9 hours ago, we_gotta_believe said:

Massie is a self-absorbed attention whooring moron. Anyone that still takes him seriously is almost certainly cut from the very same cloth as he was.

 

Trump brand cloth, of course. Made in Chyyyy-na!

4 hours ago, jsdarkstar said:

We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a saltshaker half-full of cocaine, and a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…a pint of raw ether, and two dozen amyls

Blues, reds, yellows, screamers, uppers, downers, you name it.

 

Freak Power!!! 

 

1 hour ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

Massie is verifiably one of the biggest morons in Congress, and he looks perfect for that role, too.

I'd say that's $500 well spent. I'd gladly offer another $500 to take the fight to the fascists.

Do you even have $500?

11 minutes ago, iladelphxx said:

Do you even have $500?

 

Uhhhh, yeah. I might be "a poor" in Vikas' world, but I'm not destitute, lol.

16 hours ago, jsdarkstar said:

Interesting. So Libertarians support legalized sex work, drugs, abortion and oppose the Death Penalty. 

Privatizing SS is interesting. So how will that work? Do I get all the money I put into the system for 30 years back, for me to invest as I please, or is that money gone forever? 

No, that depends on who you talk to. Essentially some will argue in favor of it based on a fetus not being a person and some will argue against for being a person. The most fundamental concept of libertarianism is the non aggression principle, so if you think the baby is in fact a baby, you can’t kill it.

As for SS, plenty of different proposals. I suppose the most libertarian way to do it would be to take whatever cash is in the trust and distribute it proportionately based on how much each individual has paid into it.

So, no, you wouldn’t get "all” the money you put in, but you’d get some, and depending on your age you might come out better.

8 hours ago, TEW said:

No, that depends on who you talk to. Essentially some will argue in favor of it based on a fetus not being a person and some will argue against for being a person. The most fundamental concept of libertarianism is the non aggression principle, so if you think the baby is in fact a baby, you can’t kill it.

As for SS, plenty of different proposals. I suppose the most libertarian way to do it would be to take whatever cash is in the trust and distribute it proportionately based on how much each individual has paid into it.

So, no, you wouldn’t get "all” the money you put in, but you’d get some, and depending on your age you might come out better.

From what I read on Libertarian's is that abortion is a personal choice between the mother and her doctor. Those who want one can get one and those who don't want one don't have to as long as the government is not involved in the decision or procedure.

If what you say is true on SS, that only some of the money is returned, then I oppose it. Why should we have to lose money that we paid into the system? As far as the trust, there is no money in it unless congress fully funds it, which will never happen. 

1 minute ago, jsdarkstar said:

If what you say is true on SS, that only some of the money is returned, then I oppose it. Why should we have to lose money that we paid into the system?

 

Honestly, most of us, especially those of us who are younger, will never get back what we put in. The program was never intended to be that way, however.

 

 

11 hours ago, jsdarkstar said:

From what I read on Libertarian's is that abortion is a personal choice between the mother and her doctor. Those who want one can get one and those who don't want one don't have to as long as the government is not involved in the decision or procedure.

If what you say is true on SS, that only some of the money is returned, then I oppose it. Why should we have to lose money that we paid into the system? As far as the trust, there is no money in it unless congress fully funds it, which will never happen. 

1) Ron Paul is pro life. So are many other libertarians. It’s a contentious argument within libertarian circles, again, because of the NAP. Pro life says a fetus is a human life and you violate the NAP by aborting the child. FWIW, this is basically my own position (Walter Block being a pretty well known and respected professor in libertarian circles): 

2) Why should you have to lose some money? Because there is not enough money to make everyone whole. Welcome to being part of a Ponzi scheme. 

11 hours ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

Honestly, most of us, especially those of us who are younger, will never get back what we put in. The program was never intended to be that way, however.

Well, it was designed so that half the people would be dead by the time it started paying out. 

11 hours ago, DaEagles4Life said:

 

 

Highest paid part time "job" anywhere.

On 5/13/2022 at 10:43 PM, TEW said:

Well, it was designed so that half the people would be dead by the time it started paying out. 

 

Yeah, pretty much. 65 was basically life expectancy in the 1930s, and it would drop lower through the Depression and WWII. That might be the most significant drag on the program, but it's about to be majorly compounded by the sheer enormity of the Boomer generation, especially relative to the size of Millennials and their share of wealth. People also forget that it was never intended to be large enough to cover everyone's living expenses. It was supposed to be a supplement to normal retirement income when pensions were at risk of being wiped out by the crash, and as a temporary financial bridge for one's dying years (since most people were not going to live to see 70 anyway).

39 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

Yeah, pretty much. 65 was basically life expectancy in the 1930s, and it would drop lower through the Depression and WWII. That might be the most significant drag on the program, but it's about to be majorly compounded by the sheer enormity of the Boomer generation, especially relative to the size of Millennials and their share of wealth. People also forget that it was never intended to be large enough to cover everyone's living expenses. It was supposed to be a supplement to normal retirement income when pensions were at risk of being wiped out by the crash, and as a temporary financial bridge for one's dying years (since most people were not going to live to see 70 anyway).

Yeah, and raising benefit distribution to the average age of mortality would basically solve the issue of SS. But good luck telling the public they aren’t going to get any money until they’re 85 years old.

15 hours ago, TEW said:

Yeah, and raising benefit distribution to the average age of mortality would basically solve the issue of SS. But good luck telling the public they aren’t going to get any money until they’re 85 years old.

In what timeline of the multiverse does this disgustingly obese and diabetes-ridden country have an average age of mortality that even sniffs 85?

It never even touched the 80's and has since dropped significantly in the last year thanks to the large segment of our population that thinks "masks are face diapers, and vaccines have microchips!"

Dixie got a new "save the dogs, abolish the ATF" pillow the other day. here she is looking over her shoulder for rouge government agents.....

so its all hugs, hold hands and kisses over there is it ? 

8 minutes ago, Alpha_TATEr said:

so its all hugs, hold hands and kisses over there is it ? 

you know it. its like an episode of little house on the prairie. 

58 minutes ago, BFit said:

you know it. its like an episode of little house on the prairie. 

great, now the theme song is in my head. 

2 hours ago, BFit said:

Dixie got a new "save the dogs, abolish the ATF" pillow the other day. here she is looking over her shoulder for rouge government agents.....

 

Rouge is bad, certainly weird. But the ones you really have to watch out for are the ones in mascara 

1 hour ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

Rouge is bad, certainly weird. But the ones you really have to watch out for are the ones in mascara 

lets not sit hear an act like i kan spell

5 minutes ago, BFit said:

lets not sit hear an act like i kan spell

 

Yeah, but you make up for it in grilling/smoking ability, so I give you a pass. I just rarely pass up the opportunity to be a smartass 

On 5/12/2022 at 9:20 AM, jsdarkstar said:

Interesting. So Libertarians support legalized sex work, drugs, abortion and oppose the Death Penalty. 

Privatizing SS is interesting. So how will that work? Do I get all the money I put into the system for 30 years back, for me to invest as I please, or is that money gone forever? 

Yes to the first paragraph (generally speaking).

As far as privatizing SS, there are lots of different ideas on how to do it. Some plans are basically to keep the SS tax in place but switch it to a private account that would be invested much like a 401K or IRA. The more libertarian approach is to just get rid of the whole thing entirely and let individuals be responsible for retirement.

As far as your tax contributions, if we are going to unwind the SS system then everyone is going to have to take a haircut.

 

 

 

7 hours ago, iladelphxx said:

 

 

 

Exactly.

Provate lenders aren’t going to give out an uncollateralized quarter million dollars to the average college kid without Uncle Sam backstopping it.

And without that tsunami of debt, colleges simply won’t be able to charge $60K a year. Suddenly, they’ll have to make some easy decisions— like if they want to cut the diversity officers or the math department, if they want to stop building resort style student housing or get rid of the business school, and do you want to keep gender studies or the engineering school?

Just get rid of the artificial extension of credit towards colleges and it would solve so many issues in this country. Not just student loan problems, but fundamental societal issues.

On 5/13/2022 at 11:04 AM, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

Honestly, most of us, especially those of us who are younger, will never get back what we put in. The program was never intended to be that way, however.

He still doesnt grasp its a swindling ponzu scheme. or refuses to grasp it.

libertarians would argue that you take care of yourself. No SS. You want protection buy insurance. We have no right to the property of others