Telling it like it is ..THIS SENIOR CITIZEN NAILED IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Subject: Social Security is an entitlement!

Alan Simpson, Senator from Wyoming , Co-Chair of Obama's deficit commission, calls senior citizens the Greediest Generation as he compared "Social Security" to a Milk Cow with 310 million teats.
August, 2010.

Here's a response in a letter from a unknown fellow in Montana ...


I think he is a little ticked off! He also tells it like it is !

"Hey Alan, let's get a few things straight..

1. As a career politician, you have been on the public dole for FIFTY YEARS.

2. I have been paying Social Security taxes for 48 YEARS (since I was 15 years old. I am now 63).

3 My Social Security payments, and those of millions of other Americans, were safely tucked away in an interest bearing account for decades until you political pukes decided to raid the account and give OUR money to a bunch of zero ambition losers in return for votes, thus bankrupting the system and turning Social Security into a Ponzi scheme that would have made Bernie Madoff proud.

4. Recently, just like Lucy & Charlie Brown , you and your ilk pulled the proverbial football away from millions of American seniors nearing retirement and moved the goalposts for full retirement from age 65 to age 67. NOW, you and your shill commission is proposing to move the goalposts YET AGAIN.

5 I, and millions of other Americans, have been paying into Medicare from Day One, and now you morons propose to change the rules of the game. Why? Because you idiots mismanaged other parts of the economy to such an extent that you need to steal money from Medicare to pay the bills.

6. I, and millions of other Americans, have been paying income taxes our entire lives, and now you propose to increase our taxes yet again. Why?
Because you incompetent bastards spent our money so profligately that you just kept on spending even after you ran out of money. Now, you come to the American taxpayers and say you need more to pay off YOUR debt.



To add insult to injury, you label us "greedy" for calling "bullshit" on your incompetence. Well, Captain Bullshit, I have a few questions for YOU.

1. How much money have you earned from the American taxpayers during your pathetic 50-year political career?

2. At what age did you retire from your pathetic political career, and how much are you receiving in annual retirement benefits from the American taxpayers?

3. How much do you pay for YOUR government provided health insurance?

4. What cuts in YOUR retirement and healthcare benefits are you proposing in your disgusting deficit reduction proposal, or, as usual,have you exempted yourself and your political cronies?

It is you, Captain Bullshit, and your political co-conspirators called Congress who are the "greedy" ones. It is you and your fellow nutcases who have bankrupted America and stolen the American dream from millions of loyal, patriotic taxpayers. And for what? Votes. That's right, sir. You and yours have bankrupted America for the sole purpose of advancing your pathetic political careers. You know it, we know it, and you know that we know it.

And you can take that to the bank, you miserable son of a bitch.

If you like the way things are in America , delete this. If you agree with what a fellow Montana citizen says, PASS IT ON!!!!



Kathy Dean
Soldiers' Angels
Regional Cpt.
CO WY ID MT UT
www.soldiersangels.org

"A man who is good enough to shed his blood for his country is good enough
to be given a square deal afterwards." Theodore Roosevelt

That's saying something, but He's Got His, so screw the rest of us. Can't let the president off the hook for appointing that turd as cochair of the Catfood Commission (and Bowles is no prize, either).

Obama appointed them and I've been pissed off at him ever since.

telling us "how we should feel or view something" the rich and powerful telling us how to act, making laws for us, how we should think....

it's all pure bullshit:grr:

it's a load of rightwing crap and this is the 2nd time it has made it to the front page of DU

I guess people will kick and rec anything that contains FU Alan Simpson in it.

is because this is how people feel. They are sick and tired of it all. sorry if you are a fan of Alan Simpson, I don't know what right wing crap you are referring to..but the backlash towards our politicians is loud and clear. People are desperate and hurting, and we are tired of rich assholes telling us that WE have to tighten OUR belts

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=439&topic_id=652744#658538

Just because I see this angry nonsense as the angry nonsense that it is, does not mean I am a fan of Alan Simpson, or even of Bart Simpson or OJ Simpson. Rightwing nonsense is rightwing nonsense even if it includes the line "FU Alan Simpson."

label it what you want..angry nonsense? you just don't get it then

like "the gubmint is gonna increase our taxes AGAIN!!1!!"

Or "the gubmint is gonna take over health care!!1!!!"

If a person just gets angry at ALL of Congress and makes no distinction between Congresspeople who are representing the top 1% and Congresspeople who are representing the bottom 90% then that is a huge part of the problem.

People are also uninformed and misinformed, and this applauds their lack of information and provides untruth and expletives as a substitute for information.

this is sheer frustration....and it is ok to be pissed. It is the people who aren't pissed that you have to worry about and educate.

Please read and comprehend.

People such as this person speak for the majority, and with good cause. Are you insulted because we have an ineffective group of congressional so called, "leaders" who mis-appropriate money and take more money from K street? Because that is what is being expressed here, only this person is sick and tired of not being listened to.

When people are sick and tired, they will tune it up, and that is EXACTLY what is expressed... not "the gubmint is gonna increase out taxes..." Where the hell did you get THAT out of this OP?

When people are sick and tired, they will tune it up, and that is EXACTLY what is expressed... not "the gubmint is gonna increase out taxes..." Where the hell did you get THAT out of this OP?

I believe it was this part of the OP:

6. I, and millions of other Americans, have been paying income taxes our entire lives, and now you propose to increase our taxes yet again. Why? Because you incompetent bastards spent our money so profligately that you just kept on spending even after you ran out of money. Now, you come to the American taxpayers and say you need more to pay off YOUR debt.

That's "tea-party", anti-government, slope brow, knuckle dragging language.

I imply that the OP is showing everyone OURSELVES, and not some tea-partying ignorant person who hates "gubmint" for "gubmint's" sake.

These sons of bitches like Alan Simpson in Congress are the problem because they don't understand history and whore for K street.

1) Social Security taxes as a whole never went into an interest bearing account, only the surpluses did.

2) Alan Simpson is a Republican, and therefore has probably never advocated raising anyone's taxes--even those billionaires that deserve to have their taxes raised.

3) Medicare has not run into trouble because "idiots mismanaged other parts of the economy to such an extent that you need to steal money from Medicare to pay the bills."

Medicare has run into trouble because:

a) The Bush administration passed a Medicare drug benefit law that didn't pay for itself with higher taxes.

b) Medical costs have been increasing at a rate that is 4-5 times higher than the general inflation rate.

c) The effects of boomer demographics were never factored in properly like they were for Social Security.

d) Medical insurance is an idiotic way to pay for healthcare.

I say that the OP is giving a teaparty message, disguised as an attack on Simpson, who is no longer in office BTW. He's a former Senator. The ideas expressed in that piece are very much in line with the Tea Party "Gubmint is spending/has spent too much" and "Gubmint better not try to raise our (as in anyone's) taxes" and "all them politicians is just a bunch of crooks (even Feingold which is why we voted that freeloading sumbitch out of office)"

However, it does not express the accounting realities of the problem well at all. Ultimately we will have to acknowledge the fiscal reality, even if it is out of sync with how people "feel".

My main objection to the OP is notion that there ever was an "interest bearing account" that all your Social Security tax money went into. The surplus went into the Social Security Trust fund, but the bulk of your tax money went to current retirees. That is the way Social Security has always worked.

for a righteous geezer rant (I can say that because I are one).

Please, we need to be honest with ourselves. Social Security payments were NEVER "safely tucked away in an interest bearing account". Since the day it was created by FDR Social Security has always been a pay as go you go system where the benefits of current retirees were paid for by taxes collected from current workers. Yes, in times when SS tax money coming in slightly exceeded SS benefits going out the surplus was nominally placed in US Savings bonds, but the amount of that surplus was never more than a slight fraction of the total SS outlay. The idea that the whole of your SS benefits lies safely tucked away in savings bonds is pure fiction.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_Trust_Fund

that it was a self-sustaining system that was raided for other purposes.

...that pays out three times as much in benefits as it takes in in taxes.

There's a reason system current system is unsustainable, says Eugene Steuerle, a former Treasury Department official and senior fellow at Washington's Urban Institute. He boils it down to two simple numbers.

"An average couple retiring today has paid just a little over $100,000 in Medicare taxes" over the course of their working lives, Steuerle tells Guy Raz, host of weekends on All Things Considered.

And what do they receive?

"About $300,000 in benefits" — even after adjusting for inflation.

http://www.wbur.org/npr/135844222/medicares-math-problem-taxes-benefits-trouble


Again, we need to be honest with ourselves and not pretend that this problem was created by the admittedly shameful payout to banks and billionaires that occurred in 2008/2009. This problem was caused by rising medical costs and the demographics of the baby boom generation, and has been known about for decades.

Here are some counter arguments:

http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2010pres/08/20100805d.html

http://www.therubins.com/socsec/solvency.htm


Cheers.

I sure don't want any "cuts" -- but, our whole economic system needs some tweaking, if not a complete overhaul.

Eventually SS/Medicare won't be worth squat if those younger can't find good jobs; health care costs keep rising well above inflation and increases in number of beneficiaries; we continue to support a disjointed/uncoordinated health care system; we continue to avoid "rationing" of some aspects of health care when there are reasonable and better alternatives; military budget is not cut; etc.

Some of the solutions -- increase SS wage cap, new/better ways to deliver health care, reasonable increases in tax rates for the "wealthy", etc. -- are easy. But, if we don't take a long hard look, none of that will happen. Personally, I'd be happy if my "benefits" were cut some, but other aspects of life were improved.

The so-called cat-food commission had some darn good recommendations -- increase SS wage cap; substantially cut military budget; public option in health care; increases for those on lower end of SS; etc.

Now the Paul Ryans can kiss my ass. But, I'm not opposed to listening and then dismissing their ideas in pursuit of something better for everyone.

a million a year and make all income -- even capital gains income subject to the Social Security/Medicare taxes and lower the Social Security/Medicare tax rates slightly. That will solve all our budget problems.

It won't solve all our problems, but reasonable increases in taxes will go a long way.

--higher earners get back proportionally less than lower income earners. You can't just tell people who pay in that they can't get money out. That would be like your auto insurance refusing to pay for your totalled car on the grounds that you had plenty of money to buy a replacement without their help.

is a totally single payer socialized system.

"our whole economic system needs some tweaking, if not a complete overhaul."

You're a god damned Republican plant aren't you? How long have you been waiting to say this bullshit?

A single payer system won't do squat for Medicare and Medicaid unless they are revamped, especially Medicaid. Know anyone on Medicaid -- it sucks. I'm actually for revamping Medicare and Medicaid. I think a system like England would be better. A single payer system will squeeze some excesses out of the system, but not enough to make medical care that much more affordable for most people without some big changes.

Go away.

around a dollar an hour. It is many times that now because of inflation. If we only get back $300,000 and put in $100,000, we are only getting back 3 times the value of what we put in although the value of the money we put in when we were young has risen far more than that. The value of our contributions should have increased far more. What happened to the rest of our money? That is what we are asking.

Please remember that the average Social Security benefit is less than $1200 per month. That is not a lot of money.

Please note also that seniors who saved their money are not receiving any interest on their savings, so you can't blame seniors for not saving enough. Savings do not help increase income at this time. There is no way that an ordinary senior who had ordinary jobs during his or her working life can meaningfully supplement Social Security at this time with interest or income on savings.

if the "minimum wage" kept up with inflation, it would have been much more than it is now ...

increased according to the increases in inflation.

The problem is that medical costs have increased at a rate that is 4 to 5 times the rate of inflation.

The three to one ratio is after adjusting for inflation. If you use the raw numbers the ratio is even worse.

your lack of understanding of how IT works. Your "understanding" of SS is overly simplified. Thus, you are wrong. You sound so GOP'ish.

Go find a source more to your liking and link to it. Then we can debate the numbers.

You and your five cohorts have yet to construct a facade good enough to fool us old folks. I find that curious, what with you being aged like we are. But Alan - some of the outrageous comments you've made of late - these suggest you're slipping towards dementia. I think if you really care about your fellow citizens, you have an obligation to recuse yourself from the team you've been assigned to. We deserve better than to have someone whose mental faculites are hamstrung. We deserve the service and considerations of someone capable of sound-minded, objective thinking.

Just like W Bush. He ain't no better.

You challenge the accuracy of a Wikipedia article that is fully sourced with numerous references with...nothing. No links to articles with contrary information, no collection of budget numbers from federal websites, just an sourceless opinion from an anonymous poster on the internet. And they say Republicans are the faith based party...

As for the other guy...........................

...has been a DU member nearly twice as long as both of you put together.

Apparently that didn't prevent you from adopting RW talking points.

avatars suck. IMO:smoke:

No.....really why do you say that?

an additional fund to provide for baby boomers. We all contributed on the understanding that those contributions would be there when we needed -- like savings accruing interest.

Congress stole the money to hand it over to the likes of Halliburton and XE, to fund wars of aggression and just to pay off their campaign contributors with huge tax breaks and limits on liability.

Now, at a time when there are few or no jobs, even for the youngest and fittest, those in the prime of their lives, they tell seniors to just crawl away and die in poverty.

Today I saw a very elderly woman sitting in front of the Post Office. She had no teeth. Her skin was dried and wrinkled. She leaned over and sat with a cane in her hands, and beside her she had a stick with what appeared to be her worldly possessions -- probably all of them -- wrapped in a piece of cloth and tied around her stick. I remember pictures of hobos with sticks and bundles like that. She looked at least 80.

Do you want your grandmother to die alone on the street? If she had no place to live, would you at least take her in to live with you?

Social Security is an entitlement because it is the means through which we as a society ensure that our grandparents and parents can live and die in at least minimal dignity. Shame on all who fall for the Republican propaganda about Social Security and Medicare. Those programs cannot be defunded. Defunding them would harm the overall economy and the fabric of our society far more than doubling taxes on those earning over a million a year. Far more.

The fund is in surplus. The U.S. government owes future retirees that money just as much as it owes money to a foreign nation that it borrows from. Take your Republican talking points back to Free Republic where you came from.

Slowly, so you don't misunderstand what I said.

a source. The Heritage Foundation pays people well to mess up wiki.

Show me any source that says that all your Social Security taxes go into an interest bearing account.

Just one.

The people that work at the Treasury Department and the Social Security Administration laugh when they read threads like this one.

Show me any source that says that all your Social Security taxes go into an interest bearing account.

Just one.


Still waiting...

You can't just keep the extra 4 trillion or so in a checking account, you have to park it in something that earns interest, like t-bills.

"...which holds in trust those interest-bearing securities that the federal government intends to redeem to pay future benefits to retirees and their survivors".

To repeat, this is what I said in post #7:

Since the day it was created by FDR Social Security has always been a pay as go you go system where the benefits of current retirees were paid for by taxes collected from current workers. Yes, in times when SS tax money coming in slightly exceeded SS benefits going out the surplus was nominally placed in US Savings bonds, but the amount of that surplus was never more than a slight fraction of the total SS outlay.

Notice there are TWO sentences. The second one describes EXACTLY you are talking about.

Have the decency to be gone!

Aren't members of Congress "entitled" to retirement benefits after 5 years?

by a real American.

K and r

Absolutely perfect!

I've posted this before but judging by this post and all of its recs and replies, it needs to be done over and over again. Also,
Sen. Bernie Sanders keeps saying the same things over and over again but people keep believing the right wing propaganda.

---------------------------------------------
August 15, 2010
Top 5 Social Security Myths Debunked
Filed under: Social Security — Tags: myths, privatization, Republicans, Social Security — Walter Ebmeyer @ 9:56 am

We especially like this page because the responses to the myths are footnoted. So if someone says “Sez who?” , the answer is right here. Some Republicans are putting out myths and lies about Social Security in an attempt to privatize it. We say: “If you liked credit default swaps, Lehman Brothers, and Bernie Madoff, you’re going to love privatized Social Security.”

Top 5 Social Security Myths

Myth #1: Social Security is going broke.

Reality: There is no Social Security crisis. By 2023, Social Security will have a $4.6 trillion surplus (yes, trillion with a ‘T’). It can pay out all scheduled benefits for the next quarter-century with no changes whatsoever.1 After 2037, it’ll still be able to pay out 75% of scheduled benefits—and again, that’s without any changes. The program started preparing for the Baby Boomers’ retirement decades ago.2 Anyone who insists Social Security is broke probably wants to break it themselves.

Myth #2: We have to raise the retirement age because people are living longer.

Reality: This is a red-herring to trick you into agreeing to benefit cuts. Retirees are living about the same amount of time as they were in the 1930s. The reason average life expectancy is higher is mostly because many fewer people die as children than they did 70 years ago.3 What’s more, what gains there have been are distributed very unevenly—since 1972, life expectancy increased by 6.5 years for workers in the top half of the income brackets, but by less than 2 years for those in the bottom half.4 But those intent on cutting Social Security love this argument because raising the retirement age is the same as an across-the-board benefit cut.

Myth #3: Benefit cuts are the only way to fix Social Security.

Reality: Social Security doesn’t need to be fixed. But if we want to strengthen it, here’s a better way: Make the rich pay their fair share. If the very rich paid taxes on all of their income, Social Security would be sustainable for decades to come.5 Right now, high earners only pay Social Security taxes on the first $106,000 of their income.6 But conservatives insist benefit cuts are the only way because they want to protect the super-rich from paying their fair share.

Myth #4: The Social Security Trust Fund has been raided and is full of IOUs

Reality: Not even close to true. The Social Security Trust Fund isn’t full of IOUs, it’s full of U.S. Treasury Bonds. And those bonds are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States.7 The reason Social Security holds only treasury bonds is the same reason many Americans do: The federal government has never missed a single interest payment on its debts. President Bush wanted to put Social Security funds in the stock market—which would have been disastrous—but luckily, he failed. So the trillions of dollars in the Social Security Trust Fund, which are separate from the regular budget, are as safe as can be.

Myth #5: Social Security adds to the deficit

Reality: It’s not just wrong—it’s impossible! By law, Social Security’s funds are separate from the budget, and it must pay its own way. That means that Social Security can’t add one penny to the deficit.8

Defeating these myths is the first step to stopping Social Security cuts. Can you share this list now?

Sources:

1.”To Deficit Hawks: We the People Know Best on Social Security,” New Deal 2.0, June 14, 2010 http://www.moveon.org/r?r=89703&id=22141-17700787-cAEhIbx&t=4

2. “The Straight Facts on Social Security,” Economic Opportunity Institute, September 2009 http://www.moveon.org/r?r=89704&id=22141-17700787-cAEhIbx&t=5

3. “Social Security and the Age of Retirement,” Center for Economic and Policy Research, June 2010 http://www.moveon.org/r?r=89705&id=22141-17700787-cAEhIbx&t=6

4. “More on raising the retirement age,” Washington Post, July 8, 2010 http://www.moveon.org/r?r=89706&id=22141-17700787-cAEhIbx&t=7

5. “Social Security is sustainable,” Economic and Policy Institute, May 27, 2010 http://www.moveon.org/r?r=89707&id=22141-17700787-cAEhIbx&t=8

6. “Maximum wage contribution and the amount for a credit in 2010,” Social Security Administration, April 23, 2010 http://ssa-custhelp.ssa.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/240

7. “Trust Fund FAQs,” Social Security Administration, February 18, 2010 http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/ProgData/fundFAQ.html

8.”To Deficit Hawks: We the People Know Best on Social Security,” New Deal 2.0, June 14, 2010 http://www.moveon.org/r?r=89703&id=22141-17700787-cAEhIbx&t=9

Distributed by DelMont Progressive Democrats of America – www.delmontpda.wordpress.com

http://delmontpda.wordpress.com/2010/08/15/top-5-social-security-myths-debunked/

the part about 10 million people out of work and not paying into s.s. and medicare , these fooken corperations stripped this country of all these jobs and drove wages down well they were at it , i say tax the chit out of the rich and make em pay for there greed and detroying this countrys systems

Educate a few million more people and maybe we can do something about this.

stash will end up getting less. that is what those statements we keep getting are about. currently i will be getting like $20/mo because i am a stay at home mom who gets paid with hugs instead of money.

for posting this. should be useful when my mom starts going off about how SS is bankrupting us.

Amazing how many times the lies about Social Security need to be debunked.

But perhaps not that amazing, with so much of our broadcast media in conservative hands trumpeting 24/7 about us all being broke because we just can't tax those multimillionaires a bit more.

Can't recommend it enough.

Imo Simpson & boles are assbags to the enth degree!

Welcome to DU. How about you stick around and help us fight the misinformation.

taxes. The letter makes a blanket statement that NO ONE should be asked to pay more taxes. I disagree. I want the rich and the corporations to start to pay their share to keep this country going.

:dem:

:applause::applause::applause:

:kick:

all along the way. Tell me why this is an entitlement? I have no pension. no special perks. It is the SS check each month that keeps me going. Unemployed for 2 years, gave up. No one wants you when you're old and gray. Simpson, your recall is overdue. You and many of your cohorts are so out of touch it is laughable.

I am collecting social security. I paid into the system for about 50 years. That is my money. I am now 72. While I was still working, I lost a chunk of money in my IRA and 401K accounts because of the Wall Street fiasco. I am now pretty much depending upon social security to keep me going for at least the next 10 years, as I do not expect to live longer than that.

Anyone who says that there is no "Social Security Trust Fund" is technically correct, but wrong on the substance.

The Social Security surplus (yes, there is one) is invested in Treasuries. Ask China or any other buyer of treasuries where their "trust fund" is. There isn't one - the US Treasury borrows money because it needs to spend the money on something. But just because the money isn't sitting around idle doesn't mean that there isn't a repayment obligation.

If all of us who took out mortgages or other loans and didn't establish a "trust fund" with the proceeds used that as an excuse to reneg on payment, we wouldn't have an economy.

It would make no sense if the Treasury borrowed money and then put it in a "trust fund", because that contradicts the very purpose of borrowing. The treasuries that were purchased by our Social Security surplus are mixed in with the treasuries purchased by China, Japan, and every other purchaser, over the years. But somehow, the corrupt, blindered wingers believe that only those treasuries purchased using Social Security surplus dollars don't require repayment.

If Nederland and others who believe the big lie honestly misunderstand the concept of the Social Security trust fund, then we need to educate them. But if they understand the situation and use fora like this one to add to the confusion, we need to expose them for what they are.

Anyone who says that there is no "Social Security Trust Fund" is technically correct, but wrong on the substance.

Agreed.

The Social Security surplus (yes, there is one) is invested in Treasuries. Ask China or any other buyer of treasuries where their "trust fund" is. There isn't one - the US Treasury borrows money because it needs to spend the money on something. But just because the money isn't sitting around idle doesn't mean that there isn't a repayment obligation.

Agreed.

If all of us who took out mortgages or other loans and didn't establish a "trust fund" with the proceeds used that as an excuse to reneg on payment, we wouldn't have an economy.

Agreed.

It would make no sense if the Treasury borrowed money and then put it in a "trust fund", because that contradicts the very purpose of borrowing. The treasuries that were purchased by our Social Security surplus are mixed in with the treasuries purchased by China, Japan, and every other purchaser, over the years. But somehow, the corrupt, blindered wingers believe that only those treasuries purchased using Social Security surplus dollars don't require repayment.

Agreed.

If Nederland and others who believe the big lie honestly misunderstand the concept of the Social Security trust fund, then we need to educate them. But if they understand the situation and use fora like this one to add to the confusion, we need to expose them for what they are.

Not sure where you get this. I agree with everything you've said in this post. I think perhaps you need to re-read my post and realize that I never said what apparently you think I said.

might we acknowledge what we have in common with the 'other side' of the aisle, and work together to effect change? Think how radical is that idea.

I posted my reply to the wrong message!

Let's hope Captain Bullshit actually read it.

Certainly speaks for me!

Simpson will never answer it, tho. He doesn't have the guts.

if the Big O saw it and read it, nothing would change. Truth and facts are unwelcome in a culture that not only depends on but thrives on non sequiturs, half-truths, and outright lies. Besides, he and most of the country are too busy jumping up and down over Bin Laden (Bush/Cheney 100,000's Bin Laden 4,000) to deal with real problems.

Every damn one of them need an attitude adjustment.

Simpson is an old fogey hypocrite and if he even sees this it will roll off him like water off a duck.

However, if this poweful kernel of truth gets seen by enough eyeballs it might jar a few more tea bagger types back to reality enough to know they're angry at the wrong targets.

In a society where people her age tend to live another 20 or more years.

But she makes great points. Thanks for posting.

Even people around here lately don't get it, which is....interesting.

More ass kicking, please.

You can't say the American citizen is responsible for this mess.

Feel the exact same way!

Forfuxsake, people.

felt about Seniors before they elected him?

The Senator's statements are one of the most astonishing posts that I have read lately.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Hey Kathy Dean...:yourock:

K&R

at the start and finish, does not mean everything said in between in true.

1. Ok.

2. Most of have paid in since we began working. Ok.

3. I reject the premise. What years did the Social Security surplus go into an interest bearing account? Cite this and we can talk.

4. Recently, as in sometime in the early 1980's when I was a young child and the writer would have been like 40 or so?

5. Medicare/Medicaid is going broke because the outrageously rising costs of health-care. This is an argument that just doesn't belong here.

6. Who proposed to raise taxes on whom? Some Democrats have proposed raising taxes on the wealthiest Americans. No Republican has, that I am aware of. I am pretty certain Mr. Simpson did not.

As for votes that bankrupted America, one of the worst was the Medicare vote during the second Bush admin. This was done to purchase seniors votes. Very little is actually done to buy the votes of young people because most just don't pay attention.

The debt has been around nearly as long as the country has. While Mr. Simpson may have been around too many years, let's not lay the blame all on him. The debt belongs to all of us. The Bush tax cuts were enormously popular at every level when passed, even if some didn't like the ones for the richest. Even still, no one is seriously considering eliminating all of the tax cuts.

I am 35 yo. My income taxes have never been raised. They have, in fact, been cut--twice. I am a single parent with 4 kids. My income tax rate is negative. Yes, I get paid by the government to work and I have a decent middle class job. My taxes are not too high and neither are the taxes of millions of others like me. It is disingenuous to expect the government to help provide for our standard of living and then to be unwilling to pay for it.

Maybe you aren't mad enough with the historical lies given to and the shrinking of the middle class.

Maybe you still think it's only non-Democrats who are fed up with who has been occupying office and then gets assigned to some committee who tells America to eat cat food.

Keep paying attention.

I'd rec it again if I could.

:kick:

and I'm embarrassed that one was promoted to the front page of DU.

For crying out loud... many of them are propaganda started in think tanks and blindly forwarded by unthinking people to further the propaganda.

I'm guessing the anonymous elderly citizen who so called "gets it" is actually an intern at some freakin' think tank. damn... this is a recycled chain mail anyway.

When I get shit like this from repugs... I usually debunk and chide them for forwarding chain mail.

I expect better of DUers and DU in general.

Seriously... can you not see the hidden propaganda? Social Security.. ponzi scheme...raise our taxes??? hell noes!1!1 Gubmit bad... really bad... Give "our" money to zero ambition losers... what... Reagan's welfare queens?

For crying out loud... this is BS propaganda. take it down.

selective readers.

Good letter and it does represent the thinking of many seniors today.

Don't like that...still some good lots available at Forest Lawn.

enough chain e-mails to know that they help dumb down the public.

RW's are relentless with spreading their bullshit.Please, people ON HERE pick up on THAT-it's important.

Tax the rich and single payer.period.

:wtf

We as a group have the responsibility to inform our friends and colleges about the true intent of the run-of-the-mill politician, and show them who the real champions of the people really are.

Get involved, and vote in each and every election no matter how small.

Couldn't agree more. When people start to hear and understand what you just said then there could be civil unrest in this country.

interest-bearing account" for decades until the pubs decided to raid it.

SS surplus monies have always been loaned to the general budget.

What changed was that reagan jacked up the amount of surplus collected.