I take solace that dollar does not look to be collapsing while I am alive....
Obama lied?
- Thread starter layoutshooter
- Start date
I believe Obama really made this quite unworkable and illegal....since Fedsare not allowed to run a national program over the states....
The simpliest thing he could have done is just top up Medicaid and lower the qualifying age and set it to income level to qualify....bingo...states rights are not violated and more people get insurance coverage...
The simpliest thing he could have done is just top up Medicaid and lower the qualifying age and set it to income level to qualify....bingo...states rights are not violated and more people get insurance coverage...
I think you are mixing up Medicaid and Medicare. Not that it really matters. Both are overdrawn. There is NO money left to fund any of this.
All the money that was put into both Medicare and Social Security was "invested" in other projects since day one, with the PROMISE of returns on our money. Just like every other Ponzi scheme out there, the day as come to call in the returns and nothing is there. All those who put money into those "schemes" were ripped off.
I believe we have reached the point of no return.
The beauty of America....you believe one thing, I believe another and the next guy believes something all together different...and that is cool....
Gotta love it.....God Bless America!
There is 2.6 TRILLION dollars missing from the Social Security trust fund, give or take a billion or so, here or there. It was stolen from the American People. Social Security was a fraud fostered on us from day one.
I posted a link, from 2011 that explains things fairly well. It has only become worse in the time that has passed.
"Unconvinced, syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer wrote a subsequent column questioning Lew’s assertions. “This [Lew’s] claim is a breathtaking fraud. The pretense is that a flush trust fund will pay retirees for the next 26 years. Lovely, except for one thing: The Social Security trust fund is a fiction. … In other words, the Social Security trust fund contains—nothing.”
Social Security status-quo defenders have assured us for the past 25 years that Social Security is fully funded—for the next 25 years, or 2036. So if there are real assets in the Social Security Trust Fund—$2.6 trillion allegedly—then how could failure to reach a debt-ceiling agreement possibly threaten seniors’ Social Security checks?
The answer is that the federal government has borrowed all of that trust fund money and spent it, exactly as Krauthammer asserted. And the only way the trust fund can get some cash to pay Social Security benefits is if the federal government draws it from general revenues or borrows the money—which, of course, it can’t do because of the debt ceiling."
What Happened to the $2.6 Trillion Social Security Trust Fund? - Forbes
I posted a link, from 2011 that explains things fairly well. It has only become worse in the time that has passed.
"Unconvinced, syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer wrote a subsequent column questioning Lew’s assertions. “This [Lew’s] claim is a breathtaking fraud. The pretense is that a flush trust fund will pay retirees for the next 26 years. Lovely, except for one thing: The Social Security trust fund is a fiction. … In other words, the Social Security trust fund contains—nothing.”
Social Security status-quo defenders have assured us for the past 25 years that Social Security is fully funded—for the next 25 years, or 2036. So if there are real assets in the Social Security Trust Fund—$2.6 trillion allegedly—then how could failure to reach a debt-ceiling agreement possibly threaten seniors’ Social Security checks?
The answer is that the federal government has borrowed all of that trust fund money and spent it, exactly as Krauthammer asserted. And the only way the trust fund can get some cash to pay Social Security benefits is if the federal government draws it from general revenues or borrows the money—which, of course, it can’t do because of the debt ceiling."
What Happened to the $2.6 Trillion Social Security Trust Fund? - Forbes
I don't know what that is all about thats been known for years. And I am pretty sure BOTH houses of Congress have been raiding it. Tbh z i think it was President Reagans crowning achievement in 1984? And as a foot note social security was only supposed to be supplemental income not as sole retirement account..........
Sent from my LG-LS970 using EO Forums mobile app
yep...that is all it is supposed to be....somewhere some got an idea it was like an income replacement or FULL pension....it was never meant to be like that...
What it was, or was not, meant to be is not relevant to the fact that the money has been stolen from the trust fund and cannot be replaced. The government put Madoff in jail for doing EXACTLY the same thing they did. The government claimed that Mr. Madoff's Ponzi scheme was the largest in history, which is of course, not true. Social Security is by FAR the biggest, and the most evil.
Madoff, did major damage to, compared to SS, a few private investors. The Social Security fraud could bring down the entire US economy.
No Social Security was FDR's baby, not Reagan's. Reagan want to privatize it and could not get that through congress. It is possible that we would not be in as bad a shape as were are now had it been done, no way to find out now, it's too late.
Yes that is correct but thats why something needs to be done about it now well actually yesterday.....
Sent from my LG-LS970 using EO Forums mobile app
Yep, but it ain't gonna happen. Congress, and the president, are gutless. They are FAR more concerned about getting reelected, or their party being reelected, so they can continue to line their own pockets, no matter what harm that does to the People. They are a joke.
“Every nation [or ‘country’] has the government it deserves,” or some other variant — is often wrongly attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville and/or Abraham Lincoln. They never said it. Joseph de Maistre did, but what he meant by it is probably different than what most people think. Maistre was a Savoy French philosopher, writer, lawyer, and diplomat. He defended hierarchical societies and a monarchical state in the period immediately following the French Revolution. When Maistre wrote this famous aphorism in 1811, he was serving as the King of Piedmont-Sardinia’s envoy to Russian Czar Alexander I. At that time, Alexander was introducing reforms that were moving Russia toward a European-style, democratic constitutional government. It’s ironic that Maistre’s quote is now commonly used to suggest that citizens should get more involved in politics, actively push for more democratic governments, rebel against tyrants or to criticize elected officials and the people who elected them. Maistre disliked democracy with a passion and believed that hereditary monarchies were a divinely-sanctioned, superior form of government. He vehemently opposed the French Revolution and supported restoration of the French monarchy. And, in his 1811 letter, Maistre was actually expressing his negative views of Alexander’s reform policies in Russia. He said a European-style constitutional system would be “over the heads” of the Russian people. The oft quoted aphorism, what he actually said was, "Every nation has the government for which it is fit for." Deserve's got nothing to do with it. The reason I say deserve's got nothing to do with it is because we as a nation certainly don't deserve Obama, despite he and his administration being a suitable fit for us. In a constitutional democracy, every elected governmental placeholder is a suitable fit, otherwise they couldn't have gotten elected to the positions, and it's the positions that make up the government. That doesn't mean that any elected government suitability is necessarily the same thing as an intelligent suitable fit, clearly. Just because we stupidly elected Obama doesn't mean that we actually deserve him, particularly in light of the fact that he has done almost nothing of what he promised in order to get elected.
" he has done almost nothing of what he promised in order to get elected."
In this regard Obama is not much different than any other of the jackweeds that have been elected to that office over the past 200 years or so.
In this regard Obama is not much different than any other of the jackweeds that have been elected to that office over the past 200 years or so.
sounds like you got your info from some Romper Room rejects web site. Honest Abe DID say that, Oh I think Miss Connie is looking in her magic mirror and calling your name.
Nope - it was LBJ that essentially took Social Security "off budget". All excess SS funds (if there are any) have to be invested in govt bonds.
Stop and think about that for a minute; he promised to fundamentally transform the USA, and he's doing exactly that with the help of a sycophantic media that won't hold him accountable for any of his blunders. He's doing a pretty good job of turning us into a European socialist society with virtually no resistance from the Republican party - except for Rand Paul and Ted Cruz.
Cite the reference where he said it and I'll concede. But if he said it, he was quoting Maistre. Maistre's 1811 letter predates Lincoln's public speaking engagements by a considerable number of years, as Lincoln was born only two years before Maistre's letter.
