1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

No more SS at 62????

Discussion in 'Off Topic Threads' started by bigdogtx, Jun 29, 2013.

  1. bigdogtx

    bigdogtx Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2006
    Messages:
    10,650
    Let's see:

    You reduce inflows for over 2 years,

    You increase outflows to illegals, new disability claims for those who can't find jobs,

    You have less people working for less money so when you do start paying back into the system, amounts are less,

    Well there is one bright spot,,,,,,,you can control medicines for those living to reduce outflows.......
     
  2. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    25,238
    Location:
    Deplorable Bitter Clinger in Liberal La La Land
    Just more theft of your money on top of the money they already forcibly took from you.

    One overlooked issue is... If you force people who want to retire at 62 to work an additional two years, how is that going to affect the employment situation? There are younger people entering or moving up the workforce ladder who need those jobs. From an employment standpoint you want people to retire earlier.

    It's not going to matter anyway. The whole ponzi scheme is going to collapse no matter what we do. Social Security won't stay solvent until 30% of the national debt is paid back to it. And that's never going to happen. It's beyond our ability to pay it back. Stick a fork in America. It's done.
     
  3. Smoke 1

    Smoke 1 Banned User Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2007
    Messages:
    964
    Brian in Oregon, you couldn't have been in the military. You and Tex are the most negative, pessimistic jerks on this forum. Guys like the two of you in our platoon wouldn't have lasted long.
    You two are pathetic excuses for human beings.
     
  4. g7777777

    g7777777 TS Supporters TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,353
    Wow something must have happened and Brian and little doggy had to change their posts

    I hope they werent spouting their anti law enforcement and anti military stuff again but I cant be certain

    I think everyone should serve- men and women- and have a 2 year active obligation

    Go to a common basic training for able bodied and modified for truly handicapped and then if you are an objector to defending your nation with force if needed you go into a civilian work corps program

    You have an additional 6 year reserve committement after that.

    You dont get the right to vote until after you have completed your two years active.

    We would mix elements of society. We would also give people vision. It would motivate people to achieve

    Varrying educational benefits would be attached to this service.

    It would also have contributions to social security although the wages would be low, they would be something.

    It is time to do this.

    Regards from Iowa

    Gene
     
  5. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    25,238
    Location:
    Deplorable Bitter Clinger in Liberal La La Land
    One of the things I've noticed over the years is that those who beat others over the head about military service usually were REMFs and pogues who dug latrines, peeled potatoes or changed the oil on trucks. The ones who served in actual combat are almost always quiet about their military service and seldom use it as a censorship tool. This is because they appreciate the freedoms they fought for too much.

    And I dunno what REMF Gene is talking about. I didn't change my post. And what does Social Security have to do with the military in the first place? Unless this is simply another REMF attempt to censor political opinion they don't like.