|
Post by dannusmaximus on Feb 20, 2014 17:43:33 GMT
That's the thing, the net is not just a net. It's a weapon to whip and control people. It's used by progressives to manipulate, they say it's to uplift but NEVER does. It only allows people to accept a minimum for compliance to the whims of other and their votes. It's too dangerous a tool for govt. to have. Civic and churches are far better at up lifting. Look at the people who accept the handouts, they rapidly degrade in moral fiber and civil behavior. Without the workplace and other responsibilities you have to have to maintain your civil behavior they will degrade because there is no motivation to behave. Without consquences such as job loss or lack of food keeping people from acting with good citizenship they will not. There is no motivation to do so. Charity is always better kept private and in the hands of the people, not the govt. Govt. handouts have created a permanent entitlement class that acts at best an ambigous fashion towards their fellow citizens, that's horrible. Poverty has only increased under the entitlement system. I don't disagree with anything in your post, GM. I DO, however, think that the government does have a vested interest (financially and morally) in providing at least some modicum of social supports for certain populations, especially the old and disabled. Could churches or other charities take up the slack of even a sharply reduced Social Security or Medicare program? Probably not, but those programs are at least partially responsible for us not having to step over sick, dying, homeless oldsters on our way to work. That said, I would LOVE to sit on the board that tells some dirtbag "tough titties, get a fucking job" when he shows up with his hand out for his guvernment swag. Europe is busily committing suicide by letting in the Muslim hordes, IMO. Can I say that here?!
|
|
|
Post by NamelessStain on Feb 20, 2014 17:56:16 GMT
Europe is busily committing suicide by letting in the Muslim hordes, IMO. Can I say that here?! IMHO, yes you can. Welcome to the real reason the forum is here.
|
|
|
Post by Gingerbread Man on Feb 20, 2014 18:45:58 GMT
^^^That. What nameless said, I'll reply in depth later but we welcome controversial statements. Just be civil. Not that you're not, just sayin.
|
|
|
Post by Gingerbread Man on Feb 20, 2014 19:06:23 GMT
That's the thing, the net is not just a net. It's a weapon to whip and control people. It's used by progressives to manipulate, they say it's to uplift but NEVER does. It only allows people to accept a minimum for compliance to the whims of other and their votes. It's too dangerous a tool for govt. to have. Civic and churches are far better at up lifting. Look at the people who accept the handouts, they rapidly degrade in moral fiber and civil behavior. Without the workplace and other responsibilities you have to have to maintain your civil behavior they will degrade because there is no motivation to behave. Without consquences such as job loss or lack of food keeping people from acting with good citizenship they will not. There is no motivation to do so. Charity is always better kept private and in the hands of the people, not the govt. Govt. handouts have created a permanent entitlement class that acts at best an ambigous fashion towards their fellow citizens, that's horrible. Poverty has only increased under the entitlement system. I don't disagree with anything in your post, GM. I DO, however, think that the government does have a vested interest (financially and morally) in providing at least some modicum of social supports for certain populations, especially the old and disabled. Could churches or other charities take up the slack of even a sharply reduced Social Security or Medicare program? Probably not, but those programs are at least partially responsible for us not having to step over sick, dying, homeless oldsters on our way to work. That said, I would LOVE to sit on the board that tells some dirtbag "tough titties, get a fucking job" when he shows up with his hand out for his guvernment swag. Europe is busily committing suicide by letting in the Muslim hordes, IMO. Can I say that here?! I agree the govt. should provide for the old and disabled who are financially unable to provide for themselves meaning it should be means tested. You have a million dollar banks account you should not get social security. I know people getting $7000 in govt. checks every month. I'm like really? I also believe any amount of money from the govt should be capped. Welfare isn't supposed to be a standard of living. I see so many folks who are able bodied just looking for handouts. I don't get it. Anyway, yes, European progressives have a suicide pact with their philosophy of open borders and immigration. Yes, there should be immigrant but you should tailor the process.
|
|
|
Post by Browning35 on Feb 20, 2014 22:18:16 GMT
It's like an obscenity, I know it when I see it.
In socialist countries everything is either state run or they tax the shit out of everyone to pay for their social programs where they proceed to distribute it out to people that didn't work.
In Sweden their income tax is 55%, that's the highest in Europe unless you're a millionaire in France...then it's 75%. Both are socialist.
|
|
|
Post by dannusmaximus on Feb 20, 2014 22:35:46 GMT
The 55% tax rate in Sweden gets a citizen: + 'Free' unlimited access to health care + 'Free' education, up to and through the university level + 'Free' elder care, including long-term care + 'Free' child care + 'Free' retirement pension, unemployment benefits, disability benefits, etc... In addition to infrastructure, what we would consider essential public services, the military, etc., etc. Sweden is consistently ranked as one of the healthiest, best educated and economically strong countries IN THE WORLD, usually tied with other Nordic countries for those records. If they are getting all these benefits, is it worth the tax rate? Do you think it's legitimate to state that Sweden's form of socialism is a failure? If it isn't, what are they doing right? My marginal tax rate last year was around 13%, but if you include ALL the taxes we pay in the States it's probably more like 30%. And we don't get shit. I think I would gladly fork over another 20% to never have to worry about a doctor's bill or stuffing money into a Roth IRA that was subject to the whims of Wall Street thugs. I do think that any system like this is doomed to fail if the leeches begin to outnumber the folks who are productive, and maybe that's the best argument AGAINST 'socialism' - - I think that's what GM is saying (and I agree with it). It will invariably fail as people realize they can suck off the system while not contributing to it.
|
|
|
Post by Browning35 on Feb 20, 2014 23:09:02 GMT
Sure, there are a number of benefits. You won't ever starve as a Swede, you'll always have somewhere to live and free education and medical care. Sounds like a prison with Ikea furniture. I'm kind of kidding and kind of not. The fact that they seem like they take care of the needs of their citizens seems to be their strongest claim to fame. Most socialist countries don't do that. That may be a feature of their culture. There are a number of down sides to all this though. www.paoracle.com/SocialismWORKS!/?sw=Sweden They also have a fairly restrictive lifestyle for a Western nation. The government gets involved in parenting as well. Most people can forget about handguns too. Wouldn't really suit me. Edit : Fixed that link several times, IDK WTF is up with it.
|
|
|
Post by Gundogs on Feb 21, 2014 12:46:08 GMT
I don't disagree with anything in your post, GM. I DO, however, think that the government does have a vested interest (financially and morally) in providing at least some modicum of social supports for certain populations, especially the old and disabled. Could churches or other charities take up the slack of even a sharply reduced Social Security or Medicare program? Probably not, but those programs are at least partially responsible for us not having to step over sick, dying, homeless oldsters on our way to work. That said, I would LOVE to sit on the board that tells some dirtbag "tough titties, get a fucking job" when he shows up with his hand out for his guvernment swag. Europe is busily committing suicide by letting in the Muslim hordes, IMO. Can I say that here?! I agree the govt. should provide for the old and disabled who are financially unable to provide for themselves meaning it should be means tested. You have a million dollar banks account you should not get social security. I know people getting $7000 in govt. checks every month. I'm like really? I also believe any amount of money from the govt should be capped. Welfare isn't supposed to be a standard of living. I see so many folks who are able bodied just looking for handouts. I don't get it. Anyway, yes, European progressives have a suicide pact with their philosophy of open borders and immigration. Yes, there should be immigrant but you should tailor the process. IMO denying someone SS who has a "million in the bank"would be socialist as it is "redistribution of wealth". They paid into SS & likely at the highest rate. Besides,having a mil saved for retirement isn't all that much these days when some may live 20-30 years after retiring
|
|
|
Post by Gingerbread Man on Feb 21, 2014 13:31:24 GMT
I believe the social security system should be means tested and reserved only for the very poor that can prove the need. Then those SSI taxes will drop to $5 a month instead of the outrageous amount they are now. Same for medicare. Everyone getting a SS check is nothing but a state funded retirement fund which is the worst socialist idea ever. Not only does it lock you into the state system but it destroys options and removes choice from the market. To be perfectly honest, with 50 year I think the SS system should be gone. Anyone who isn't investing their retirement is very foolish and really, get what they deserve.
|
|
|
Post by Gundogs on Feb 21, 2014 22:55:22 GMT
I believe the social security system should be means tested and reserved only for the very poor that can prove the need. Then those SSI taxes will drop to $5 a month instead of the outrageous amount they are now. Same for medicare. Everyone getting a SS check is nothing but a state funded retirement fund which is the worst socialist idea ever. Not only does it lock you into the state system but it destroys options and removes choice from the market. To be perfectly honest, with 50 year I think the SS system should be gone. Anyone who isn't investing their retirement is very foolish and really, get what they deserve. So,here my wife and I are--retired with investments that could likely sustain us without SS. You think that over 40 years of paying into SS & Medicare doesn't entitle us to receive benefits because we don't "need" them to survive?! Sure,I would rather have had the money to invest myself,but I had no option. The deductions were required. We never lived beyond our means and feel we deserve to have a comfortable retirement based on our frugality & savings. Nobody has the right to take our money to support others.
|
|
|
Post by Gingerbread Man on Feb 22, 2014 16:01:42 GMT
Sure, I agree with that however I think the system should be incrementally dismantled. Everyone one it, great, have fun. Anyone 55 will get 75%. Anyone 45 gets 50% and 35 will see 25%. @ 25 you'd see 10%. Then it just fades away. The would happen over the course of 40 years. IF SSI is not address, roped in and dismantled it will destroy our country.
I ask you this my friend, what do you want for your children and grandchildren? Freedom or serfdom? Economic liberty or socialism? Eternal heights of a free market or the slow desperate grind down that socialism always leads to.
|
|
|
Post by Gundogs on Feb 23, 2014 13:32:50 GMT
Sure, I agree with that however I think the system should be incrementally dismantled. Everyone one it, great, have fun. Anyone 55 will get 75%. Anyone 45 gets 50% and 35 will see 25%. @ 25 you'd see 10%. Then it just fades away. The would happen over the course of 40 years. IF SSI is not address, roped in and dismantled it will destroy our country. I ask you this my friend, what do you want for your children and grandchildren? Freedom or serfdom? Economic liberty or socialism? Eternal heights of a free market or the slow desperate grind down that socialism always leads to. Yes,SS is poorly run & in many ways is a bad program. As I said I would rather have had the option of managing my own money. I was responding to your statement that seemed to say I,and my wife, shouldn't receive it because we may be "worth" a $million,or IOW,means tested
|
|
|
Post by Gingerbread Man on Feb 23, 2014 13:52:44 GMT
It would be incorrect to take it away from people who already have it. It needs to be incrementally dismantled.
It was designed for widows in the last years of their lives and orphans. Now, it's a state retirement fund and that was never it's intend.
In 40 years or so the SSI system can be there for people who actually need it allow people to invest in their own retirement or not. Now, I'm forced under duress to pay into a system I want no part of. That's the failing of socialism and big government. IT's also a tool used to control the old and disabled, they're using it to buy votes. That's wrong and it's absurd in a freedom democracy that a certain party has the ability and control to redistribute wealth simply to remain in there seats.
|
|
|
Post by Gundogs on Feb 23, 2014 14:03:42 GMT
It would be incorrect to take it away from people who already have it. It needs to be incrementally dismantled. It was designed for widows in the last years of their lives and orphans. Now, it's a state retirement fund and that was never it's intend. In 40 years or so the SSI system can be there for people who actually need it allow people to invest in their own retirement or not. Now, I'm forced under duress to pay into a system I want no part of. That's the failing of socialism and big government. IT's also a tool used to control the old and disabled, they're using it to buy votes. That's wrong and it's absurd in a freedom democracy that a certain party has the ability and control to redistribute wealth simply to remain in there seats. Of course it's a means of control,as is welfare,food stamps & other programs. As originally intended these programs were probably OK,but they have been very diluted over the years. I become very resentful when I think of all the taxes we paid over the years to help support others while rasing 3 children with no "help" from others. I used to be very supportive of gov,but have been disgusted with it for the past 10 years or so
|
|
|
Post by Gingerbread Man on Feb 23, 2014 16:45:31 GMT
You and me both, brother.
|
|