Moving….
Moving to:
http://conservativevictorynews.com
Please plan on using the new site by December 1, 2012.
You can still use this site but no new news articles will be posted here.
I do appreciate everyone who has participated on CVN for the past nine months. I hope you will now join us at the new site as we continue to enlighten ourselves in our fight to save the America we all love and respect.
Bring your friends. We need all the help we can get.
Thanks to all,
Navy Gentleman-
Recent Posts
- Our wonderful adventure continues…
- Eight PM Open Post – November 30, 2012
- Boehner: ‘We’re almost nowhere’ in talks with Obama [VIDEO] | The Daily Caller
- Afternoon Speculation – Fiscal Cliff: Obama is putting politics ahead of our national interest.
- Memo From Middle America | Obama’s Administrative Amnesty Not Applicable To White, Legal, English Girl. And While We’re On The Subject, Aren’t British Immigrants Preferable To Mexican Immigrants Anyway? | VDARE.com
Archives
Categories
I disagree with the assertion that those on Social Security are on the "dole".
This is not a social welfare program to those who receive it, it is a return of money invested in a retirement program.
It is more like an annuity than a gift.
Correct. I also don't think that simply being on the dole automatically translates into votes for Democrats. I wish the media would stop insinuating this stuff.
Actually, the headline itself is misleading. It says homes, not households. If you want to get technical, 100% of (mortgaged) homes are on the dole, since they get the write-off. I have such a write-off.
But, it is up to the Repubs, as Sarah P and Arthur Brooks and so many are beginning to say, to make the moral case for free markets. It's the only way. Liberalism is a dead end road, except by force and tyranny.
All deductions are not subsidies nor government handouts. Most are legitimate expenses and expenditures that reduce the taxable amount of our income that the federal government needed a constitutional amendment in order to extort from us because our founding fathers new that an income tax is immoral.
OregonTea, I consider Social Security a Capital Loss Tax……8>)
Now that I agree with.My kid will never collect SS, but I sure had better, I have paid infor 40 years so far with 10+ to go.This is the only “benefit” the gov't can't take away, there will be arevolt unheard of in history.Medicare, SS disability, welfare, extra unemployment, etc, are crapand a waste of money, cut them out.
I disagree. The average recipient uses their ENTIRE contribution in 2 years. Life expectancy is 13 years MORE. It's elderly welfare and has discouraged people from saving for retirement.
Ah, where your error lies is in the compounded interest it is supposedto bring. This is what was sold the people when the program started.We cannot opt out. The fact the gov't changed their rules does notapply to the participants.We are owed this money. Period.
CONgress stole your money, just like Bernie Madof did of his victims. Ironically, they spent it on their own perks, including their gold-plated healthcare and retirement programs.
Yep! Those who believe "The average recipient uses their ENTIRE contribution in 2 years." is a fool. Just consider if the money you were forced to put into Social Securtiy had been put into a bank with interest compounded over, say, 25 years … how can anyone possibly believe the entire contribution would be used in 2 years even without interest? The fact of the matter is that you wouldn't have to be a very good investor to do better than Social Security, but, we aren't given that choice, are we?
The current grouping of Social Security recipients with people actually on the dole is a Leftist talking point. And, like all their talking points, it's based on a flawed premise. Social Security recipients are NOTHING like those on welfare… the money S.S. recipients receive is money EARNED by WORKING!!
I understand all that, but the facts speak for themselves. They use up their contribution in two years, regardless of what COULD have been done with that money. Studies also show that it DISCOURAGES saving, as all safety nets do, and has in fact become more more akin to elderly welfare than a program to supplement retirement. You're shooting the messenger, but the facts still remain.
"Facts"? Who is providing those "facts" and what is the agenda behind those "facts"? Since when is the forceful seizure of your money a safety net? "Discourages savings"? Those elderly "welfare" recipients would have saved more if they had the money that the government took from them. Yep, it's really THEIR fault that the money that was left was used to raise families and give all the ungrateful children their goodies. They should have said the hell with the family and providing for them, I'm saving this money for My retirement because I shouldn't be expected to apply and start receiving any of the money that was, through no fault of mine, taken from me for years. I'm not "shooting the messenger", I'm questioning the "facts"… perhaps, you should too.
Except you aren't, you're attacking me. Did I advocate forceful seizure of ANYONE'S funds? Nope, but you rant about it as if it were my policy. If it were up to me, SS would have been buried YEARS ago. The numbers are easy to find, and the study I quote is several years old so I bet they're even more skewed than I even state. Trying to lay blame and fault is just asinine. Again, the NUMBERS speak for themselves. We all agree its a broken program, but instead of attacking me, ask yourself this.
Is it "fair" that the current generation has 3 workers for every recipient and these workers MUST pay for those on the dole because the elderly used up the funds that were taken for them? When SS was founded, there were 15-17 workers for every recipient and the avergae life expectancy was 67.
AGAIN, NUMBERS. Keep attacking me while ignoring the fact that there are fewer contributors, 13 years worth of unfunded checks, and that it discourages saving for retirement. But yeah, I'm the problem.
Good gracious, you all are disgraceful. I'm an MD and benefit directly from Medicare, and although it would harm me personally, I'll be the FIRST to agree it must be scrapped. You all need to grow up and face facts. The left is right about this very aspect of Tea party members, They want small gov't but bitch and moan about losing SS and Medicare. Wake up hypocrites. Get the FACTS
What you are spewing is the same propaganda rhetoric that the Left has deliberately used to group senior citizens into the same category as free loading welfare recipients. And, by doing so, the Left and, you, can feel justified in threatening EARNED S.S. benefits whenever the subject of cutting welfare budgets comes up. It's a disgusting tool and you have either willing, or just stupidly, bought into.
You say, the "NUMBERS speak for themselves". I guess, we should believe those numbers, the same way we should believe all the media hyped unemployment numbers, huh? Funny, how those unemployment numbers always get quietly revised after the "fake" numbers have been ballyhooed. But, of course, in your mind, I suppose, you believe that's different. Numbers can be adjusted to any result you want to prove. Ask any business accountant.
You use the word "fair" … LOL! Are you sure you belong on a Conservative site?
Get over yourself … you really think I'd waste my time attacking you? For a doctor you certainly don't read very well and you are, apparently, insincere about your attitude toward Medicare. You could refuse to treat Medicare patients as some physicians do.
I'm done trying to explain the difference between those who get money for nothing from hard working taxpayers and those who are deserving of receiving some of their earned money that was forcibly taken from them. Do you really believe S.S. recipients or those still having to be subjected to that are happy about it? You choose to throw all of us working taxpayers into the same group as those lazy never employed worthless "Obama stash" slugs. Who really is the disgraceful one?
You're so hung up on the term welfare that you YET AGAIN IGNORE THE NUMBERS! yes, it is clear you "gave up" on thinking because as I HAVE REPEATEDLY STATED:
1) The average life expectancy has increased THIRTEEN YEARS since SS was created. THAT's NOT FUDGED, moron
2) There are 12-14 FEWER WORKERS TO PAY INTO THE FUND than when it was funded. Again, those aren't fudged moron
3) There are on average 13 years of UNFUNDED CHECKS, again, unfudged numbers.
Good god, you all are sign posts! I GUARANTEE, I have "contributed" against my will as everyone has more money than most here will contribute in a life time and I know I'll never get a penny of it. The gov't raided the SS trust fund, spent it and left IOU's in place. People live longer, contribute less and expect their kids to make up the difference. Yes, I WILL use the word "fair" because this generation is getting raped by the generations above them who have spent their entire life times of earnings, left them trillions of debt to show for it, and that IGNORES the SS trust fund issues.
Keep the head in the sand.
Want to know who has the regressive mentality? YOU DO with your entitlement mentality.
Fear the numbers, but the gov't doesn't want you to know that the average person spends all they contributed in two years. Neither does the left. That why the gov't. the left and YOU always defend social insecurity. Remember when Bush tried to make reform? I'm sure you protested loudly.
You certainly have repeated the same statements over and over again in your attempt of treat Social Security as the most egregious of entitlements and to condemn supporters of the Tea Party movement as though they are all SS recipients out to protect their dole. You repeatedly offer the traditional Socialist goal of "fairness" and the cornerstone of your rant is "the numbers". Unending Unemployment Compensation, food stamps, support for growing numbers of illegitimate children, and those growing numbers of big government "entitlements" that pay people not to work don't get your condemnation – just SS. Well, let's not stop with supporting Bush's attempt to reform SS – as most Tea Party supporters did. Let's just cancel payments to SS recipients immediately and transfer the money being paid in SS taxes to those programs designed to pay the bums not to work. Anyone who wants to, can provide "numbers" showing that will be more "fair". After all, we readily accept that any minor reduction in the increase in amounts budgeted for those "pay not to work" programs is a drastic and dangerous budget CUT. You've sanctified the numbers which prove that too, I suppose. You're right. Kill Social Security NOW. It's only fair. And while we're at it, lets just kill off as many of those Tea Party people as we can. No sense waiting for the death panels is there Doctor?
Your name and logic have never been used in the same sentence. You are being a TYPICAL liberal. All or none, hyperbole, personal attacks, attacking arguments I never made.
No, lets play it your way. Look at the last budget and then look at the single biggest ticket item. Then lets play pretend like you want to. You can go out there with your buddies Pelosi, Reid, Frank and all other leftists and tell us how its fiscally sound despite ALL NUMERIC EVIDENCE to the contrary. The sad thing is, I use shadowstats.com ALL the time because the gov't CHANGED the way they record the numbers. These numbers are pretty damn simple.
Here. Educate yourself. There are MANY ideas about how to reform it, but the way it "works" now is people get 13 years of benefits that they only paid for two years worth. That IS BROKEN and is unsustainable.
You DO understand that the term "shared sacrifice" actually means including you, not just everyone BUT you, correct?
http://www.cato.org/social-securitys-financial-cr... http://blog.heritage.org/tag/social-security/
Now go moan and whine about those numbers to Cato and Heritage. I'm sure Pelosi will give you a medal.
So, the single biggest item makes all other items unimportant.
You speak of "shared sacrifice" … another Liberal talking point. It's impossible trying to be reasonable with you Liberals. Keep cooking the numbers and I'm sure you'll find that utopia that you and Obama so fervently pursue.
For a guy who said he was done, you sure like to keep posting, don't you? Show me reasonable you entitlement addicted jack wad. By the way, you bring up fairness, yet that is the ONLY basis for your ENTIRE argument. You paid into the system so you should get 10 fold more out of it than you put into it because that's fair. You have NO ARGUMENT. Just your "I don't trust this new fangled math". Great. I hope you ignore your troponin level of 5 when you get it. It's one of those "funny numbers". Just leave the ER, go home, and do society a favor and wait on your couch for a check your kids have to pay for.
Like I SAID, reason and logic have never been tools you have ever used. Hey jack wad, no, the single biggest ticket item when we are 200 TRILLION in debt when using real accounting practices is irrelevant. Explain to all of us here why you HATE your kids, their kids, and their kids because jack asses like YOU are the reason the next three generations are financially enslaved.
YOU are the single biggest sort of idiot I hate the most. A die hard entitlement addicted moron who is liberal to the core but claims otherwise. YOU are the sort that the liberals point to when talking about Tea Party hypocrisy.
Go get your cookie from Nancy, after all you are "entitled".
Do you or anyone else know who "Alinskyyhffeess" is? It made some comment on this thread to me and then, as a coward will do, he deleted it. No chance to respond publicly. Here's it's post to me:
"Give it up Hobbes. You got owned.
your BS doesn't even hold water on a fringe site like this.
Go back to throwing a elderly person off a cliff. "
LOL!! As though my comments were against the elderly… just the opposite. But then, someone who hides in the shadows can't be expected to know much more than a mushroom and they survive on crap!!
He is over playin with roger and cowboy on the parachuting into NK thread.I don't know who he is by name, just that he is our resident troll.
Thank you. I kinda figured that he was a troll particularly with "Alinsky" in the name. I don't usually pay attention to them so I didn't recognize the name. Thanks again and, I guess, I'd better watch the trolls more carefully in the future so I can pick them out easily!
It has used about 25 different names since he came here.It is fairly easy to spot.It makes no sense and writes like a uneducated 13 y.o.I just don't feed them but rarely.
Whoa, I just jumped over to the NK thread … wow … I guess, my encounter wasn't so bad after seeing what it's pulling over there! What a jerk! Thanks again for the heads up … I usually don't want to feed them either, but, I do get fooled sometimes …
Over the cliff? Like the legion of demons turned into a Islamic take out order? Mmm, Mmm, Mmm. Hussein Barack the Pig with AlinskySauce on the side!
There are plenty of places to cut. How about getting rid of the department of education, EPA, IRS, and some other jackbooted departments of government. Sure, that would put a lot more people out of work, but if we got rid of taxes on income the private sector would have jobs available for them.
Instead of defund departments and agencies, how about defunding the federal government? The income tax was once unconstitutional. I wonder why?
Welcome to Obama land… change is all you're going to have left when he's done running the country into the ground.