Progressivism

[MorTech]

Progressivism - Where everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else. See Parasite.

These retarded little brats think their thieving ideology is "Progress". Duuuuhhhhhhhh.

[Don Baldwin]

Progressivism - Where everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else. See Parasite.

These retarded little brats think their thieving ideology is "Progress". Duuuuhhhhhhhh.

"Progress" is lowering the standards so low that ANYONE can "qualify"...and feel "proud about themselves" for "making it".

You know...like little league where girls get to play, everyone plays equally, and everyone gets a trophy. Meaning...not REAL sports...but pretend sports.

Education has become "pretend" education because the standards have been lowered so much.

[rubicon]

I have a belief that the moderate Democrats are going to make a shift toward the Republican side of the aisle.

I say this because their leaders are too far out on the fringes including the would be chair of the DNC.

Progressives in general have not yet gotten over the fact that their candidate and their marxist platform has been rejected. they thrive on moral relativism which is another way of saying the ends justifies the means.

We can see radical progressives become more militant and more violent. They are moving closer to communism because their leaders keep describing Trump's movement as fascism .

The tipping point may come with Chuck Schummer. if he sides with Pelosi who is simply out of control then button down the hatches because we are in for a ride.

The MSM will never cut Trump any slack and they will continue to fuel anonymity toward Trump and his team


Indeed Trump does not help himself with his faux pas but one must recognize that you get what you see with Trump and he does not apologize for it. Trump may not always be right but he is always up front and honest about his feelings, and actions. I would rather deal with Trump then with the likes of Obama who says one thing and does another.

Personal Best Regards:

[dave harris]

Progressivism - Where everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else. See Parasite.

These retarded little brats think their thieving ideology is "Progress". Duuuuhhhhhhhh.

So, you will be refusing your socialistic programs like social secutity, medicare, ect. You would not be a hypocrite about this would you?

[dave harris]

I have a belief that the moderate Democrats are going to make a shift toward the Republican side of the aisle.

I say this because their leaders are too far out on the fringes including the would be chair of the DNC.

Progressives in general have not yet gotten over the fact that their candidate and their marxist platform has been rejected. they thrive on moral relativism which is another way of saying the ends justifies the means.

We can see radical progressives become more militant and more violent. They are moving closer to communism because their leaders keep describing Trump's movement as fascism .

The tipping point may come with Chuck Schummer. if he sides with Pelosi who is simply out of control then button down the hatches because we are in for a ride.

The MSM will never cut Trump any slack and they will continue to fuel anonymity toward Trump and his team


Indeed Trump does not help himself with his faux pas but one must recognize that you get what you see with Trump and he does not apologize for it. Trump may not always be right but he is always up front and honest about his feelings, and actions. I would rather deal with Trump then with the likes of Obama who says one thing and does another.

Personal Best Regards:

Yes, you are right, the Democrats should take a page out of the repub book. From now on use every stall tactic to block all repub legislation and everything they do.Thats the repub creed.

[Don Baldwin]

So, you will be refusing your socialistic programs like social secutity, medicare, ect. You would not be a hypocrite about this would you?

Why would you list the ONLY "social programs" that aren't actually "socialistic" as welfare is?

People PAY into SS and Medicare their whole working lives. It's an "insurance" program run by the government more than a "social program" in the sense you are thinking of one.

Did you contribute to your retirement plan? 401k? SEP? THAT could also be called a "social program" but it's not...because it's not.

[billethkid]

So, you will be refusing your socialistic programs like social secutity, medicare, ect. You would not be a hypocrite about this would you?

Anything that we paid for in advance is not a socialist program.
Some folks can only function by re-defining whatever the subject matter until it fits their program or agenda.

[Don Baldwin]

Anything that we paid for in advance is not a socialist program.
Some folks can only function by re-defining whatever the subject matter until it fits their program or agenda.

They're women and minorities...they CAN'T think logically like you and I...it's WHY they twist everything around with delusion.

[dave harris]

Why would you list the ONLY "social programs" that aren't actually "socialistic" as welfare is?

People PAY into SS and Medicare their whole working lives. It's an "insurance" program run by the government more than a "social program" in the sense you are thinking of one.

Did you contribute to your retirement plan? 401k? SEP? THAT could also be called a "social program" but it's not...because it's not.

Those were repub words about S.S. and medicare. How about if we use S.S. as the only medical program and you pay into it, would you be in favor of that?

[dave harris]

Anything that we paid for in advance is not a socialist program.
Some folks can only function by re-defining whatever the subject matter until it fits their program or agenda.

You are not paying for all of S.S. and Medicare, it is subsidized. .

[MDLNB]

You are not paying for all of S.S. and Medicare, it is subsidized. .

Subsidized because our money is NOT earning interest on it and because it is not going to just those that paid into it, but others that never contributed to it. It's not socialist, it's a Ponzi scheme.

[dillywho]

Why would you list the ONLY "social programs" that aren't actually "socialistic" as welfare is?

People PAY into SS and Medicare their whole working lives. It's an "insurance" program run by the government more than a "social program" in the sense you are thinking of one.

Did you contribute to your retirement plan? 401k? SEP? THAT could also be called a "social program" but it's not...because it's not.

Excellent point! Seems that anyone who contributes to a retirement plan or buys an insurance plan has expectations of someday collecting. Or should they just say, that's ok...keep it and use those proceeds to line your own pockets? Besides, with those, you chose to participate. With SS and Medicare, you did not, right along with your employers. If they were intended as forced donations, why weren't we told that?

[Don Baldwin]

Those were repub words about S.S. and medicare. How about if we use S.S. as the only medical program and you pay into it, would you be in favor of that?

No...they were YOUR words...YOU typed them.

You are not paying for all of S.S. and Medicare, it is subsidized. .

No Davi, it is NOT subsidized...please EXPLAIN to me HOW a program that has consistently generated a SURPLUS can be subsidized?

They've been taking the surplus and spending it...leaving IOUs in it's place.

Subsidized because our money is NOT earning interest on it and because it is not going to just those that paid into it, but others that never contributed to it. It's not socialist, it's a Ponzi scheme.

You're an idiot for believing Davi's crap without checking...without KNOWING that SS has run a PROFIT since...forever. It WILL need subsidizing after they pay back all the money they owe it...owe us.

[MDLNB]

No...they were YOUR words...YOU typed them.



No Davi, it is NOT subsidized...please EXPLAIN to me HOW a program that has consistently generated a SURPLUS can be subsidized?

They've been taking the surplus and spending it...leaving IOUs in it's place.



You're an idiot for believing Davi's crap without checking...without KNOWING that SS has run a PROFIT since...forever. It WILL need subsidizing after they pay back all the money they owe it...owe us.

The "surplus" from the 80's has been spent and now we have more taking than contributing to it. YES, they did borrow from it and left us with IOUs but the fact remains now that it will be in trouble as long as more take than contribute. It's a Ponzi scheme plain and simple.

[Don Baldwin]

The "surplus" from the 80's has been spent and now we have more taking than contributing to it. YES, they did borrow from it and left us with IOUs but the fact remains now that it will be in trouble as long as more take than contribute. It's a Ponzi scheme plain and simple.

You know NOT of what you speak... Please don't contradict me when you haven't done your homework.

"In 2015, reserves are large enough that cash flow will not be a problem for the trust fund for almost 20 years."

"Because the surplus OASDI funds are essentially loaned to the rest of the government, a full understanding of the effects of OASDI financing requires consideration of its effects on the Treasury's general account cash flows."

"In 1980, the OASDI trust fund reserves were low and declining. Congress enacted changes in 1983 (discussed later) that enabled reserves to begin to accumulate. In the 2014 edition of the Annual Report of the Board of Trustees of the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance and Federal Disability Insurance Trust Funds (henceforth, the Trustees Report), reserves are projected to peak around 2020 and to be depleted around 2033 if no changes are made to the tax or benefit provisions before then."

"Chart 1 shows trust fund total income exceeding trust fund expenditures from 1984 through 2019, generating annual surpluses. Beginning in 2020, total income is projected to be less than expenditures, generating annual deficits (shown as negative surpluses)."

There's more...

Social Security Trust Fund Cash Flows and Reserves (https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/ssb/v75n1/v75n1p1.html)

[MDLNB]

"There are currently 2.8 workers for each Social Security beneficiary. By 2035, there will be 2.2 covered workers for each beneficiary."

"In 2016, nearly 61 million Americans will receive approximately $918 billion in Social Security benefits"
https://www.ssa.gov/news/press/factsheets/basicfact-alt.pdf

"...Beginning in 2020, however, they project the OASDI annual cost will exceed total income, so the trust fund reserves will be drawn down until they are depleted in 2034—the same year as estimated last year. After trust fund reserve depletion, continuing income is sufficient to pay 79 percent of program cost, declining to 74 percent for 2090."
Summary: Actuarial Status of the Social Security Trust Funds, June 2016 (https://www.ssa.gov/policy/trust-funds-summary.html)

You're right. My mistake. I had read in several places where we had depleted the 80's surplus. Can't find it now, so I've got no quote to back me up. According to SSA we now have until 2020 before the cost exceeds the income.

[Don Baldwin]

"There are currently 2.8 workers for each Social Security beneficiary. By 2035, there will be 2.2 covered workers for each beneficiary."

"In 2016, nearly 61 million Americans will receive approximately $918 billion in Social Security benefits"
https://www.ssa.gov/news/press/factsheets/basicfact-alt.pdf

"...Beginning in 2020, however, they project the OASDI annual cost will exceed total income, so the trust fund reserves will be drawn down until they are depleted in 2034—the same year as estimated last year. After trust fund reserve depletion, continuing income is sufficient to pay 79 percent of program cost, declining to 74 percent for 2090."
Summary: Actuarial Status of the Social Security Trust Funds, June 2016 (https://www.ssa.gov/policy/trust-funds-summary.html)

You're right. My mistake. I had read in several places where we had depleted the 80's surplus. Can't find it now, so I've got no quote to back me up. According to SSA we now have until 2020 before the cost exceeds the income.

That's what happens when you believe the "group think". The "general knowledge"...that is false.

That's why I'm always saying...trust no one, believe nothing in the media. Draw your OWN conclusions after reviewing the facts.

In many cases...you never get any facts...just lies and propaganda. So you CAN'T come to a conclusion. Pretty much EVERYTHING that happens overseas, especially a war zone, is almost 100% propaganda.

That's why I don't take any sides in politics because both sides are full of liars...corrupt, crooked, thieving, liars.

[dillywho]

"There are currently 2.8 workers for each Social Security beneficiary. By 2035, there will be 2.2 covered workers for each beneficiary."

"In 2016, nearly 61 million Americans will receive approximately $918 billion in Social Security benefits"
https://www.ssa.gov/news/press/factsheets/basicfact-alt.pdf

"...Beginning in 2020, however, they project the OASDI annual cost will exceed total income, so the trust fund reserves will be drawn down until they are depleted in 2034—the same year as estimated last year. After trust fund reserve depletion, continuing income is sufficient to pay 79 percent of program cost, declining to 74 percent for 2090."
Summary: Actuarial Status of the Social Security Trust Funds, June 2016 (https://www.ssa.gov/policy/trust-funds-summary.html)

You're right. My mistake. I had read in several places where we had depleted the 80's surplus. Can't find it now, so I've got no quote to back me up. According to SSA we now have until 2020 before the cost exceeds the income.

Has anyone calculated into these equations the monies paid into SS (including employers, of course) of people who die before they are old enough (62 minimum) to withdraw from it? These are the people who have no one qualified to receive those monies because they leave no spouse or no minor children.

[Don Baldwin]

Has anyone calculated into these equations the monies paid into SS (including employers, of course) of people who die before they are old enough (62 minimum) to withdraw from it? These are the people who have no one qualified to receive those monies because they leave no spouse or no minor children.

There is NO "John Doe" account to be passed on to anyone. There is only...Joe Doe paid this much...and when John Doe reaches age and applies...this is what he gets per month until he dies. Remember too...spouses can get half the husbands SS benefit for their lifetime even though they never worked.

They count on lots of people dying before collecting a dime. What they are having trouble with is people are living too damn long to keep paying them and their healthcare...yes folks...with single payer comes death panels...they will NOT spend $ millions on an 85 y/o in the future. Also...the end of the baby boom paying in has cut down the amount going into SS...WHY do you think they're LETTING the Hispanic invasion happen? Not JUST low wage workers for the food conglomerates, but KIDS...kids that "hopefully", will become workers and replace the dwindling boomers. White people are having NEGATIVE population growth...minorities...triple digit!

It STILL works out to...they pull in more than they pay out. In 2020 when it starts losing money again...they'll just change something so it continues, lower the payout or raise the "contribution". It's what they do...it's what they've done.

The future ISN'T so bright you gotta wear shades...it's dark...dark skinned, poor, violent, and nasty.

[dillywho]

There is NO "John Doe" account to be passed on to anyone. There is only...Joe Doe paid this much...and when John Doe reaches age and applies...this is what he gets per month until he dies. Remember too...spouses can get half the husbands SS benefit for their lifetime even though they never worked.

They count on lots of people dying before collecting a dime. What they are having trouble with is people are living too damn long to keep paying them and their healthcare...yes folks...with single payer comes death panels...they will NOT spend $ millions on an 85 y/o in the future. Also...the end of the baby boom paying in has cut down the amount going into SS...WHY do you think they're LETTING the Hispanic invasion happen? Not JUST low wage workers for the food conglomerates, but KIDS...kids that "hopefully", will become workers and replace the dwindling boomers. White people are having NEGATIVE population growth...minorities...triple digit!

It STILL works out to...they pull in more than they pay out. In 2020 when it starts losing money again...they'll just change something so it continues, lower the payout or raise the "contribution". It's what they do...it's what they've done.

The future ISN'T so bright you gotta wear shades...it's dark...dark skinned, poor, violent, and nasty.

The question concerned those who never collect because they die too young and do not have a spouse to get their half nor have any minor children.

[Don Baldwin]

The question concerned those who never collect because they die too young and do not have a spouse to get their half nor have any minor children.

Dilly Who...the ANSWER was in the FIRST sentence...

"There is NO "John Doe" account to be passed on to anyone."

Could my answer have been more pithy? Any clearer? Any more succinct?

Money paid in but uncollected...becomes part of the "surplus" that the government steals to give to corporations owned by those who put politicians in office who then appoint "regulators" who ensure conditions are ripe for them to profit handsomely.


Is that the answer you were looking for?

What did you think of the "new" Cindy Lou Who?