 |
My taxes support them, plus my taxes support schools and libraries too.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
I saved money for my retirement. I hope you are saving too.Quote:
SS and Medicare are insurance policies I'm paying for which big government is squandering. I would much rather have been able to decide where my money went towards my retirement.
That doesn't make them part of a socialist economy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
So I should just kiss my SS and Medicare goodbye? I paid for it.Quote:
I saved money for my retirement. I hope you are saving too.
If all of us pay into the pot for something, that's socialist.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
I get SS and Medicare AND have a nest egg that I have saved up over the years to dip into for all the things SS doesn't cover. You can do that too!Quote:
So I should just kiss my SS and Medicare goodbye? I paid for it.
Socialism is any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goodsQuote:
If all of us pay into the pot for something, that's socialist.
Wrong, it's a straw man argument. They are not part of the production and distribution of goods in our economy. The only thing I can even remotely recall our government producing is helium and privatization of that began in 1996 via the Helium Privatization Act of 1996.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
That didn't answer my question.Quote:
I get SS and Medicare AND have a nest egg that I have saved up over the years to dip into for all the things SS doesn't cover. You can do that too!
I am the government.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
This is silly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
So Tom socialism is not the provision of services by government?Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Our government produces nothing but more dependents.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
Yes that will be true while you have a growing population and unemployment at high levels, but they cannot change unemployment without putting large numbers on the government payroll, changing unemployment will come when the private sector gains confidence and begins investing. You cannot give people incentives to become employed if there are no jobs, what you could do is give every new signon from the unemployment rolls a one year tax holiday giving them time to get set up again and reducing the wage burden on the employer who may not have to pay higher wagesQuote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
The economy produces dependants when its not working up to full potential. No good paying jobs, no spending, no economy. What you think that Walmart workers, and McDonalds can create enough demand for goods and services to spur a consumer driven economy? Hasn't worked yet, nor has the job creators helped either despite record profits, AND the Bush Tax cuts.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
But you think its okay they get rich because charity needs their donations to take care of all those poor people they helped create by shipping good paying jobs to sweat shop and overseas slave labor.
Now you want to cut your own benefits because the government is lousy and we are broke?! You guys make excuses based on some weird stuff.
No that would be the nanny state .I have no problem with legitimate government services. The local governments can build golden calves for all I care so long as they stay within the law. The Federal government is rightly and intentionally restricted by the ConstitutionQuote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
No they only want to spend OPM not their own, heaven forbid they might actually get a tax increase. There are ways to fix all this, increase the standard deduction a little and do away with all deductions, no options as to whether you do actual or not, and allow a concession maybe for very large medical expenses. Manipulate the scales so the threshold where you actually pay tax is higher but no one actually pays more tax and introduce a new tax scale for those who earn ,say, more than $1M. Next take all those above a certain income off welfare, SS or any other benefit.
What does this do, it cuts waste by reducing the number and complexity of the tax returns. It cuts waste by not paying benefits to those who don't need it. It also means that the incidence of any increase falls on a small group with large incomes
The term, 'means of production' is pregnant with many possibilities, as is the term 'socialism' . The means of production of a modern society could include some of the things Wondergirl suggests. I think she mentioned such things as schools and the fire department.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
As frustrating as it is Tom,some terms don't fit into neat boxes. Terms such as 'socialism' are next to useless when we try to give them a precise meaning when we try to exemplify particular occurrences.
Tut
Here is the problem I have with not giving SS to those that paid into it. It would be means testing. What your saying is that a person who bought something already loses the right to ownership of it just because they have done well. To me that is not right. It would be like having auto insurance that you have paid on for years and when you have an accident some decides you can afford to pay for it even though you have been paying into it for just such an occasion.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
Wait until you see the great 401-K theft by the government .
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Hi Tom,
What exactly is the 401-K? I'll assume it has something to do with socialism.
Tut
Here is the Obot's idea of coming together for a common purpose and finding common ground to averting the fiscal cliff .
Yesterday's bid was increase taxes on the high income earners ,to increase revenue by $1.6 trillion ; a massive stimulus INCREASE in spending ,and a unilateral blank check to eliminate the debt ceiling . (presented by Turbo-tax Tim to the Repubics on Capitol Hill)
I suppose they think that was a serious proposal .
Today instead of staying in DC to negotiate with Congressional leaders ,the President is off the Philly to do some more community organizing .
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
OK then. But I'm still the none wiser.
Tut
Quite the opposite . It is a pension plan funded by the participant ,sometimes with a matching contribution by an employer. The only govt participation is a deferral of taxes until the participant starts to withdraw funds. It is very popular and allows someone to plan and fund retirement and NOT rely on the minimal amts they will receive from the Social Security system. In many cases ,these accounts have replaced traditional pension plans.Quote:
Originally Posted by TUT317
The problem for the Dems is that they see all this untapped wealth and drool . They have been planning since at least 2006 for the government seizure of 401-K plans .They claim the money would be converted to some kind of government managed accounts that would pay a guaranteed minimal rate of return .
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:22 AM. |