goes broke first. That could fix everything…. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 10:05:28 AM EST
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Can't speak to Felicia's specific point, since he asked us to make our own interpretation, but the charts separate collection of SS with Medicare as Payroll Taxes ($1.5T). And, it also shows that SS plus Medicare spending is $1.95T. That doesn't seem to balance, though, by about $0.45T. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: For anyone who can't read a simple chart or look at actual budget outlays versus revenues; it's simple, at our current level Mandatory Spending(Things like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid) + interest payments outpace or are near balanced with our entire revenue stream. This means the entire discretionary budget (defense and everything else) is being borrowed. You could slash 100% of discretionary spending and we'd still be broke. Because current or soon to be Social Security recipients say "Fuck You, Pay Me". No dream of the "Trust Funds" is going to change this. You cannot tax your way out of this. Social Security and Medicare should not be included in the general budget since they are funded by a separate tax. Medicaid is welfare and should not be confused with Medicare. Will someone please explain to me how ending SS will balance the budget? I assume that you will not only stop benefits eliminate the tax. After all you are trying to cut your taxes. Try reading and analyzing the chart. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/40084/Screenshot_2024-02-06_183926_png-3124075.JPGhttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/40084/Screenshot_2024-02-06_183503_png-3124076.JPG What is your point? The charts do not clearly separate SS taxes from other taxes. Assume SS benefits cost $1.2T. If we assume SS taxes raise $1.1T than 0.1T is taken from the SS Trust Fund. If you eliminate the benefits you save 1.2T assuming you continue to the SS taxes and take from the SS Trust Fund. Wait, you don’t want to pay the SS taxes? You just lost 1.1T in income. Don’t worry, you can still take the SS Trust Fund. That will save money this year. SS should be looked at as a separate budget. It is funded by its own taxes and does not use general tax revenue. Can't speak to Felicia's specific point, since he asked us to make our own interpretation, but the charts separate collection of SS with Medicare as Payroll Taxes ($1.5T). And, it also shows that SS plus Medicare spending is $1.95T. That doesn't seem to balance, though, by about $0.45T. The deficit is currently being funded by the SS Trust Fund. General tax revenues are not being used to pay SS. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 10:08:05 AM EST
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It separates out the revenue quite clearly. It even explains which portion of revenue is from SS taxes and such. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: For anyone who can't read a simple chart or look at actual budget outlays versus revenues; it's simple, at our current level Mandatory Spending(Things like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid) + interest payments outpace or are near balanced with our entire revenue stream. This means the entire discretionary budget (defense and everything else) is being borrowed. You could slash 100% of discretionary spending and we'd still be broke. Because current or soon to be Social Security recipients say "Fuck You, Pay Me". No dream of the "Trust Funds" is going to change this. You cannot tax your way out of this. Social Security and Medicare should not be included in the general budget since they are funded by a separate tax. Medicaid is welfare and should not be confused with Medicare. Will someone please explain to me how ending SS will balance the budget? I assume that you will not only stop benefits eliminate the tax. After all you are trying to cut your taxes. Try reading and analyzing the chart. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/40084/Screenshot_2024-02-06_183926_png-3124075.JPGhttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/40084/Screenshot_2024-02-06_183503_png-3124076.JPG What is your point? The charts do not clearly separate SS taxes from other taxes. Assume SS benefits cost $1.2T. If we assume SS taxes raise $1.1T than 0.1T is taken from the SS Trust Fund. If you eliminate the benefits you save 1.2T assuming you continue to the SS taxes and take from the SS Trust Fund. Wait, you don’t want to pay the SS taxes? You just lost 1.1T in income. Don’t worry, you can still take the SS Trust Fund. That will save money this year. SS should be looked at as a separate budget. It is funded by its own taxes and does not use general tax revenue. It separates out the revenue quite clearly. It even explains which portion of revenue is from SS taxes and such. Thanks for the clarification. I did not understand the note as saying payroll taxes Only fund SS and Medicare. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 10:09:32 AM EST
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Somehow, prior to 1935, people managed to plan for retirement without a Government check being the plan. Which is impossible today somehow. Actually they did not plan for retirement. A lot of workers continued to work as long as possible and either died or went on welfare. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 10:11:46 AM EST
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Somehow, prior to 1935, people managed to plan for retirement without a Government check being the plan. Which is impossible today somehow. It's only impossible if you lack a brain. Anybody relying on SS to solely fund their retirement, clearly doesn't have one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 10:24:45 AM EST
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's only impossible if you lack a brain. Anybody relying on SS to solely fund their retirement, clearly doesn't have one. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Somehow, prior to 1935, people managed to plan for retirement without a Government check being the plan. Which is impossible today somehow. It's only impossible if you lack a brain. Anybody relying on SS to solely fund their retirement, clearly doesn't have one. Social Security was never meant to be your sole income in retirement. Retirement income was compared to a three legged stool with SS being one of the legs. The other two were company pensions and your savings/investments. We all know that defined benefit pensions have been replaced for most people by defined contributions plans (ie 401k, 403b etc.). The other self evident truth is that a significant number of people don’t plan for the future and have little in savings. Many of the same people don’t invest in their 401k plans or their employers don’t offer them. I did work for a company with a pension plan and get a small, thick happy meal size check, from them. Later I worked for a company with profit sharing and a good 401k. I took full advantage of the 401k and did my own savings and investments. SS is not my primary income but I paid into it and would not want to lose it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 10:33:05 AM EST
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Social Security was never meant to be your sole income in retirement. Retirement income was compared to a three legged stool with SS being one of the legs. The other two were company pensions and your savings/investments. We all know that defined benefit pensions have been replaced for most people by defined contributions plans (ie 401k, 403b etc.). The other self evident truth is that a significant number of people don’t plan for the future and have little in savings. Many of the same people don’t invest in their 401k plans or their employers don’t offer them. I did work for a company with a pension plan and get a small, thick happy meal size check, from them. Later I worked for a company with profit sharing and a good 401k. I took full advantage of the 401k and did my own savings and investments. SS is not my primary income but I paid into it and would not want to lose it. I couldn't care less about other people's failure to plan. It's not my problem. And I'm perfectly fine losing SS, shits prolly gonna be means tested to hell by the time I'm 62 anyway. And that's not even getting into the fact that in about 10 years the lock box runs out and then the fed will start printing the extra 0.45 trillion to cover SS insolvency. Because as stated earlier, if the government threatened old people's retirement monies, we would actually see a change in this country and we can't have that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 10:49:55 AM EST
[#22]
BTW, we have a member here who was in the securities industry. He asserts that 401ks were created to herd people into the stock market.
One major change from the old days is that is is rare that people actually own stock. When you bought 1000 shares of IBM, he got a engraved stock certificate that stated that you held 1000 shares of IBM (or what not). Today you get a brokerage statement that says you have 1000 shares. In reality your brokerage may or may not have bought that 1000 shares. They're counting on people to buy/sell and chase the rising stocks. So, all they really do is credit your account w/out buying it. If you sell, they figure the diffence and pay you. It is possible that a brokerage has that 1,000 shares, but it may also be held by your neighbor, coworker, cousin, cousin's former college roomate --- in short, multiple people have a claim on that same 1,000 shares. If you want another layer of confusion consider title. Title is a legal concept and it goes to who can actually dispose of the object that the title is to. Title is actually held by DTCC and you are not the title holder of that 1,000 shares of IBM. So what are you? A beneficiary. Just like your savings account, you are just a benefiiciary just like your neighbor, coworker, cousin, cousin's former college roomate to those same shares. It's a big mess that David Webb talks about in his book (and free audio book), The Great Taking. Webb discusses how "securities" laws were changed to make the public susceptible to the sudden loss of wealth. Dodd-Frank did the same to your banking account. The "contents" of your 401K and brokerage account can vanish when a bank or brokerage house collapse. Everything goes into receivership and the courts will take years to figure out what gets how much of each 1,000 shares. You may only get 1% by the time it's settled. You're running out of time to take action but don't listen to me. I'm just an old guy who reads a lot of books. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 10:51:17 AM EST
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I couldn't care less about other people's failure to plan. It's not my problem. And I'm perfectly fine losing SS, shits prolly gonna be means tested to hell by the time I'm 62 anyway. And that's not even getting into the fact that in about 10 years the lock box runs out and then the fed will start printing the extra 0.45 trillion to cover SS insolvency. Because as stated earlier, if the government threatened old people's retirement monies, we would actually see a change in this country and we can't have that. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Social Security was never meant to be your sole income in retirement. Retirement income was compared to a three legged stool with SS being one of the legs. The other two were company pensions and your savings/investments. We all know that defined benefit pensions have been replaced for most people by defined contributions plans (ie 401k, 403b etc.). The other self evident truth is that a significant number of people don’t plan for the future and have little in savings. Many of the same people don’t invest in their 401k plans or their employers don’t offer them. I did work for a company with a pension plan and get a small, thick happy meal size check, from them. Later I worked for a company with profit sharing and a good 401k. I took full advantage of the 401k and did my own savings and investments. SS is not my primary income but I paid into it and would not want to lose it. I couldn't care less about other people's failure to plan. It's not my problem. And I'm perfectly fine losing SS, shits prolly gonna be means tested to hell by the time I'm 62 anyway. And that's not even getting into the fact that in about 10 years the lock box runs out and then the fed will start printing the extra 0.45 trillion to cover SS insolvency. Because as stated earlier, if the government threatened old people's retirement monies, we would actually see a change in this country and we can't have that. The problem is they can't print it. That may have been the strategy before, but when Biden decided to weaponize SWIFT, it no longer works. Well, it does, but just means rampant inflation for us all. And Medicare is the one to watch. Part B and D already are funded by general revenues to a high degree (deficit spending) and when Part A runs out of it's trust, more pain will ensue. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 10:55:25 AM EST
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The problem is they can't print it. That may have been the strategy before, but when Biden decided to weaponize SWIFT, it no longer works. Well, it does, but just means rampant inflation for us all. And Medicare is the one to watch. Part B and D already are funded by general revenues to a high degree (deficit spending) and when Part A runs out of it's trust, more pain will ensue. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Social Security was never meant to be your sole income in retirement. Retirement income was compared to a three legged stool with SS being one of the legs. The other two were company pensions and your savings/investments. We all know that defined benefit pensions have been replaced for most people by defined contributions plans (ie 401k, 403b etc.). The other self evident truth is that a significant number of people don’t plan for the future and have little in savings. Many of the same people don’t invest in their 401k plans or their employers don’t offer them. I did work for a company with a pension plan and get a small, thick happy meal size check, from them. Later I worked for a company with profit sharing and a good 401k. I took full advantage of the 401k and did my own savings and investments. SS is not my primary income but I paid into it and would not want to lose it. I couldn't care less about other people's failure to plan. It's not my problem. And I'm perfectly fine losing SS, shits prolly gonna be means tested to hell by the time I'm 62 anyway. And that's not even getting into the fact that in about 10 years the lock box runs out and then the fed will start printing the extra 0.45 trillion to cover SS insolvency. Because as stated earlier, if the government threatened old people's retirement monies, we would actually see a change in this country and we can't have that. The problem is they can't print it. That may have been the strategy before, but when Biden decided to weaponize SWIFT, it no longer works. Well, it does, but just means rampant inflation for us all. And Medicare is the one to watch. Part B and D already are funded by general revenues to a high degree (deficit spending) and when Part A runs out of it's trust, more pain will ensue. "Sir" Allan Greenspan admitted that much. He said something to the effect that we can alwaays meet our obligation (mean'n brrrrrrrrrrrr!) but he couldn't guarantee what it could buy (Weimar America!  ) Greenspan: "USA can pay any debt because it can always print money" So, what's the difference between money and currency? (exponentialpi, mach and doppel know, do you?) |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 10:56:16 AM EST
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: They are going to go after 401ks. It's inevitable. Start seizing investments, people will stop investing. It's all downhill from there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 10:57:41 AM EST
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The problem is they can't print it. That may have been the strategy before, but when Biden decided to weaponize SWIFT, it no longer works. Well, it does, but just means rampant inflation for us all. And Medicare is the one to watch. Part B and D already are funded by general revenues to a high degree (deficit spending) and when Part A runs out of it's trust, more pain will ensue. Can't wait. And the worst part is my generation is too retarded to make the correct decisions to avert/fix this financial mess. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 10:58:22 AM EST
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I want back what was stolen from me. If that means the next generation has to pay for it, so be it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 11:07:32 AM EST
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Wow. You... are what's wrong with our society. Do you favor reparations for slavery too? Why make the country better for their future generations when they can get paid right now? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 11:43:30 AM EST
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Why make the country better for their future generations when they can get paid right now? I intend to make the future better for my daughter and grandson by leaving an estate. Why aren't others doing the same? What is your generation doing to make this country better? Well, besides complaining about the unfairness of the system and hoping to steal from your elders. You weren't the only ones born into this. Change the game instead of hating the players. But that would require effort. Taking action as a voting bloc. In fairness, neither the Boomers or GenX did either. Personally I blame it all on the Silent generation... |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 11:58:22 AM EST
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I intend to make the future better for my daughter and grandson by leaving an estate. Why aren't others doing the same? What is your generation doing to make this country better? Well, besides complaining about the unfairness of the system and hoping to steal from your elders. You weren't the only ones born into this. Change the game instead of hating the players. But that would require effort. Taking action as a voting bloc. In fairness, neither the Boomers or GenX did either. Personally I blame it all on the Silent generation... I've already determined my generation is retarded and worthless as a whole. They won't be able to fix this because of the same reasons every previous generation refused to fix it. And not to mention the fact that they would rather blame everything on rich people instead of learning what the phrase "live below your means" refers to. As for me? I'm trying to leave more for my kids than anybody will have left for me. But that doesn't mean I won't point out the failings of the generations that preceded me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 12:04:40 PM EST
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I couldn't care less about other people's failure to plan. It's not my problem. And I'm perfectly fine losing SS, shits prolly gonna be means tested to hell by the time I'm 62 anyway. And that's not even getting into the fact that in about 10 years the lock box runs out and then the fed will start printing the extra 0.45 trillion to cover SS insolvency. Because as stated earlier, if the government threatened old people's retirement monies, we would actually see a change in this country and we can't have that. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Social Security was never meant to be your sole income in retirement. Retirement income was compared to a three legged stool with SS being one of the legs. The other two were company pensions and your savings/investments. We all know that defined benefit pensions have been replaced for most people by defined contributions plans (ie 401k, 403b etc.). The other self evident truth is that a significant number of people don’t plan for the future and have little in savings. Many of the same people don’t invest in their 401k plans or their employers don’t offer them. I did work for a company with a pension plan and get a small, thick happy meal size check, from them. Later I worked for a company with profit sharing and a good 401k. I took full advantage of the 401k and did my own savings and investments. SS is not my primary income but I paid into it and would not want to lose it. I couldn't care less about other people's failure to plan. It's not my problem. And I'm perfectly fine losing SS, shits prolly gonna be means tested to hell by the time I'm 62 anyway. And that's not even getting into the fact that in about 10 years the lock box runs out and then the fed will start printing the extra 0.45 trillion to cover SS insolvency. Because as stated earlier, if the government threatened old people's retirement monies, we would actually see a change in this country and we can't have that. Other people’s failure to plan for retirement is your problem. Who do you think pays for the welfare that they will get? At least with SS they are forced to pay into a retirement fund if they work in a covered job. You may not want to fund welfare for them but it has been and will be done. That is simply the reality we live in. I don’t like paying taxes to support people who could work and support themselves. Welfare should be limited to people who can’t work not those who choose not to work and support themselves. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 2:03:05 PM EST
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I intend to make the future better for my daughter and grandson by leaving an estate. Why aren't others doing the same? Because, Comrade, that is not very just to hoard all the resources only for your family. Not to worry, we have a camp where you can get re-educated. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 2:05:36 PM EST
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: How about we just abolish social security. Kthxbye. After all I paid into it? I know how to make big fucking bombs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 2:07:58 PM EST
[#34]
Nothing but gaslighting to sow more division.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 2:21:40 PM EST
[#35]
He asserts that 401ks were created to herd people into the stock market. I doubt that. 401ks weren't intentionally created. They were an accident. I don't doubt that after they appeared Wall Street saw the opportunity, but they didn't create it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 2:27:06 PM EST
[#36]
Quote HistoryA strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks. - Thomas Jefferson |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 2:46:09 PM EST
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: After all I paid into it? I know how to make big fucking bombs. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: How about we just abolish social security. Kthxbye. After all I paid into it? I know how to make big fucking bombs. Further more, the government is under no obligation to pay you SS benefits. None. If they wanted to scrap the system tomorrow, you'd get nothing. People hate hearing it but, the money in a SS check is no more "yours" than the money in a welfare check would be. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 2:49:41 PM EST
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: How about we just abolish social security. Kthxbye. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 2:56:24 PM EST
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Once again, you paid taxes, some of which funded the SS system. That money isn't "yours" - it ceased to be yours once the government took it. Further more, the government is under no obligation to pay you SS benefits. None. If they wanted to scrap the system tomorrow, you'd get nothing. People hate hearing it but, the money in a SS check is no more "yours" than the money in a welfare check would be. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: How about we just abolish social security. Kthxbye. After all I paid into it? I know how to make big fucking bombs. Further more, the government is under no obligation to pay you SS benefits. None. If they wanted to scrap the system tomorrow, you'd get nothing. People hate hearing it but, the money in a SS check is no more "yours" than the money in a welfare check would be. You are so wrong. Just because SCOTUS ruled that a man deported for not disclosing his membership in the Communist party was not entitled to Social Security does not mean the government can arbitrarily take it from you. Do you honestly think there are enough senators, congressmen and a president willing to commit political suicide to end Social Security? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 3:02:16 PM EST
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You are so wrong. Just because SCOTUS ruled that a man deported for not disclosing his membership in the Communist party was not entitled to Social Security does not mean the government can arbitrarily take it from you. Do you honestly think there are enough senators, congressmen and a president willing to commit political suicide to end Social Security? This is correct. I love SS threads where GD jerkoffs jerkoff to ending SS. It's the Bell Curve on full display. But, in a way, it's sad to know so many people have nothing better to do than fantasize about completely ending SS. Of course we could do it, but maybe first we ought to end the military, end crime, end LEOs, feed all the hungry, house the homeless, and elect Tay Tay as POTUS. Those would be easier, IMO. Low hanging fruit, so to speak. Then we could tackle ending SS. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 3:15:34 PM EST
[#41]
does not mean the government can arbitrarily take it from you. The government arbitrarily taxed those SS "contributions" away from you in the first place. And they are arbitrarily taxing some of the "benefits" right now. What makes you think the government can't take it all? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 3:28:38 PM EST
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You think commies give a shit about tanking the economy? It's a feature. Just like they are attacking private homeownership. Your guns. Your gasoline powered vehicles etc.. It's all about control. Actually they do. No one wants to have their power structure collapse and get shot in the face. King Louis XVI knows what 'm talking about. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 3:33:28 PM EST
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You pay the government for insurance? And even then, at least with my insurance I can hop companies to track down a better rate. With SS, I'm stuck with the shitty annualized rate of return that consistently loses me money. If the SS program wasn't propped up by the government, it would've crashed and burned a long time ago. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: By your definition any type of insurance is socialism. You pay the government for insurance? And even then, at least with my insurance I can hop companies to track down a better rate. With SS, I'm stuck with the shitty annualized rate of return that consistently loses me money. If the SS program wasn't propped up by the government, it would've crashed and burned a long time ago. Ummm, a lot of people pay the gov't for insurance. Health and property insurance. You're free to invest wherever you want just like everyone else before you. I'd recommend an ETF that follows the S&P500 and keep funding it at regular intervals over you working years.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 3:46:00 PM EST
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Neither party has any plank or policy that mentions reducing Social Security. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: While I agree with you completely, that will not happen. Too many "well just give me MY money back" people out there, that vote. We boiled the frog slowly and now we have to turn the heat down so slowly that it's virtually imperceptible. That has the best chance of succeeding politically. There's numerous ways to accomplish that, but everyone gets at least a few bites of the shit sandwich, even if you spread it out over 100 years or more. But we won't do that either. No one wants to be responsible about it. Just kick the can down the road and lie. I know it won't happen. Social Security will be the last program still being funded before the inevitable collapse. Because we let SS recipients vote, our representatives will never do the needful. So which party should they vote for? Most polls show SS age people vote majority Republican while the majority of people that complain about SS vote dem. Neither party has any plank or policy that mentions reducing Social Security. One tried and they got creamed in the election and absolutely demonized by the msm in that election cycle. Remember the ads of the dude rolling grandma off the cliff? Good luck getting any party to try that platform again. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 3:51:07 PM EST
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 168,600 this year. That took 2 seconds to google. It didn't cross 100k until 2008. When is enough of my money enough for you? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Hey guys, did you know SS is only payed on approximately the first $140K you make? Above that, nothing. There is a simple answer here to save SS but nobody wants to address it. Wonder why. 168,600 this year. That took 2 seconds to google. It didn't cross 100k until 2008. When is enough of my money enough for you? When the underperformers get above the threshold would be my guess.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 3:54:43 PM EST
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This is correct. I love SS threads where GD jerkoffs jerkoff to ending SS. It's the Bell Curve on full display. But, in a way, it's sad to know so many people have nothing better to do than fantasize about completely ending SS. Of course we could do it, but maybe first we ought to end the military, end crime, end LEOs, feed all the hungry, house the homeless, and elect Tay Tay as POTUS. Those would be easier, IMO. Low hanging fruit, so to speak. Then we could tackle ending SS. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: You are so wrong. Just because SCOTUS ruled that a man deported for not disclosing his membership in the Communist party was not entitled to Social Security does not mean the government can arbitrarily take it from you. Do you honestly think there are enough senators, congressmen and a president willing to commit political suicide to end Social Security? This is correct. I love SS threads where GD jerkoffs jerkoff to ending SS. It's the Bell Curve on full display. But, in a way, it's sad to know so many people have nothing better to do than fantasize about completely ending SS. Of course we could do it, but maybe first we ought to end the military, end crime, end LEOs, feed all the hungry, house the homeless, and elect Tay Tay as POTUS. Those would be easier, IMO. Low hanging fruit, so to speak. Then we could tackle ending SS. My goal is always to get people talking about it. Mandatory spending is almost 4 times the discretionary budget. It is not a sustainable system unless the plan is to keep taxing the "rich" until rich is defined as those not on welfare. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 3:55:26 PM EST
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: BTW, we have a member here who was in the securities industry. He asserts that 401ks were created to herd people into the stock market. One major change from the old days is that is is rare that people actually own stock. When you bought 1000 shares of IBM, he got a engraved stock certificate that stated that you held 1000 shares of IBM (or what not). Today you get a brokerage statement that says you have 1000 shares. In reality your brokerage may or may not have bought that 1000 shares. They're counting on people to buy/sell and chase the rising stocks. So, all they really do is credit your account w/out buying it. If you sell, they figure the diffence and pay you. It is possible that a brokerage has that 1,000 shares, but it may also be held by your neighbor, coworker, cousin, cousin's former college roomate --- in short, multiple people have a claim on that same 1,000 shares. If you want another layer of confusion consider title. Title is a legal concept and it goes to who can actually dispose of the object that the title is to. Title is actually held by DTCC and you are not the title holder of that 1,000 shares of IBM. So what are you? A beneficiary. Just like your savings account, you are just a benefiiciary just like your neighbor, coworker, cousin, cousin's former college roomate to those same shares. It's a big mess that David Webb talks about in his book (and free audio book), The Great Taking. Webb discusses how "securities" laws were changed to make the public susceptible to the sudden loss of wealth. Dodd-Frank did the same to your banking account. The "contents" of your 401K and brokerage account can vanish when a bank or brokerage house collapse. Everything goes into receivership and the courts will take years to figure out what gets how much of each 1,000 shares. You may only get 1% by the time it's settled. You're running out of time to take action but don't listen to me. I'm just an old guy who reads a lot of books. You stick it all in your mattress first.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 3:57:44 PM EST
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That would be the end of the economy. Money in 401Ks isn't cash in bank accounts - it's money that's invested. Start seizing investments, people will stop investing. It's all downhill from there. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: They are going to go after 401ks. It's inevitable. Start seizing investments, people will stop investing. It's all downhill from there. It would actually collapse almost immediately. Everything they seized would be almost worthless before the seizure process was completed. They know this. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 3:58:33 PM EST
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: One tried and they got creamed in the election and absolutely demonized by the msm in that election cycle. Remember the ads of the dude rolling grandma off the cliff? Good luck getting any party to try that platform again. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: While I agree with you completely, that will not happen. Too many "well just give me MY money back" people out there, that vote. We boiled the frog slowly and now we have to turn the heat down so slowly that it's virtually imperceptible. That has the best chance of succeeding politically. There's numerous ways to accomplish that, but everyone gets at least a few bites of the shit sandwich, even if you spread it out over 100 years or more. But we won't do that either. No one wants to be responsible about it. Just kick the can down the road and lie. I know it won't happen. Social Security will be the last program still being funded before the inevitable collapse. Because we let SS recipients vote, our representatives will never do the needful. So which party should they vote for? Most polls show SS age people vote majority Republican while the majority of people that complain about SS vote dem. Neither party has any plank or policy that mentions reducing Social Security. One tried and they got creamed in the election and absolutely demonized by the msm in that election cycle. Remember the ads of the dude rolling grandma off the cliff? Good luck getting any party to try that platform again. Current law says when the trust is insolvent, only revenues will be available to make benefits. Hence the disclaimer straight from my statement that I posted earlier. The key is Congress can alter the terms whenever they want. There is no set benefit and no matter what, the program will change from what it the current structure. Math just is. Some folks keep wanting to act like it is written in stone. That is not the case and demographics are catching up with us. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2024 4:01:01 PM EST
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I intend to make the future better for my daughter and grandson by leaving an estate. Why aren't others doing the same? What is your generation doing to make this country better? Well, besides complaining about the unfairness of the system and hoping to steal from your elders. You weren't the only ones born into this. Change the game instead of hating the players. But that would require effort. Taking action as a voting bloc. In fairness, neither the Boomers or GenX did either. Personally I blame it all on the Silent generation... Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Why make the country better for their future generations when they can get paid right now? I intend to make the future better for my daughter and grandson by leaving an estate. Why aren't others doing the same? What is your generation doing to make this country better? Well, besides complaining about the unfairness of the system and hoping to steal from your elders. You weren't the only ones born into this. Change the game instead of hating the players. But that would require effort. Taking action as a voting bloc. In fairness, neither the Boomers or GenX did either. Personally I blame it all on the Silent generation... The Silent Gen implemented it and the Greatest Gen enabled it and nurtured it. Weird no one complains about those gens?
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
