One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Repubicns k*****g social Security.
Page <<first <prev 3 of 4 next>
Jan 12, 2015 16:26:38   #
Molly2399 Loc: Ohio
 
permafrost wrote:
Shipfitter,

As in so many things, this falls mainly onto Ronald Reagan evil administration. You will not accept this, but these excerpts point out the lying intent of Reagan, his administration and Greenspan.

Ron Reagan, remember his name, one of the most evil men ever to hold office...



Ronald Reagan was one of the most popular presidents in modern history. As a former Hollywood actor, he had an uncommon degree of charisma. The conservatives absolutely loved Reagan for his efforts to reduce the size of government, but most liberals h**ed him with a passion. Reagan is still revered by a lot of Americans. This reverence for Ronald Reagan helps to explain how he was able to fool most of the American people to a degree unparalleled by any other modern president. With the help of Alan Greenspan, Reagan pulled off one of the greatest frauds ever perpetrated against the American people.

Instead of being a proud day for America, April 20, 1983, has become a day of shame. The Social Security Amendments of 1983 laid the foundation for 30-years of federal embezzlement of Social Security money in order to use the money to pay for wars, tax cuts and other government programs. The payroll tax hike of 1983 generated a total of $2.7 trillion in surplus Social Security revenue. This surplus revenue was supposed to be saved and invested in marketable U.S. Treasury bonds that would be held in the trust fund until the baby boomers began to retire in about 2010. But not one dime of that money went to Social Security.

The 1983 legislation was sold to the public, and to the Congress, as a long-term fix for Social Security. The payroll tax hike was designed to generate large Social Security surpluses for 30 years, which would be set aside to cover the increased cost of paying benefits when the boomers retired.

Let’s have a look at the events leading up to this proposal. Reagan and the government had big financial problems. Supply-side economics was not working like Reagan had promised. Instead of the lower tax rates generating more revenue as the supply-siders claimed would happen, there was a dramatic drop in revenue. Something had to be done, so Ronald Reagan set for himself a new mission. He would have to figure out a way to get the additional revenue he needed from another source.
Shipfitter, br br As in so many things, this fall... (show quote)


We do not need charisma or liars. We need someone with our welfare in mind.

Reply
Jan 12, 2015 16:28:22   #
mongo Loc: TEXAS
 
son of witless wrote:
There has never been or ever will be a lock box for government revenues. Many taxes are collected in anticipation of a need far down the road. SS is the best example. So while that money piles up and won't be needed until the currant bunch of crooks is out of office, it will be robbed for other things. Gasoline taxes diverted to mass t***sit are another. Then later when roads and bridges are collapsing they raise the taxes. Since 1993 16% of fuel taxes have been stolen for mass t***sit. Some money gets stolen for bicycle paths.

Never trust a politician not to steal money for pet projects.
There has never been or ever will be a lock box fo... (show quote)


Never trust a politician not to steal money period!
Or to lie, c***t, take bribes, become t*****rs, hire assassins, throw the country under the bus, the list goes on and on.
In other words, just don't trust a politician, ever!

SEMPER FI

Reply
Jan 12, 2015 16:29:51   #
Tasine Loc: Southwest US
 
mongo wrote:
Never trust a politician not to steal money period!
Or to lie, c***t, take bribes, become t*****rs, hire assassins, throw the country under the bus, the list goes on and on.
In other words, just don't trust a politician, ever!

SEMPER FI


:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Reply
 
 
Jan 12, 2015 16:30:33   #
permafrost Loc: Minnesota
 
mongo wrote:
Never trust a politician not to steal money period!
Or to lie, c***t, take bribes, become t*****rs, hire assassins, throw the country under the bus, the list goes on and on.
In other words, just don't trust a politician, ever!

SEMPER FI


:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Reply
Jan 12, 2015 16:44:16   #
Ricko Loc: Florida
 
permafrost wrote:
Shipfitter,

As in so many things, this falls mainly onto Ronald Reagan evil administration. You will not accept this, but these excerpts point out the lying intent of Reagan, his administration and Greenspan.

Ron Reagan, remember his name, one of the most evil men ever to hold office...



Ronald Reagan was one of the most popular presidents in modern history. As a former Hollywood actor, he had an uncommon degree of charisma. The conservatives absolutely loved Reagan for his efforts to reduce the size of government, but most liberals h**ed him with a passion. Reagan is still revered by a lot of Americans. This reverence for Ronald Reagan helps to explain how he was able to fool most of the American people to a degree unparalleled by any other modern president. With the help of Alan Greenspan, Reagan pulled off one of the greatest frauds ever perpetrated against the American people.

Instead of being a proud day for America, April 20, 1983, has become a day of shame. The Social Security Amendments of 1983 laid the foundation for 30-years of federal embezzlement of Social Security money in order to use the money to pay for wars, tax cuts and other government programs. The payroll tax hike of 1983 generated a total of $2.7 trillion in surplus Social Security revenue. This surplus revenue was supposed to be saved and invested in marketable U.S. Treasury bonds that would be held in the trust fund until the baby boomers began to retire in about 2010. But not one dime of that money went to Social Security.

The 1983 legislation was sold to the public, and to the Congress, as a long-term fix for Social Security. The payroll tax hike was designed to generate large Social Security surpluses for 30 years, which would be set aside to cover the increased cost of paying benefits when the boomers retired.

Let’s have a look at the events leading up to this proposal. Reagan and the government had big financial problems. Supply-side economics was not working like Reagan had promised. Instead of the lower tax rates generating more revenue as the supply-siders claimed would happen, there was a dramatic drop in revenue. Something had to be done, so Ronald Reagan set for himself a new mission. He would have to figure out a way to get the additional revenue he needed from another source.
Shipfitter, br br As in so many things, this fall... (show quote)


permafrost-from what I read the republicans are merely trying to stop or at least slow down the t***sfer of monies from the Social Security Retirement fund to the SS Disability fund. The t***sfer of funds has been an annual event which needs to be stopped. The SS disability fund has morphed into a money sucking machine and everybody and his/her uncle is disabled in some way and is drawing from the fund regardless of age. Why should a fund into which Seniors have paid for years be used to make disability payments to anyone. Since our illustrious leaders saw fit to raid the SS funds by putting the money into the general fund they need to figure out how to shore-up the SS disability fund without taking any more money from our retirement fund. Of course, you can expect that the democrats will insist on kicking the can down the road once again.PS. the charts showing the amounts in each fund is meaningless because it does not show the outflow from each. If projections are that the SS disability fund with run-out in 2017 it will probably be dry by 2016. Good Luck America !!!

Reply
Jan 12, 2015 17:23:24   #
Glaucon
 
mongo wrote:
Never trust a politician not to steal money period!
Or to lie, c***t, take bribes, become t*****rs, hire assassins, throw the country under the bus, the list goes on and on.
In other words, just don't trust a politician, ever!

SEMPER FI



Why do you suppose we have such negative opinions of politicians when we put them in office and return them to office no matter what thy do? If we fired them all and replaced them, what would cause us to choose better next time than we have done in the past?

Reply
Jan 12, 2015 17:34:03   #
J Anthony Loc: Connecticut
 
Borrowing from the SS fund should never have been even considered,and should have been vehementlly fought against in the 80s when they really started dipping into it whenever they felt like it. We'll never know for sure the precise amount, but there's no doubt we're being robbed.

Reply
 
 
Jan 12, 2015 17:36:45   #
Ricko Loc: Florida
 
Glaucon wrote:
Why do you suppose we have such negative opinions of politicians when we put them in office and return them to office no matter what thy do? If we fired them all and replaced them, what would cause us to choose better next time than we have done in the past?


Glaucon-good points! The only way I could see change, and that is not a guarantee by any means, is for the system to change. If our congressmen/women were only allowed to serve a total of 12 years or so then politics would not become a career. A person who is willing to serve, knowing in advance that this job is not a lifetime avocation, would probably be more of a patriot than a politician. We should also consider a part-time congress likes the States have. We do not need those people in Washington,D.C. on a full time bases dreaming up new laws which are neither needed nor enforced. We need to task them with reviewing all the laws and determine their applicability. Similarly, they should review every program to see whether some can be eliminated and others consolidated. For some reason, our representatives feel they have to pass new legislation as a prerequisite of keeping the populace happy.
The system is the problem not the solution. Good Luck America !!!

Reply
Jan 12, 2015 17:39:33   #
mongo Loc: TEXAS
 
Glaucon wrote:
Why do you suppose we have such negative opinions of politicians when we put them in office and return them to office no matter what thy do? If we fired them all and replaced them, what would cause us to choose better next time than we have done in the past?


That is part of the perplexity. When was the last time the people had a candidate on the b****t that they really wanted?

SEMPER FI

Reply
Jan 12, 2015 17:41:54   #
stevenkalka
 
Ricko wrote:
Glaucon-good points! The only way I could see change, and that is not a guarantee by any means, is for the system to change. If our congressmen/women were only allowed to serve a total of 12 years or so then politics would not become a career. A person who is willing to serve, knowing in advance that this job is not a lifetime avocation, would probably be more of a patriot than a politician. We should also consider a part-time congress likes the States have. We do not need those people in Washington,D.C. on a full time bases dreaming up new laws which are neither needed nor enforced. We need to task them with reviewing all the laws and determine their applicability. Similarly, they should review every program to see whether some can be eliminated and others consolidated. For some reason, our representatives feel they have to pass new legislation as a prerequisite of keeping the populace happy.
The system is the problem not the solution. Good Luck America !!!
Glaucon-good points! The only way I could see cha... (show quote)


Passing new laws is what gets them press. So does appearing at a ribbon cutting ceremony. Why do you think so many roads and bridges need replacement or overhaul? Once they're built, good maintenance doesn't add v**ers.

Reply
Jan 12, 2015 18:08:47   #
son of witless
 
shipfitter wrote:
I know that . It was the DEMONICrats , who Called it a Lock Box


Even some Rinos think that lock boxes are secure. Silly Rinos.

Reply
 
 
Jan 12, 2015 18:20:00   #
vernon
 
permafrost wrote:
Shipfitter,

As in so many things, this falls mainly onto Ronald Reagan evil administration. You will not accept this, but these excerpts point out the lying intent of Reagan, his administration and Greenspan.

Ron Reagan, remember his name, one of the most evil men ever to hold office...



Ronald Reagan was one of the most popular presidents in modern history. As a former Hollywood actor, he had an uncommon degree of charisma. The conservatives absolutely loved Reagan for his efforts to reduce the size of government, but most liberals h**ed him with a passion. Reagan is still revered by a lot of Americans. This reverence for Ronald Reagan helps to explain how he was able to fool most of the American people to a degree unparalleled by any other modern president. With the help of Alan Greenspan, Reagan pulled off one of the greatest frauds ever perpetrated against the American people.

Instead of being a proud day for America, April 20, 1983, has become a day of shame. The Social Security Amendments of 1983 laid the foundation for 30-years of federal embezzlement of Social Security money in order to use the money to pay for wars, tax cuts and other government programs. The payroll tax hike of 1983 generated a total of $2.7 trillion in surplus Social Security revenue. This surplus revenue was supposed to be saved and invested in marketable U.S. Treasury bonds that would be held in the trust fund until the baby boomers began to retire in about 2010. But not one dime of that money went to Social Security.

The 1983 legislation was sold to the public, and to the Congress, as a long-term fix for Social Security. The payroll tax hike was designed to generate large Social Security surpluses for 30 years, which would be set aside to cover the increased cost of paying benefits when the boomers retired.

Let’s have a look at the events leading up to this proposal. Reagan and the government had big financial problems. Supply-side economics was not working like Reagan had promised. Instead of the lower tax rates generating more revenue as the supply-siders claimed would happen, there was a dramatic drop in revenue. Something had to be done, so Ronald Reagan set for himself a new mission. He would have to figure out a way to get the additional revenue he needed from another source.
Shipfitter, br br As in so many things, this fall... (show quote)


you forget carter started us paying taxes on our ss.thats a tax on a tax.and he also kept the wives that worked and had a small pension from drawing their share of the husbands ss,
.remember that the demorats controlled the congress all those years .and back then the presidents didnt write their laws like this criminal does.

Reply
Jan 12, 2015 18:22:05   #
son of witless
 
permafrost wrote:
Shipfitter,

As in so many things, this falls mainly onto Ronald Reagan evil administration. You will not accept this, but these excerpts point out the lying intent of Reagan, his administration and Greenspan.

Ron Reagan, remember his name, one of the most evil men ever to hold office...



Ronald Reagan was one of the most popular presidents in modern history. As a former Hollywood actor, he had an uncommon degree of charisma. The conservatives absolutely loved Reagan for his efforts to reduce the size of government, but most liberals h**ed him with a passion. Reagan is still revered by a lot of Americans. This reverence for Ronald Reagan helps to explain how he was able to fool most of the American people to a degree unparalleled by any other modern president. With the help of Alan Greenspan, Reagan pulled off one of the greatest frauds ever perpetrated against the American people.

Instead of being a proud day for America, April 20, 1983, has become a day of shame. The Social Security Amendments of 1983 laid the foundation for 30-years of federal embezzlement of Social Security money in order to use the money to pay for wars, tax cuts and other government programs. The payroll tax hike of 1983 generated a total of $2.7 trillion in surplus Social Security revenue. This surplus revenue was supposed to be saved and invested in marketable U.S. Treasury bonds that would be held in the trust fund until the baby boomers began to retire in about 2010. But not one dime of that money went to Social Security.

The 1983 legislation was sold to the public, and to the Congress, as a long-term fix for Social Security. The payroll tax hike was designed to generate large Social Security surpluses for 30 years, which would be set aside to cover the increased cost of paying benefits when the boomers retired.

Let’s have a look at the events leading up to this proposal. Reagan and the government had big financial problems. Supply-side economics was not working like Reagan had promised. Instead of the lower tax rates generating more revenue as the supply-siders claimed would happen, there was a dramatic drop in revenue. Something had to be done, so Ronald Reagan set for himself a new mission. He would have to figure out a way to get the additional revenue he needed from another source.
Shipfitter, br br As in so many things, this fall... (show quote)


That is one giant load of Obama crap you are shucking.

Reply
Jan 12, 2015 18:53:44   #
Glaucon
 
Ricko wrote:
Glaucon-good points! The only way I could see change, and that is not a guarantee by any means, is for the system to change. If our congressmen/women were only allowed to serve a total of 12 years or so then politics would not become a career. A person who is willing to serve, knowing in advance that this job is not a lifetime avocation, would probably be more of a patriot than a politician. We should also consider a part-time congress likes the States have. We do not need those people in Washington,D.C. on a full time bases dreaming up new laws which are neither needed nor enforced. We need to task them with reviewing all the laws and determine their applicability. Similarly, they should review every program to see whether some can be eliminated and others consolidated. For some reason, our representatives feel they have to pass new legislation as a prerequisite of keeping the populace happy.
The system is the problem not the solution. Good Luck America !!!
Glaucon-good points! The only way I could see cha... (show quote)


You have some ideas worth trying and we can probably come up with more. I See our representatives drifting away from the interests of the citizens.

I wonder if the extremely complexity of government and the compromises they make isn't a big part of the problem. As, I will v**e for your an unnecessary military base in your district if you will v**e for my unnecessary post office in my district. I will support an unnecessary bridge in your district if you will support the unnecessary highway in mine. We also have the problem of the very big money in politics that results in most of those in Congress ending up multimillionaires for doing favors for their financial backers at tax payers expense. However, I believe (hope) some legislators are strong and honorable enough to resist most of these influences and still get things done.

Some states have term limits and that hasn't worked out so well. We have career staff with experience influencing new legislators in the office turnover resulting from term limits and that gives staff more power than they should have because they know the ropes and the new legislators don't.

Reply
Jan 12, 2015 18:57:40   #
Glaucon
 
mongo wrote:
That is part of the perplexity. When was the last time the people had a candidate on the b****t that they really wanted?

SEMPER FI


With all due respect, who is responsible for the situation? We chose the candidates and we don't like them? I can't think of any kind of system that would insure we always had clear choices. We often seem to be making choices between two candidates and not enthusiastic about either.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 3 of 4 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.