More Socialism: Socialism is for people who just can't make it on their own and need government help to eke out a living. Wherever one turns, there is socialism with its ability to...

truthiness

Socialism is for people who just can't make it on their own and need government help to eke out a living.

Wherever one turns, there is socialism with its ability to cause societal decay, induce people not to work, to pay the slug who can't make it on his own without help from the government: Social security, Medicare, and now...

https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/us-pay-farmers-trade/2019/07/25/id/925946/?ns_mail_uid=056d40e6-c71b-453d-b94a-fffd9cd8950c&ns_mail_job=DM42481_07272019&s=acs&dkt_nbr=010124d60tn8

debeda

t***hiness wrote:

Socialism is for people who just can't make it on ... (show quote)

Farm aid is nothing new, for many different reasons. And why do you compare social security and Medicare which are paid into, to this? Many people would need to live to 110 just to get the money they paid in and their employers paid in on their behalf BACK. Forget 50 years of interest

lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

t***hiness wrote:

Socialism is for people who just can't make it on ... (show quote)

You mean, like farmers getting 16 billion to tide them over?

Yep, that damn socialist Trump at it again!

debeda

lpnmajor wrote:

You mean, like farmers getting 16 billion to tide them over?

Yep, that damn socialist Trump at it again!

popparod Loc: Somewhere else.

t***hiness wrote:

Socialism is for people who just can't make it on ... (show quote)

T***hiness, I doubt it.
There is some t***h in your statement if you remove Social Security and Medicare from it.
For your information those two programs are taken from my and my employers contributions during my 60 years of working life and would still be there if Government had not decided to rob us by putting those
Programs in the general fund.
To associate Social Security and Medicare to socialism being for people who just can’t make it on their own and need government help to eke out a living is pure BULLS**T!
Please get your facts straight and do a little research before you open your mouth and make statements that you obviously know very little about.

debeda

popparod wrote:

T***hiness, I doubt it. br There is some t***h in ... (show quote)

DAMN STRAIGHT, popparod

America 1 Loc: South Miami

lpnmajor wrote:

You mean, like farmers getting 16 billion to tide them over?

Yep, that damn socialist Trump at it again!

So, you consider the trade imbalance with China a good thing?
You would be great at running a country, just not this one.

debeda

America 1 wrote:

So, you consider the trade imbalance with China a good thing?
You would be great at running a country, just not this one.

Trade/tariff imbalance is a very bad thing. But the US has rolled over for the rest of the world since WWII. President Trump is trying to fix that.

truthiness

debeda wrote:

Trade/tariff imbalance is a very bad thing. But the US has rolled over for the rest of the world since WWII. President Trump is trying to fix that.

Fix with socialism? A peculiar method for a person who believes in an unfettered free market.

truthiness

debeda wrote:

Farm aid is nothing new, for many different reasons. And why do you compare social security and Medicare which are paid into, to this? Many people would need to live to 110 just to get the money they paid in and their employers paid in on their behalf BACK. Forget 50 years of interest

So, one asks: Can you collect more social security than you paid in?

And the answer is:

Most lower-wage workers receive more in benefits than they pay in taxes. ... But the trust fund is set to run out in 2033, after which the program will only be able to pay about three-quarters of promised benefits, according to the Social Security trustees.Apr 14, 2013
Social Security: Many pay more in taxes than they'll get back - Business
https://money.cnn.com/2013/04/14/news/economy/social-security-benefits/index.html
Search for: Can you collect more social security than you paid in?

Because most people get more than they put in is why the pot is diminishing. If people got less money than they put in, there would be no shortfall in the next decade as is predicted. Of course, Congress' taking money out for other uses of the years has not help stabilize the fund.

truthiness

popparod wrote:

T***hiness, I doubt it. br There is some t***h in ... (show quote)

....

Sorry, I guess I didn't make the cynicism of my remark obvious enough for you. It was a paraphrase of the folks who think that any socialistic program is a welfare boondoggle for lazy people who don't want to work.

truthiness

debeda wrote:

Farm aid is nothing new, for many different reasons. And why do you compare social security and Medicare which are paid into, to this? Many people would need to live to 110 just to get the money they paid in and their employers paid in on their behalf BACK. Forget 50 years of interest

Farm aid is nothing new--true. You cancall it by wh**ever names you want to give it, but it is still socialism. The farm lobby is strong; the inefficient small farm is the backbone of the nation (a strange argument from folks who believe in the efficiency of the free market system), etc., etc., but subsidization is socialism. That is what the free marketeers said about Solyndra and they were right.

truthiness

debeda wrote:

Trade/tariff imbalance is a very bad thing. But the US has rolled over for the rest of the world since WWII. President Trump is trying to fix that.

If trade/tariff imbalance is a bad thing, why isn't the all-knowing, all-powerful American free market fixing it? Looks like Trump is trying to fix it with subsidizing socialism. Where is the consistency in that? If it takes socialism to fix a freemarket problem...

debeda

t***hiness wrote:

Fix with socialism? A peculiar method for a person who believes in an unfettered free market.

???????????No, fix with balanced tariffs and trade deals. Calling me a socialist is fightin words, t***hiness

debeda

t***hiness wrote:

So, one asks: Can you collect more social security... (show quote)

There is a shortfall cuz it was deemed a tax in the early 70s. Which gave politicians carte blanche to get their greedy little hands on it. IMO