Thread: Entitlement???

for whatever reason the GOP always lumps social security in there with medicare, etc.

it's just what they do to get the base rilled up.

Originally Posted by LAM

for whatever reason the GOP always lumps social security in there with medicare, etc.

it's just what they do to get the base rilled up.

Last I checked Nancy and Harry seem to lump Social Securty, Medicare, Medicade and unemployment benefits all together too. Don't point fingers at this, Gena's post is correct. Social Security is a privilege to working people, not an entitlement. You pay for the PRIVILEGE to receive it. If you never worked a day in your life, I'm sorry I am not paying for you. If you didn't get yourself life insurance then the bread winner died, not my freaking problem, get a job lazy ass. The whole system is FUBAR on a level it is nearly impossible to comprehend. Nothing on either side of the aisle has addressed these core issues that are bankrupting the country. Guess what, we all are going to have to pay more taxes in the years to come because NOTHING is getting done and 90 weeks on unemployment is considered OK and we still pay for you. You want to see motivation, stop providing hand outs, amazing things will happen.

Originally Posted by oufinny

Last I checked Nancy and Harry seem to lump Social Securty, Medicare, Medicade and unemployment benefits all together too. Don't point fingers at this, Gena's post is correct. Social Security is a privilege to working people, not an entitlement. You pay for the PRIVILEGE to receive it. If you never worked a day in your life, I'm sorry I am not paying for you. If you didn't get yourself life insurance then the bread winner died, not my freaking problem, get a job lazy ass. The whole system is FUBAR on a level it is nearly impossible to comprehend. Nothing on either side of the aisle has addressed these core issues that are bankrupting the country. Guess what, we all are going to have to pay more taxes in the years to come because NOTHING is getting done and 90 weeks on unemployment is considered OK and we still pay for you. You want to see motivation, stop providing hand outs, amazing things will happen.

Spoken so well. It most me those of us who have worked our whole lives that see this, and the system suckers that don't. Fricken sad and pathetic.

People born after January 1, 1946 should NOT receive Social Security until they are 74 years old.

SS cannot suppor the 77+ million people born between 1946 and 1964.

The SS insolvency was publicly known about by the late 1960s.

If these people were and are too stupid to know SS was bust, they are idiots.

CUT THEM OFF! First cut off Medicare, then cut SS for these assholes.

I was born in 1970 and I will never see a fucking dime.

SS supporters, fuck off!

Let let you in a little secret: There's no "lock box" for the Social Security money you paid in and there's absolutely nothing in writing that guarantees you Social Security once you retire.

If you have a problem with that, you have a problem with every DC politician there has ever been over the last 60 years.

People born after Jan. 1, 1946 should not get SS until they are 74 years old.

SS cannot support the 77+ million people born between 1946 to 1964.

By the late 1960s SS was publicly known to be unsustainable. Those who did not know and do not know, are idiots.

I was born in 1970 and will never see a fucking dime.

SS supporters, fuck off.

People born after Jan. 1, 1946 should not get SS until they are 74 years old.

SS cannot support the 77+ million people born between 1946 to 1964.

By the late 1960s SS was publicly known to be unsustainable. Those who did not know and do not know, are idiots.

I was born in 1970 and will never see a fucking dime.

SS supporters, fuck off.

People born after Jan. 1, 1946 should not get SS until they are 74 years old.

SS cannot support the 77+ million people born between 1946 to 1964.

By the late 1960s SS was publicly known to be unsustainable. Those who did not know and do not know, are idiots.

I was born in 1970 and will never see a fucking dime.

SS supporters, fuck off.

Originally Posted by oufinny

Last I checked Nancy and Harry seem to lump Social Securty, Medicare, Medicade and unemployment benefits all together too. Don't point fingers at this, Gena's post is correct. Social Security is a privilege to working people, not an entitlement. You pay for the PRIVILEGE to receive it. If you never worked a day in your life, I'm sorry I am not paying for you. If you didn't get yourself life insurance then the bread winner died, not my freaking problem, get a job lazy ass. The whole system is FUBAR on a level it is nearly impossible to comprehend. Nothing on either side of the aisle has addressed these core issues that are bankrupting the country. Guess what, we all are going to have to pay more taxes in the years to come because NOTHING is getting done and 90 weeks on unemployment is considered OK and we still pay for you. You want to see motivation, stop providing hand outs, amazing things will happen.

Plus one!

If you are entitled to it, then why is not an entitlement?

Hell, one dictionary even gives social security as one of the definitions.

"the right to guaranteed benefits under a government program, as Social Security or unemployment compensation."

It's an entitlement.

ANd social security cannot continue on its current path. It is unworkable. The numbers trend is unsustainable.

Oh, I hear you Gena.

I have never been given anything in my life, nor do I expect to ever be given anything.

How many of you guy's have gotten phone calls asking if you'd like to "give" money to fire fighters and policemen? I was asked this several times and each time I say, How about those men in Iraq and Afghanistan, who's gonna give them money. And How about people like myself who were in previous wars, who gave me anything? No one that's who.

So, now when a young Marine or anyone in the military gets hurt and has to rely on his VA pension and SS to survive cause he got fucked up, and they're talking about doing away with it.

Where's your patriotism, now.

This is just a plan someone told W to instill. And he tried to steal that money and give to his friends.
Remember when he tried to pull that shit, and said it was like 700 billion $.
And the house and the senate said no. Funny but they still got their money only they went after peoples 401k's and we had that first financial melt down.

We are all just peons and part of this rabble. While the rich just keep on getting richer on our backs.

Freaking disgusting if you ask me!

What makes it an entitlement, IMO, is that people pay $150,000 total in to a fund they will take 6x as much out of. They will shift the burden of their lifestyle choices on to the next generation, who will do the same. It's kind of like watching a monkey fuck a football. No matter how hard they try to make social security work, it never will. The only way they could make it work is if people paid financially through taxes for things that increase their risk of disease. Stuff like sugar, McDonalds, beer, cigarettes, fast cars, guns, you know, the things that drive our economy.

Originally Posted by Big Pimpin

If you have a problem with that, you have a problem with every DC politician there has ever been over the last 60 years.

Ya I do as a matter of fact I think all of them have screwed us and they are laughing all the way to the bank. All politicians regardless what side of the aisle they are from drive me

Originally Posted by oufinny

Guess what, we all are going to have to pay more taxes in the years to come because NOTHING is getting done and 90 weeks on unemployment is considered OK and we still pay for you. You want to see motivation, stop providing hand outs, amazing things will happen.

any other really, really bad ideas besides cutting spending?

textbook economics and US recession history shows that slashing spending with high unemployment, deepens the problem, as GDP decreases so does tax receipts which nullifies any gains from decreasing government stimulus.

in the US the low wage neo-liberal economic model has created quite the conundrum in our consumption based economy. even during years of full employment the gov has to subsidize many household incomes via tax credits (EITC), TANF and direct payments. so when unemployment remains high during recovery periods after recessions such as direct stimulus from the gov such as extended unemployment benefits makes up for this.

the economic health of your neighbor now effects you. as more families are forced to reduce spending it endangers the jobs of others in the service sector (store receipts decrease from less customers, hours to employees get reduced, then jobs, etc.).

I think the confusion arises from the multiple definitions of the word. As is so often the case with the English language, the word has multiple similar meanings. People often think of the word entitlement in the context of being intitled to something for nothing. In this case, entitlement relates to being entitled to something you have already paid for. If we are entitled to benefits under the law, then the use of the word is, by definition, an argument in favor of the right itself. You have to use one or the other, you can't mix and match definitions.

en·ti·tle·ment

noun \-ˈtī-təl-mənt\

Definition of ENTITLEMENT

1: the state or condition of being entitled : right b: a right to benefits specified especially by law or contract

2 a government program providing benefits to members of a specified group; also: funds supporting or distributed by such a program

3 belief that one is deserving of or entitled to certain privileges

ENTITLEMENT

1. my entitlement to a refund
2. celebrities who have an arrogant sense of entitlement
3. entitlements such as medical aid for the elderly and poor

Definition of ENTITLE

transitive verb
1 to give a title to : designate

2 to furnish with proper grounds for seeking or claiming something <this ticket entitles the bearer to a refund>

1. He entitled his book “My Life on Mars.”
2. <the card entitles my grandmother to the discount for senior citizens>

Originally Posted by LAM

any other really, really bad ideas besides cutting spending?

textbook economics and US recession history shows that slashing spending with high unemployment, deepens the problem, as GDP decreases so does tax receipts which nullifies any gains from decreasing government stimulus.

in the US the low wage neo-liberal economic model has created quite the conundrum in our consumption based economy. even during years of full employment the gov has to subsidize many household incomes via tax credits (EITC), TANF and direct payments. so when unemployment remains high during recovery periods after recessions such as direct stimulus from the gov such as extended unemployment benefits makes up for this.

the economic health of your neighbor now effects you. as more families are forced to reduce spending it endangers the jobs of others in the service sector (store receipts decrease from less customers, hours to employees get reduced, then jobs, etc.).

The 400 Richest Americans Pay An 18% Tax Rate - Robert Lenzner - StreetTalk - Forbes

Originally Posted by Dale Mabry

What makes it an entitlement, IMO, is that people pay $150,000 total in to a fund they will take 6x as much out of. They will shift the burden of their lifestyle choices on to the next generation, who will do the same. It's kind of like watching a monkey fuck a football. No matter how hard they try to make social security work, it never will. The only way they could make it work is if people paid financially through taxes for things that increase their risk of disease. Stuff like sugar, McDonalds, beer, cigarettes, fast cars, guns, you know, the things that drive our economy.

Guns and cars don't cause disease.

Originally Posted by hypno

Ya I do as a matter of fact I think all of them have screwed us and they are laughing all the way to the bank. All politicians regardless what side of the aisle they are from drive me

The politicians have screwed us royally and their greatest accomplishment is getting so many of us to think that WE are to blame.

Originally Posted by malfeasance

ANd social security cannot continue on its current path. It is unworkable. The numbers trend is unsustainable.

Unsustainable is a political word used to fire people up against each other.

Originally Posted by malfeasance

ANd social security cannot continue on its current path. It is unworkable. The numbers trend is unsustainable.

this would be a direct effect of the low wage neo-liberal economic model. and the fact that privatization and de-regulation are leading factors in the decline of GDP across all OECD countries. when company's go from being held by the public to private less emphasis is place on high employment and more on profits. it has accounted for a 20-50% decrease in the national income that goes to labor in advanced OECD countries.

no country could sustain itself when half the labor force is making low wages and charged with the brunt of consumption. low wages are effected by inflation the most along with increased costs of food, energy, etc. to say the least this low wage model is mathematically challenged and simply ridiculous, it's one of the main reasons why the US is in the shape it's in today.

Originally Posted by Zaphod

Guns and cars don't cause disease.

Oops, meant to put go to the hospital, not disease.

Social security is probably the most solvent government program in US history. It's so successful that congress robs from it on a regular basis. Anyone that argues to defunct the SS system has serious problems with reality. The system, if left in its current form, will be solvent for another 25 years. The strategy to solvency past that is not very complex. It will be a combination of raising the maximum taxable earning levels, increasing retirement age, reducing cost of living adjustment and changing of the benefit formula.

Originally Posted by Glycomann

Social security is probably the most solvent government program in US history. It's so successful that congress robs from it on a regular basis. Anyone that argues to defunct the SS system has serious problems with reality. The system, if left in its current form, will be solvent for another 25 years. The strategy to solvency past that is not very complex. It will be a combination of raising the maximum taxable earning levels, increasing retirement age, reducing cost of living adjustment and changing of the benefit formula.

the program is sound, the problem is the same across the board and that is with REVENUE and taxation. unfortunately ideologues seem to be mathematically challenged when it comes to the root causes of all the economic problems in the US. since the GDP has been declining since 1980 this is causing an obvious revenue problem so the logical approach would be to increase GDP and that is not going to be done with limited taxation on capital and corporations and a service sector of workers receiving low and stagnant wages that are constantly being reduced via inflation.

Originally Posted by Glycomann

Social security is probably the most solvent government program in US history. It's so successful that congress robs from it on a regular basis. Anyone that argues to defunct the SS system has serious problems with reality. The system, if left in its current form, will be solvent for another 25 years. The strategy to solvency past that is not very complex. It will be a combination of raising the maximum taxable earning levels, increasing retirement age, reducing cost of living adjustment and changing of the benefit formula.

Technically SS, is sound.

But it's outrageously unfair.

Last year SS spent more than it took in (from revenue) 27 years ahead of schedule.

When you get it, and how much you get, depends on when you were born.

With the economy and decreasing tax revenue, it will mean (if it stays) younger worker will pay more and more to receive less and less, later in life.

And how worse will it get? Once you have an SS number it is a law - you have to pay into it.

A scam. The boomers always thought they would ride this gravy train to the very end, get as much as they could, and leave a train crash for the following generations.

They are doing it now.

Originally Posted by LAM

for whatever reason the GOP always lumps social security in there with medicare, etc.

it's just what they do to get the base rilled up.

Last I heard, Harry Reid and the hag Nancy Pelosi were not only lumping them together and the Emperor Barry was going as far as trying to scare the shit out of those receiving them by threatening to not send out the checks. Yes, it's all the GOPs fault. Better yet, it's Bush's fault. I'm sure the dems will propose a plan of their own before next Tuesday. Hell, Barry may even propose a 2011 budget before the 2012 election...... Nahhh prolly not.