Jim - Tim - Frank - Ever Heard Of These Guys?

EASYTRADER · Sep 22, 2012

The only thing any of us GOOD people can do is get out of debt, and prepare ourselves for he inevitable colapse, which could happen anytime, or it may be 20 years still in the future. But it is coming, sure as green grass is green.

xiggi · Sep 22, 2012

Actually the 47 percent is not an accurate ffigure. That includes such as retired people living on ss. The free leaders is a huge problem no doubt but it isn't 47 percent.

Sent from my Fisher Price X900 via EO Forums

layoutshooter · Sep 22, 2012

FAR too many lazy freeloaders out there. There are NOT enough resources to provide for those that REALLY need it AND the bums. The bums need to be sorted out. Requiring NASTY HARD work for the 'freebies' would go a LONG way to thinning out that herd.

EASYTRADER · Sep 22, 2012

SSI is welfare, not a "retirement", another problem the country has is the willful ignorance of the population.

The avergae ole geezer will pull 10 times more out in SSI than they ever put in.

layoutshooter · Sep 22, 2012

SSI and Social Security retirement benefits are not the same as far as I know. SSI was tacked on later into the life of the program.

davekc · Sep 22, 2012

They are two diffferent things. SSI is for children more or less and the disabled. The other is for retirement.

While it didn't start that way, retirement has evolved to the point that most will pull out more than they put in. Certainly is a problem.
As far as "freeloaders", it is probably half that number of 47 percent depending on how retirees are looked at.

Wounded vets, the disabled, children who are parentless, and the elderly are not what I would consider "freeloading".

EASYTRADER · Sep 22, 2012

Like I said willfull ignorance.

Having said that, as soon as I'm eligible I will have my hand out too, in a year when I get out of this truck I'm going on food stamps.

Unlike, other "conservatives" I won't kid myself that those programs are anything other than "welfare", my view is none of these programs should exhist, but since they do I'm gonna git mine!!!

layoutshooter · Sep 22, 2012

In regards to the 'geezers'. They were forced by law to pay into the system, as are we. WE have NO choice, and will see little if returns on the money the government stole from us. Nothin like stealing from people, with a PROMISE, of benefits later. Sounds like any number of flim flam artists out there. ANY politician involved should be hung.

davekc · Sep 22, 2012

EASYTRADER said:
Like I said willfull ignorance.

Having said that, as soon as I'm eligible I will have my hand out too, in a year when I get out of this truck I'm going on food stamps.

Unlike, other "conservatives" I won't kid myself that those programs are anything other than "welfare", my view is none of these programs should exhist, but since they do I'm gonna git mine!!!

Gee don't stop there. Once on welfare and the unemployment checks run out you can claim a mental disability and get on SSI. Quite a few articles on it as it is all the newest rage.

layoutshooter · Sep 22, 2012

In the mean time, disabled vets, who EARNED some benefits, are getting it stuck in their ear. They are getting shot up with drugs, warehoused and discharged, all in an attempt to cut costs. All while the bums and gimmie goobers are being promised more.

davekc · Sep 22, 2012

Probably true. That is Romney's or any candidate for that matter that has a uphill climb. Doesn't matter really who the candidate is as it is more the philosophy.
Unless you are giving stuff out and not cutting anything, it is a tough road.

layoutshooter · Sep 22, 2012

davekc said:
Probably true. That is Romney's or any candidate for that matter that has a uphill climb. Doesn't matter really who the candidate is as it is more the philosophy.
Unless you are giving stuff out and not cutting anything, it is a tough road.

Only because Romney, and most others, are AFRAID to stand up and say what needs said. Romney is AFRAID to lose. Obama is out to win. He will promise ANYTHING to reach that goal, Romney is AFRAID to challenge the stupidity of it. Romney, there for , will lose.

davekc · Sep 22, 2012

And there lies the problem. Romney or anyone else is walking a tightrope. You just can't say the facts like you could in the Reagan era. Why? Too many on the take now. Look at the response just from his 47 percent comment. Granted it wasn't a accurate number, but that isn't the backlash. The media and electorate is much different than years past.

layoutshooter · Sep 22, 2012

There are only two choices, be a wimp, and TRY not to lose, OR, stand up like a Man who has the courage of his convictions and TRY to win. Standing up for what is right just MAY draw out many who not longer vote due the the lack of quality candidates. Wimping out promises an Obama win. We KNOW the route O'Romney is taking. He looks like an idiot. Fumbling around, like a deaf bat.

21cExp · Sep 22, 2012

I believe they need some Powdermilk Biscuits.

"They give ya the strength to get up and do what needs to be done!"

layoutshooter said:
Only because Romney, and most others, are AFRAID to stand up and say what needs said. ...

davekc · Sep 22, 2012

The ones not voting very well be the ones who are on the take. Again...very delicate balance.

layoutshooter · Sep 22, 2012

davekc said:
The ones not voting very well be the ones who are on the take. Again...very delicate balance.

Well Dave, we will just have to agree to disagree on this. Doing what Romney is doing is just not in my nature. I have no respect for him. It is just how it is.

Not to worry, I have LESS than no respect for Obama!

aristotle · Sep 22, 2012

Why would anyone be surprised at Romney's lackluster performance as a campaigner? This is the logical outcome when a moderate is nominated. The GOP Establishment simply never learns. The GOP should have nominated a fiery, in-your-face candidate capable of putting the heat to Obama. Instead, we get Mister Rogers.

layoutshooter · Sep 22, 2012

I, for one, am NOT surprised! This is EXACTLY what I expected! McCain II.

davekc · Sep 22, 2012

aristotle said:
Why would anyone be surprised at Romney's lackluster performance as a campaigner? This is the logical outcome when a moderate is nominated. The GOP Establishment simply never learns. The GOP should have nominated a fiery, in-your-face candidate capable of putting the heat to Obama. Instead, we get Mister Rogers.

I would want to agree until I look at what the electorate is comprised of. One could have a Chris Christie type of candidate but the minute you say you are going to cut something, all bets are off. You have now 50 percent of the population getting some kind of assistance. The message is where the problem is I am sad to say. One only has to look at European elections and you will see what I mean.