Hey....what are "lib tactics" anyway....and can I use those in a lesbian bar to get laid ?
- Goto:
- Go
bustMall 12 years ago
Our problem here is that a system designed to lift people out of the great depression, as a means of last resort, that provided money, for work, upon which some of our greatest feats of infrastructure genius were built, has become a cradle to grave way of life for too many, and others look upon as some kind of right after 30 years of work or a certain age.
SS was a stop-gap to keep people from destitution between the end of their physical ability to work, and death. Not a long term retirement system.
Unemployment was often denied if you were fired for cause, and or were not actively looking for work.
Medicaid/Medicare were for the very ppor, but now the threat of legal action has made even rudimentary care cost prohibitive. (The reason lawyers in political office will never change the system)
.... in short, what close to 50% of our population now view as entitlements, were once something that you did everyting to AVOID and GET OUT OF if you had a shred of self pride. Today, people just want more, and politicians are willing to give it, so long as it keeps them in office.
We are going bankrupt and it does need to change. I don't expect any changes until public employees are all part of the same system as the public, and it return to a means of last resort instead of an ENTITLEMENT.
The constitution entitles you to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It goesn't guarantee your success at finding happiness. It doesn't guarantee your life will be long. It only guarantees the liberty to do your best to to achieve the others.
SS was a stop-gap to keep people from destitution between the end of their physical ability to work, and death. Not a long term retirement system.
Unemployment was often denied if you were fired for cause, and or were not actively looking for work.
Medicaid/Medicare were for the very ppor, but now the threat of legal action has made even rudimentary care cost prohibitive. (The reason lawyers in political office will never change the system)
.... in short, what close to 50% of our population now view as entitlements, were once something that you did everyting to AVOID and GET OUT OF if you had a shred of self pride. Today, people just want more, and politicians are willing to give it, so long as it keeps them in office.
We are going bankrupt and it does need to change. I don't expect any changes until public employees are all part of the same system as the public, and it return to a means of last resort instead of an ENTITLEMENT.
The constitution entitles you to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It goesn't guarantee your success at finding happiness. It doesn't guarantee your life will be long. It only guarantees the liberty to do your best to to achieve the others.
F1098 12 years ago
We are a nation of pigs. Each and everyone of us. Our representitives are tasked with bringing home more revenue from DC than we send to them. I have absolutely no problem with this abuse of the system so long as Congress provides billions of dollars of subsidies to agriculture and petroluem.
Look in the mirror if you want to see where the problem begins and ends.
Look in the mirror if you want to see where the problem begins and ends.
bustMall 12 years ago
Quote:
Originally posted by F1098
We are a nation of pigs. Each and everyone of us.
Look in the mirror if you want to see where the problem begins and ends.
Each and every one of us, eh?
I would disagree. There are a good many Americans that want very little from our government outside of infrastructure and national security, nor do they feel that the constitution provides congress with the authority to provide much more than that. (which on another thread explains why I view the military and the rest of the federal government differently, but that's a digression here)
I know quite a number of people that have refused unemployment benefits, myself included, even though eligible, and view it as a source of last resort, not some right. The same can be said for SS. The idea that the minimal payroll input by an average worker somehow covers the cost of a retirement for 15-30 years is ludicrous, nor was it the original intent of the SS stopgap. As a compassionate people, we need to care for the mentally incapable, physically infirm, and the destitute by unfortunate circumstance, but we are not obligated to provide "ENTITLEMENTS" to the mentally and physically capable, regardless of age.
But had you not so defined your comments with "Each and everyone...", but rather as a vast majority, I would have agreed wholeheartedly.
F1098 12 years ago
You miss my point completely. PLease re-read what I said.
( You point was articulated on the SS issue. Only.)
( You point was articulated on the SS issue. Only.)
Quote:
Originally posted by bustMall
...
Each and every one of us, eh?
I would disagree. There are a good many Americans that want very little from our government outside of infrastructure and national security, nor do they feel that the constitution provides congress with the authority to provide much more than that. (which on another thread explains why I view the military and the rest of the federal government differently, but that's a digression here)
I know quite a number of people that have refused unemployment benefits, myself included, even though eligible, and view it as a source of last resort, not some right. The same can be said for SS. The idea that the minimal payroll input by an average worker somehow covers the cost of a retirement for 15-30 years is ludicrous, nor was it the original intent of the SS stopgap. As a compassionate people, we need to care for the mentally incapable, physically infirm, and the destitute by unfortunate circumstance, but we are not obligated to provide "ENTITLEMENTS" to the mentally and physically capable, regardless of age.
But had you not so defined your comments with "Each and everyone...", but rather as a vast majority, I would have agreed wholeheartedly.
bustMall 12 years ago
Hey, I read it three times, and even went to look in the mirror (twice just cuz I'm so handsome), and still don't get it... Help me out.
PS: Maybe re-read mine. I disagreed with nothing but the all-inclusiveness of "each and everyone"
PS: Maybe re-read mine. I disagreed with nothing but the all-inclusiveness of "each and everyone"
F1098 12 years ago
Each and everyone refers to the congressional pork that we demand and gobble up like pigs. Now, Bust'm....walk away from mirror (
) and ask yourself if anyone in your state or congressional district has called their rep to tell him that the money spent on his bull shit project would be better spent either on a national project or on his little "bridge to nowhere".
We are a nation of pigs and we have the govenment that deserve. Shortsighted and focused on staying in power.
We are a nation of pigs and we have the govenment that deserve. Shortsighted and focused on staying in power.
Quote:
Originally posted by bustMall
Hey, I read it three times, and even went to look in the mirror (twice just cuz I'm so handsome), and still don't get it... Help me out.
PS: Maybe re-read mine. I disagreed with nothing but the all-inclusiveness of "each and everyone"
bustMall 12 years ago
I pretty much have to agree as far as infrastructure expenditures. We all tend to look at any money as good money. Just look what guys like Robert Byrd were able to do in their states (damn near everything in WV is named the Robert Byrd Something or Other)... but there are many of us that petition congress regularly to spend less, reduce government, and get the hell out of "The People's" way.
Are we disagreeing about anything here?
Are we disagreeing about anything here?
- Goto:
- Go