Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

Prepare to work longer for less


  • Please log in to reply
61 replies to this topic

#51 Ravn

Ravn
  • VibeTribe
  • 7,806 posts

Posted 13 July 2011 - 09:32 PM

For every economist and policy maker that screams this from the mountain top, there is another economist that says it's completely untrue.

You can believe it if you want to, but that doesn't make it fact.



Regardless , I would be more comfortable handling *MY* money the way *I* see fit. And the people that wouldn't handle it in a responsible manner? TS for them.

#52 deadheadskier

deadheadskier
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,141 posts

Posted 13 July 2011 - 10:12 PM

The thing is that it would be tough shit for you as well, not just for the people who can't save on their own.

I understand that some Americans can save and invest way better on their own than what the federal gov't can do for them. However, most Americans cannot, so they need the liebral nanny gov't to keep a piggy bank for them.

You take that piggy bank away and your taxes will go up by other means. Because there is going to be way greater need for homeless shelters and low income housing. And if you say tough shit to the shelters, well then your money is going to go towards way more police and jails as crime will skyrocket. Don't believe me? travel 1000 miles southwest of you and tell me what you find.

Social Security has worked just fine since it's inception. It's only recently become a problem because the government has pilfered the funds to pay for unnecessary wars. What needs to change is SS funds need to be left alone. If the gov't wants to go to war, they need to finance it in other ways.

Some reform would be fine, such as indexing the retirement age with life expectancy. However, I think it would be extremely dangerous and horrendously irresponsible to do away with a safety net that unfortunately is needed by a huge percentage of our citizens.

#53 Condormania

Condormania
  • VibeTribe
  • 5,387 posts
  • LocationDerby

Posted 13 July 2011 - 10:20 PM

^yup

#54 TEO

TEO

    VibeGuide

  • VibeGuide
  • 22,549 posts

Posted 13 July 2011 - 11:14 PM

^yup

#55 vic

vic
  • VibeTribe
  • 4,913 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 01:30 PM

The thing is that it would be tough shit for you as well, not just for the people who can't save on their own.

I understand that some Americans can save and invest way better on their own than what the federal gov't can do for them. However, most Americans cannot, so they need the liebral nanny gov't to keep a piggy bank for them.

You take that piggy bank away and your taxes will go up by other means. Because there is going to be way greater need for homeless shelters and low income housing. And if you say tough shit to the shelters, well then your money is going to go towards way more police and jails as crime will skyrocket. Don't believe me? travel 1000 miles southwest of you and tell me what you find.

Social Security has worked just fine since it's inception. It's only recently become a problem because the government has pilfered the funds to pay for unnecessary wars. What needs to change is SS funds need to be left alone. If the gov't wants to go to war, they need to finance it in other ways.

Some reform would be fine, such as indexing the retirement age with life expectancy. However, I think it would be extremely dangerous and horrendously irresponsible to do away with a safety net that unfortunately is needed by a huge percentage of our citizens.


:clapping:

#56 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,443 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 02:20 PM

Yep. I've been screaming it for a long time. END THE F*^&ING WARS! :joker:

#57 Condormania

Condormania
  • VibeTribe
  • 5,387 posts
  • LocationDerby

Posted 14 July 2011 - 02:22 PM

Can anyone imagine what kind of shape we would be in if our country's first retarded president and his gaggle of cronies hadn't declared war on the...wait, who are we fighting again? Sometimes it makes me sad to think about it.

#58 TEO

TEO

    VibeGuide

  • VibeGuide
  • 22,549 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 02:24 PM

The war on drugs or the other one?

#59 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,443 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 02:26 PM

Can anyone imagine what kind of shape we would be in if our country's first retarded president and his gaggle of cronies hadn't declared war on the...wait, who are we fighting again? Sometimes it makes me sad to think about it.


Which first retarded president?
If you think GWB started this trend, you've gotta go back quite a few presidencies.
Granted, he escalated the trend like no other. But he is far from the trend starter.

#60 Condormania

Condormania
  • VibeTribe
  • 5,387 posts
  • LocationDerby

Posted 14 July 2011 - 04:35 PM

The war on drugs or the other one?

The other two.


Which first retarded president?
If you think GWB started this trend, you've gotta go back quite a few presidencies.
Granted, he escalated the trend like no other. But he is far from the trend starter.


I never said he started any trend. I'm referring to this: http://costofwar.com/en/

#61 beerzrkr

beerzrkr
  • VibeTribe
  • 716 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 04:51 PM

Let us not forget the people we are killing in Yemen, Pakistan, and Libya. Some folks would say they aren't wars but I don

#62 haloofroses

haloofroses
  • VibeTribe
  • 465 posts

Posted 25 July 2011 - 06:46 PM

fuck all this, fuck squabbling and waiting for the next party while we struggle and strive get shafted; and we know this.

I'm going to work on a farm -