The gun lobby is deranged

[Gipper]

What about someone like me? I am still young. I am paying into Social Security, but what if I die at 45? I will have gotten nothing back. CATO did a study a few years back that found I needed to basically live until I was 90 to break even in Social Security. What are the odds of that?

Plus, it gets worse. Every year I pay off the Social Security tax fairly early, but now, the idea is to just have me pay that tax with no cap, (more money I won't get back), and to add insult to injury, now BOTH parties seem to want to "means test" me out of getting any real benefit -- because I don't need it.

I may not need it, but it is absurd to demand I pay more into a system under the idea I will get some benefit back, and then means test me out of getting any benefit.

Why can't I just opt out altogether? I don't want Social Security, and it is insulting to demand I pay more for a "benefit" that both parties are beginning to acknowledge they will never give me.

Hey....you are rich chump....pay up and shut up...says Uncle Sam.

You will not be alone my friend. SS will soon be means tested and anyone with assets will not receive benefits. It WILL become a welfare program. I laugh at the annual statements the SS Administration sends me and my wife each year. There is no F-ing way we will ever receive that money...because we worked hard, saved our money, and have a nice net worth.

And you do have options. Leaving the country is one. I suggest you consider it if you want to keep your wealth. Because eliminating SS benefits is just the beginning. They will take much much more before they are done. An off-shore bank account is a must.

 

[GenSeneca]

Exactly how are Welfare, Social security, Medicaid, Medicare, and Unemployment Insurance threatening a loss of life, liberty, and/or property?

I cannot refuse to participate, under legal threat of losing my life, liberty, and property.

If you want to think of the morality of the actions becoming lost, that's fine with me. I call it gray areas.

Murder, robbery, enslavement... Gray areas...

As I said in your other thread, I'm not interested in your silly game.

I answered your absurd questions about the trolley problem and the kids on the bus... Now that you're asked to answer similar questions, you refuse. Why is that?

 

[GenSeneca]

What about someone like me? I am still young. I am paying into Social Security, but what if I die at 45? I will have gotten nothing back. CATO did a study a few years back that found I needed to basically live until I was 90 to break even in Social Security. What are the odds of that?

Plus, it gets worse. Every year I pay off the Social Security tax fairly early, but now, the idea is to just have me pay that tax with no cap, (more money I won't get back), and to add insult to injury, now BOTH parties seem to want to "means test" me out of getting any real benefit -- because I don't need it.

I may not need it, but it is absurd to demand I pay more into a system under the idea I will get some benefit back, and then means test me out of getting any benefit.

Why can't I just opt out altogether? I don't want Social Security, and it is insulting to demand I pay more for a "benefit" that both parties are beginning to acknowledge they will never give me.

Would you accept being means tested out if it was done to end the program? Yes, you'd still get screwed but future generations would never have to pay into that ponzi scheme.

 

[BigRob]

Would you accept being means tested out if it was done to end the program? Yes, you'd still get screwed but future generations would never have to pay into that ponzi scheme.

I'd have to see the specifics of such a plan.

 

[Lagboltz]

I cannot refuse to participate, under legal threat of losing my life, liberty, and property.

You certainly can refuse to participate in welfare and unemployment insurance. I presume you are talking only about taxation in general and those programs as specific examples of what taxation is used for.

I answered your absurd questions about the trolley problem and the kids on the bus... Now that you're asked to answer similar questions, you refuse. Why is that?

I addressed that in the other thread.

 

[dogtowner]

You are partially correct. This are excerpts from our beloved gummint.
http://www.ssa.gov/history/BudgetTreatment.html

In the Social Security Act of 1935 the income from the payroll tax was to be credited to a Social Security "account." Benefits were to be paid against this account, but there was no formal trust fund as such.
...
In the 1939 Amendments, a formal trust fund was established and a requirement was put in place for annual reports on the actuarial status of the fund.
...
In early 1968 President Lyndon Johnson made a change in the budget presentation by including Social Security and all other trust funds in a"unified budget."

The damn progressive LBJ spent my SS on the Vietnam war.

and what exactly was the nature of this fund ? just paperwork.

 

[Gipper]

interesting...proof the state's desire to confiscate guns from law abiding citizens, is NOT about saving lives. If the state were concerned, they would be doing something about stopping Death by Doctor...but with Obamacare, that number should raise.

Gun control laws are not meant to stop criminals. Gun control is about control and about disarming the American people because there are some very bad people who wish to do middle class Americans great harm. America needs to wake up and see gun control for what it is; gun control is most often a precursor to absolute tyranny and often culminates in genocide.
If this government was truly sincere about making the country safer, they would be corralling and controlling the reckless and negligent medical-pharmaceutical-industrial complex. The present medical statistics demonstrate that death by doctor dwarfs death by gunfire as the following chart demonstrates.

Rank Causes of Death (2010) # of Deaths
1 Heart disease 597,689
2 Cancer 574,743
3 Medically caused deaths 225,000
4 Chronic lower respiratory diseases 138,080
5 Stroke 129,476
6 Accidents 120, 859
7 Alzheimer’s 83, 494
8 Diabetes 69,071
9 Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome 50,476
10 Influenza and Pneumonia 50,094
??? Death by Firearm 9,601
In 2010, there were 14,043 homicides in the United States. This was 15th leading cause of death according to the CDC mortality statistics and a Wall Street Journal review for causes of death. However, when one isolates the number of deaths by firearms, the number of deaths caused by guns drops to 9,601. Gunfire, as a cause of mortality is not even ranked among the leading causes of death. The likelihood of being killed in a mass shooting are about what they are for being struck by lightning.
http://www.activistpost.com/2013/02/death-by-doctor-vs-death-by-firearms.html

 

[Lagboltz]

and what exactly was the nature of this fund ? just paperwork.

Of course. It was more secure paperwork than tossing our SS money into a general fund to have it evaporate within the year. All capitalism is financed by paperwork ... stock certificates, or the more modern bytes in an electronic database, etc. You gotta get used to it.

 

[dogtowner]

Of course. It was more secure paperwork than tossing our SS money into a general fund to have it evaporate within the year. All capitalism is financed by paperwork ... stock certificates, or the more modern bytes in an electronic database, etc. You gotta get used to it.

they kept and keep tabs of what you pay in as that dictates your payout when that begins but evrryone's money goes into the same account and if a surplus came.about that went to the general fund via special tbills.

 

[cashmcall]

interesting...proof the state's desire to confiscate guns from law abiding citizens, is NOT about saving lives. If the state were concerned, they would be doing something about stopping Death by Doctor...but with Obamacare, that number should raise.

Love the logic! How about this: Obama says that by getting guns off the streets, that will save lives. If it saves one life, it's worth it. Ok, so if 1.5 million people use a gun in a personal defense each year, how many lives have been saved (of both the victims AND the assailants)? Just the deterrent effect of guns is huge. You've heard the saying about robbing Peter to pay Paul? Those who want to take away gun rights are saying, "Let's kill Peter to save Paul." WHO has the RIGHT to make that kind of decision for us?

 

[GenSeneca]

You certainly can refuse to participate in welfare and unemployment insurance.

No, people cannot opt out of paying, directly or indirectly, for those programs either. Can you at least admit to the fact that people are coerced into funding the programs?

I presume you are talking only about taxation in general and those programs as specific examples of what taxation is used for.

It's all coercion.

I addressed that in the other thread.

I played your "silly game" and answered your "silly" questions and you tried to paint me as an 'extreme moral coward' for refusing to agree that it would ever be moral for me to murder innocent people. You certainly weren't shy about admitting that you're willing to murder innocent people and that led to an obvious question... When asked just how many innocent people you'd be willing to murder, suddenly it's a "silly game" and you refuse to participate. If anyone is playing games, it's you.

 

[Gipper]

Love the logic! How about this: Obama says that by getting guns off the streets, that will save lives. If it saves one life, it's worth it. Ok, so if 1.5 million people use a gun in a personal defense each year, how many lives have been saved (of both the victims AND the assailants)? Just the deterrent effect of guns is huge. You've heard the saying about robbing Peter to pay Paul? Those who want to take away gun rights are saying, "Let's kill Peter to save Paul." WHO has the RIGHT to make that kind of decision for us?

Yes. Guns save far more lives than they take. We know this and so do the elites like BO. However the power elite know they can easily dupe a large segment of our population into believing in gun control and even confiscation. Those gullible people are scary fools. They will gladly give up their rights thus making the power elite even more powerful and much more dangerous.

Imagine a political party or politician saying to Americans just 50 years ago, turn in your guns. They would be laughed at and roundly condemned. But in America today, after decades of liberal indoctrination (really dumbing down), many Americans will gladly comply.