Economy Wake up babe! The new right-wing mask-off moment just dropped! "Make the plebes toil away until they die!"

Daverisimo said:
No, it's very much a rw thing. The right has been against social security as long as it's been a thing. They are, always have been, and always will be pro capital and anti labor. It's kinda their thing
Click to expand...

Fuck paying into SS. I should be able to invest into my own retirement and not be robbed by the government.
 
Jack V Savage said:
That's great, but the elderly poverty rate used to be around 50%, and it still would be if not for SS. Does reducing that (to under 10%) have any value to you?
Click to expand...
What does this have to do with my comment?

I think every situation is unique, but I don't think the elderly should need to depend on the government for SS, but the way things are now I don't know if I'll actually get back anything I've paid in over the last 30 years.
 
spamking said:
What does this have to do with my comment?
Click to expand...
Your comment was about your personal situation, which is usually not what we think about in these discussions. So I asked you if it matters to you at all that some potential slight increase in your retirement income would be weighed against a massive increase in poverty among the elderly in America.
spamking said:
I think every situation is unique, but I don't think the elderly should need to depend on the government for SS, but the way things are now I don't know if I'll actually get back anything I've paid in over the last 30 years.
Click to expand...
I mean, sure, it would be great if everyone was just magically rich or something. That's not the tradeoff we think about in the real world, though. Also, if you're concerned about SS being cut, maybe don't vote for people who want to cut it.

Further, think this through logically. If the elderly all invested in such a way that they exactly reproduced their collective retirement income from SS with investment income, what would the effect be on the income of the non-elderly? In isolation, the answer is zero (with lower taxes offset 100% by lower pre-tax income).
 
avenue94 said:
SS disproportionately benefits lower income Americans. That isn't to say that, for example, there would be value in potentially means testing benefits so that a millionaire isn't collecting it.

If only there was a way to increase the number of Americans in the workforce through immigration. And if only there was a way to increase tax revenue by phasing out the payroll tax cap.

All valid problems with clear solutions. SS can be improved on the money going in side and money going out side. Housing can be easily fixed by just building a lot of new housing. National debt is a separate issue and not a problem like the other two.
Click to expand...
No, it disproportionately steals from lower income Americans and gives it to higher net worth Americans who already own their houses and have more in savings and other retirement accounts.

Ok, so the evil racist 'great replacement theory" is your solution to kick the can down the road and push the ponzi scheme back a couple more years? Oh wonderful, we'll just import a bunch of landscapers with less education, less skill and lower wages to replace a retiring middle and upper middle class. What could go wrong?

"Just keep stealing more from people joining the bottom rung of our ponzi scheme" isn't a solution to a drowning program, it's at best a way to push the controller all the way to the right when the tetris blocks are stacked too high because you don't want to accept the game is over. You can just not take that money from me, and I can instead put it into a house that appreciates, or a better retirment fund instead of the one that's failing miserably.

How about we just make SS optional? You can pay into it if you'd like, and we'll write your name down and see if your money is still there in a couple decades, or you can opt out and handle your own money? How many would pick the guys who are going $54 trillion in debt by 2034 and are already running their ponzi scheme at a deficit for the last 14 years?
 
Daverisimo said:
So, the "anti-elitist" right wing has declared war against not just social security, but retirement in general.


Retirement is a "stupid idea" says Benny Shaps

Ben Shapiro, who I'm sure has done nothing but work his fingers to the bone throughout his whole life, thinks the idea of 65 year olds retiring is stupid. He's not alone in this.

Matt Walsh: "Social Security is unfair/morally atrocious"

Mr. Weakchin McBeardo himself has evidently deemed fit to take a break from fear mongering about queer people to tell us lowly poors about how not throwing the elderly into the meat grinder of capitalism is bad actually (and of course Elmo Muskrat has cosigned).

Now, I know this might sound harsh to you normies, being brainwashed by the liberal commie woke SJW MSM and all, but how about you think about Jebus for a second, huh?

Charlie Kirk: "Retirement isn't Biblical"

Checkmate atheists!
Click to expand...

I'll definitely work less when I get older but I'll probably never retire.
 
nostradumbass said:
No, it disproportionately steals from lower income Americans and gives it to higher net worth Americans who already own their houses and have more in savings and other retirement accounts.
Click to expand...
Lower income Americans rely on Social Security far more than anyone else. This has always been the case. Again, I'm fine with means testing SS payments if you want. That solves your I'm sure good faith complaint about wealthier Americans benefiting.
nostradumbass said:
Ok, so the evil racist 'great replacement theory" is your solution to kick the can down the road and push the ponzi scheme back a couple more years? Oh wonderful, we'll just import a bunch of landscapers with less education, less skill and lower wages to replace a retiring middle and upper middle class. What could go wrong?
Click to expand...
Do you have another idea on how to increase the number of workers entering the workforce and paying into Social Security. This is simple math. If more Americans are going to be pulling money out of the program, you want more paying into it to offset it.
nostradumbass said:
How about we just make SS optional? You can pay into it if you'd like, and we'll write your name down and see if your money is still there in a couple decades, or you can opt out and handle your own money? How many would pick the guys who are going $54 trillion in debt by 2034 and are already running their ponzi scheme at a deficit for the last 14 years?
Click to expand...
Or we can just eliminate the regressive payroll tax phase out, which would fund the program for quite a while.
 
avenue94 said:
Lower income Americans rely on Social Security far more than anyone else. This has always been the case. Again, I'm fine with means testing SS payments if you want. That solves your I'm sure good faith complaint about wealthier Americans benefiting.

Do you have another idea on how to increase the number of workers entering the workforce and paying into Social Security. This is simple math. If more Americans are going to be pulling money out of the program, you want more paying into it to offset it.

Or we can just eliminate the regressive payroll tax phase out, which would fund the program for quite a while.
Click to expand...
Well you at least agree that something has to be done, so that's a start.

No, I don't have another idea for increasing the number of people paying into it, which is why I'm the one who said it's a failed program and accepted that it's just money lost for me and won't be there when I'm old enough to collect it, and I'm not deluding myself into thinking we should move the entire population of Haiti over here and hope that taking their $7 will pay for my retirement.

There's nothing "regressive", it's a flat rate, and you being open to means testing suggests that it's not really a retirement program anymore, since your idea is to take most of it from the people who are excluded from the benefits, it's just another welfare program that you already didn't need to be 65 to apply for, so why is it separate from just collecting disability?
 
ColemanwastheGOAT said:
Ben Shapiro is a fucking douche but to suggest he doesn't work hard is idiotic. That dude has been grinding at a high level for over a decade at this point.
Click to expand...
At talking. I could do my job until I die or get dementia. I mostly just talk and occasionally I write.

The contractors, plumbers, waiters, miners, etc? No, they cannot do their jobs until they die...unless it's the job that kills them first.

There's a luxury that people who don't physically work for a living get when thinking and talking about retirement that puts them out of touch with everyone else.

No one's paying social security on income above ~170k anyway. This proposal only, and has only, hurt working class Americans.
 
nostradumbass said:
Well you at least agree that something has to be done, so that's a start.
Click to expand...
My first post was literally me saying the payroll phase out should be adjusted...
nostradumbass said:
No, I don't have another idea for increasing the number of people paying into it, which is why I'm the one who said it's a failed program and accepted that it's just money lost for me and won't be there when I'm old enough to collect it, and I'm not deluding myself into thinking we should move the entire population of Haiti over here and hope that taking their $7 will pay for my retirement.
Click to expand...
The program was always contingent on an adequate number of people paying in, whether immigrants or births. Sitting there and pretending the country is powerless to fix the program is absurd given how simple the problem is. We know the problem, we know how we can fix it, just no one wants to do it because one party has decided the hill it wants to die on is "migrants bad."
nostradumbass said:
There's nothing "regressive", it's a flat rate, and you being open to means testing suggests that it's not really a retirement program anymore, since your idea is to take most of it from the people who are excluded from the benefits, it's just another welfare program that you already didn't need to be 65 to apply for, so why is it separate from just collecting disability?
Click to expand...
It's a flat rate that phases out. That's about as textbook regressive a tax as you could find.

Social security has always been a welfare program. Again, what's the argument for giving the top 15 percent of earners a tax break?

You're also making the classic dishonest argument of focusing only one one aspect of taxation and ignoring every other part to cry, woe, rich people are being jobbed by the government. It's like complaining that unemployment insurance is only available to those who are unemployed.
 
panamaican said:
At talking. I could do my job until I die or get dementia. I mostly just talk and occasionally I write.

The contractors, plumbers, waiters, miners, etc? No, they cannot do their jobs until they die...unless it's the job that kills them first.

There's a luxury that people who don't physically work for a living get when thinking and talking about retirement that puts them out of touch with everyone else.

No one's paying social security on income above ~170k anyway. This proposal only, and has only, hurt working class Americans.
Click to expand...

I was just responding to the idiotic statement that he doesn't work hard. Go read his wikipedia page. The guy never stops working

Absolutely a plumber can't be crawling around under sinks in his 60s but he should own a plumbing company by that point in his career.
 
ColemanwastheGOAT said:
I was just responding to the idiotic statement that he doesn't work hard. Go read his wikipedia page. The guy never stops working

Absolutely a plumber can't be crawling around under sinks in his 60s but he should own a plumbing company by that point in his career.
Click to expand...
Not everyone is cut out to run a business. I've met a lot of hard-working people who don't have the smarts to work on their own. But they're diligent, hard-working and ethical.

And not everyone wants to run a business. They want to do their jobs and go home at the end of it. The world needs employees too.
 
panamaican said:
Not everyone is cut out to run a business. I've met a lot of hard-working people who don't have the smarts to work on their own. But they're diligent, hard-working and ethical.

And not everyone wants to run a business. They want to do their jobs and go home at the end of it. The world needs employees too.
Click to expand...

You didn't work in trades when you were younger, I'm guessing.
 
nostradumbass said:
No, it disproportionately steals from lower income Americans and gives it to higher net worth Americans who already own their houses and have more in savings and other retirement accounts.

Ok, so the evil racist 'great replacement theory" is your solution to kick the can down the road and push the ponzi scheme back a couple more years? Oh wonderful, we'll just import a bunch of landscapers with less education, less skill and lower wages to replace a retiring middle and upper middle class. What could go wrong?

"Just keep stealing more from people joining the bottom rung of our ponzi scheme" isn't a solution to a drowning program, it's at best a way to push the controller all the way to the right when the tetris blocks are stacked too high because you don't want to accept the game is over. You can just not take that money from me, and I can instead put it into a house that appreciates, or a better retirment fund instead of the one that's failing miserably.

How about we just make SS optional? You can pay into it if you'd like, and we'll write your name down and see if your money is still there in a couple decades, or you can opt out and handle your own money? How many would pick the guys who are going $54 trillion in debt by 2034 and are already running their ponzi scheme at a deficit for the last 14 years?
Click to expand...
Its theft and you 100 percent should have the right to opt out...How can anyone actually oppose that?
 
Last edited:
lol at Charlie Kirk. The internet isn’t biblical either. God punished those for building the Tower of Babel. What does the internet allow you to do again? These people are a joke
 
I'm a Commie but when you listen to Shapiro its clear hes basing this off his own personal friends who have found purpose in ruining the world. In that rant he constantly alludes to how the people he knows suffer from not working and your employment is your purpose for living and when you lose it you die.

Well values aside the people hes alluding to had jobs they enjoyed and were the main beneficiaries of. They were not toiling away to make someone else wealthy and leaving behind no legacy whatsoever. So its a different dynamic. Yes if you have unlimited resources and no employer doing something you believe in will extend your life compared to retirement. That is absolutley different than people toiling away against their will who are doing so mainly because they have been told their whole lives they can finally enjoy themselves when they turn 65. And Shapiro probably has never met those sort of people and if he has views them with absolute contempt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,667
Messages
55,508,238
Members
174,800
Latest member
kechan123

Share this page

Back
Top