SS privatization back next term??

SS privatization back next term?? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

pahunkboy -> SS privatization back next term?? (8/25/2006 2:16:48 PM)
http://www.unionvoice.org/campaign/socialsecurity_c/explanation chilling thought that bushes nighmaresh plan to privatize SS seems headed for his agenda again....

WyrdRich -> RE: SS privatization back next term?? (8/25/2006 2:27:52 PM)
I like the idea of a privatized Social Security system. Right now I look at the deduction on the paystub as my "tithe to the elderly." I never expect to see it again. Want a good "Liberal" reason to change the system? It's the wealthy and upper middle-class people who are living (and collecting) the longest I'm still in favor of a safety net for disability and survivors. Perhaps a less radical solution would be to just euthanize people after so many years of retirement.

pahunkboy -> RE: SS privatization back next term?? (8/25/2006 2:50:29 PM)
dont forget many of these laws have hidden items in them. surprises. being what war is costing.... i know alot of ppl that have taken a pay cut,. anyhow- it will be a long debate should it resurface

WyrdRich -> RE: SS privatization back next term?? (8/25/2006 2:58:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy anyhow- it will be a long debate should it resurface Unfortunately, I don't think it will be a good debate. Arguements will get reduced to the lowest common denominator, politicians on both sides will tell blatant lies that are believed and in the end, those with the least power will get screwed the hardest.

NorthernGent -> RE: SS privatization back next term?? (8/25/2006 3:03:23 PM)
Wyrd, If you privatise Social Security there will not be any saftey net. Privatisation means profits and profits means reduced cost and reduced cost means no saftey net. Can't have it both ways Wyrd, no point sitting on the fence - which is it? the everyman for himself culture of privatisation or the more humane method of government which provides for all of it's citizens through social welfare? Three things you need to define to achieve any sort of credibility with your post - what do you mean by Liberal, Upper-Class and Middle Class? On explanation it will be possible to weigh up if "your good Liberal reason" is sound logic. Regards

WyrdRich -> RE: SS privatization back next term?? (8/25/2006 3:47:10 PM)
Of course I can have it both ways North. As soon as I'm appointed "Dictator Until I Get Bored," I can decree a separation between between the disability/widows and orphans system, and the retirement benefits system. I'm one of those dreamer Libertarian types, I believe the function of Government is to do the things the people and states cannot do for themselves and get the hell away from things Sovereign Citizens can do for themselves. I'm also realistic enough to know that a pure Libertarian state is probably almost as unworkable as a Communist one. I'd like to have more control over my options if I must have a Gov't system. With what I'd recieve now for all that money I never had the opportunity to invest, I'm not gonna be able to afford the gas to the nearest ice-floe.

Level -> RE: SS privatization back next term?? (8/25/2006 3:52:47 PM)
Quick reply: Something better be done about Social Security and Medicare, or else your children and grandchildren are going to suffer for it.

Estring -> RE: SS privatization back next term?? (8/25/2006 5:15:11 PM)
I just don't understand how a plan that gives people more control over what to do with their own money is considered nightmarish. It just shows you how indoctrinated people are to believe that Big Brother knows best.

meatcleaver -> RE: SS privatization back next term?? (8/25/2006 6:00:36 PM)
Estring. The state protects the property and wealth of the rich at the expense of the poor. As Noam Chomsky pointed out, that is the function of the state. You seem to be one of those indoctrinated souls that truely believes that laisez faire capitalism exists for the benefit of all. It doesn't. Laisez faire capitalism was quietly dispensed with in the west because it was quite obvious to most governments that it leads to revolution. When social security was introduced into Britain it was seen as a cheap way to buy off a potential revolution and protect the wealth of the rich. Cut tax and social security and let society polarise between rich and poor and your children and grandchildren will find themselves living in a completely different country to what you live in now. Probably a south American style dictatorship.

Estring -> RE: SS privatization back next term?? (8/25/2006 6:08:03 PM)
It is my money! Why not let me decide for better or worse what to do with it? The privatization is not mandatory. If you believe that Big Government knows best, you can still let them take your money and use it as they see fit. I would like the choice to do with it what I want.

Level -> RE: SS privatization back next term?? (8/25/2006 6:12:25 PM)
And let's keep in mind that it isn't a total privatization, but only 2-3%, I think, which would go into stocks/bonds/whatever you call them doohickeys that would be overseen by the government.

NorthernGent -> RE: SS privatization back next term?? (8/25/2006 6:14:05 PM)
Wyrd, A libertarian approach to life is fine if your life is all about you as an individual. What you are basically saying is you are doing ok, you know your own mind so for people like you individualism is fine. What about people who are struggling for various reasons whether it be emotional or physical difficulties - if you are saying those less fortunate should be left to their own devices then you are basically advocating survival of the fittest. No offence intended here but there's no point in giving yourself a label and attempting to take creditbility from that label by aligning it with freedom when basically you are not advocating freedom - you are talking about survival of the fittest. We all know that there are people on this planet that need help for various reasons so by taking a survival of the fittest stance you're basically saying I'm alright Jack fuck everyone else. A genuinely free country would think with a free conscience and provide the conditions that satsify everyone. Freedom is a mind issue - for example, those who support the US Government do not have freedom of mind and similarly those who advocate individualism do not have freedom of mind because they've been conned into thinking life is about the individual when it is clearly not. You will never get the things humans need in life from individualism - love, loyalty, friendship, respect - all collective. Regards

Estring -> RE: SS privatization back next term?? (8/25/2006 6:16:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent Wyrd, A libertarian approach to life is fine if your life is all about you as an individual. What you are basically saying is you are doing ok, you know your own mind so for people like you individualism is fine. What about people who are struggling for various reasons whether it be emotional or physical difficulties - if you are saying those less fortunate should be left to their own devices then you are basically advocating survival of the fittest. No offence intended here but there's no point in giving yourself a label and attempting to take creditbility from that label by aligning it with freedom when basically you are not advocating freedom - you are talking about survival of the fittest. We all know that there are people on this planet that need help for various reasons so by taking a survival of the fittest stance you're basically saying I'm alright Jack fuck everyone else. A genuinely free country would think with a free conscience and provide the conditions that satsify everyone. Freedom is a mind issue - for example, those who support the US Government do not have freedom of mind and similarly those who advocate individualism do not have freedom of mind because they've been conned into thinking life is about the individual when it is clearly not. You will never get the things humans need in life from individualism - love, loyalty, friendship, respect - all collective. Regards Spoken like a true European.

Level -> RE: SS privatization back next term?? (8/25/2006 6:17:34 PM)
And that's Estring, not WyrdRich. [:D]

NorthernGent -> RE: SS privatization back next term?? (8/25/2006 6:21:56 PM)
An amazingly considered and well-thought out response. I would say spoken like a true American but then it would be insulting the US posters who have far more insight than you. I'll leave it at if I were you I'd do some reading and educate myself about the world and life in general.

meatcleaver -> RE: SS privatization back next term?? (8/25/2006 6:22:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Estring It is my money! Why not let me decide for better or worse what to do with it? The privatization is not mandatory. If you believe that Big Government knows best, you can still let them take your money and use it as they see fit. I would like the choice to do with it what I want. Look at all the privatisations that have taken place since privatisation became fashionable, they are all more expensive than state run institutions. The reason is obvious, private companies rake off profits at the expense of the services they run. The only reason I can think of that politicians haven't reversed this privatisation trend is because they receive back handers from the private companies.

Estring -> RE: SS privatization back next term?? (8/25/2006 6:27:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver quote: ORIGINAL: Estring It is my money! Why not let me decide for better or worse what to do with it? The privatization is not mandatory. If you believe that Big Government knows best, you can still let them take your money and use it as they see fit. I would like the choice to do with it what I want. Look at all the privatisations that have taken place since privatisation became fashionable, they are all more expensive than state run institutions. The reason is obvious, private companies rake off profits at the expense of the services they run. The only reason I can think of that politicians haven't reversed this privatisation trend is because they receive back handers from the private companies. And private companies do a better job than government agencies. When private companies do a bad job, they go out of business. When government agencies do a bad job, they just continue doing a bad job. I prefer to trust my money with someone who depends on my business to survive. And sorry you don't like that companies make profits. That is why they exist. And that is why they do a better job than government everytime.

meatcleaver -> RE: SS privatization back next term?? (8/25/2006 6:35:30 PM)
They don't go out of business because they are running services that governments can't allow to go out of business such as water, utilities, medical and transport etc. If there was a level playing field and no intervention, the US wouldn't have a major airline for a start and most of your farming would disappear. If you looked into it you will be quite surprised at what companies and what multi-millionaires your tax dollars support. Companies you think would have nothing to do with government. Now that is social security for you. You pay a lot more social security to help support millionaires than you do to keep food in the mouths of the poor.

Estring -> RE: SS privatization back next term?? (8/25/2006 6:46:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver They don't go out of business because they are running services that governments can't allow to go out of business such as water, utilities, medical and transport etc. If there was a level playing field and no intervention, the US wouldn't have a major airline for a start and most of your farming would disappear. If you looked into it you will be quite surprised at what companies and what multi-millionaires your tax dollars support. Companies you think would have nothing to do with government. Now that is social security for you. You pay a lot more social security to help support millionaires than you do to keep food in the mouths of the poor. Social security isn't intended to keep food in the mouths of the poor. And how about this? Let me keep my money and I can give more to private charities that do a great job feeding the poor.

WyrdRich -> RE: SS privatization back next term?? (8/25/2006 6:55:53 PM)
North, Absolutely not. I believe that not every worthy cause is a job for Government. That is a far cry from abandoning those in need. One of the reasons for my split away from Liberalism was a perception that a lot of comfortable liberals espoused those values to make the homeless man on their doorstep 'somebody else's problem.'

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125