Why Do Democrats Want Social Security To Go Bankrupt?

If you think all kids are planned, you are grossly mistaken. What do you think this is, Vulcan?

Now that abortion is illegal completely in 8 states AND highly restricted in about another half dozen with nearly all the GOP-controlled states making it harder for abortions to be performed, that number of poor kids will rise significantly. I guess you will propose a "license" to have a baby now, huh?

 

Well yes, that's the plan. Create one big underclass of the working and middle classes, and keep 'em dependent. Owning nothing.

 

Call me crazy, but if you fear your ability to feed another mouth, logic demands you'll do everything in your power to avoid creating that extra mouth in the first place.

If you act in opposition to that, then ipso facto, you're doing so because you don't fear. THAT'S the problem.

 

The operative word is "if." It is expensive to live here compared to most countries, especially among other OECD countries. And it is not getting better. Housing prices have skyrocketed, rent prices have skyrocketed, cost of living has skyrocketed, not within the last year or two, but try the last 50 years plus.

 

I was hoping the one claiming Dems shoot down Rs proposals would show what is exactly getting shut down.

 

And yet it's still very doable, even for the working classes. IF they want it enough, as you say.

 

And yet, people get married because they are in love, an emotion, not logic. Hence the rest follows.

 

The GOP will either cut funding to every federal agency except DoD and DHS, or they will propose their wish list of government agencies that should be shut down permanently ranging from the Department of Education to DOL to some of those "newly created" independent agencies, among others. That will be less than 5% of the discretionary funding. Discretionary funding is about 38% of the total budget.

 

Perhaps in your small corner of the privileged First World West, but that certainly isn't the case in much of the world. There may be romance incidentally involved, sure, but pragmatics are just as important when you have to fight for survival. Often they're more important.

None of which has anything to do with the irresponsibility of having kids you can't afford.

 

In India, it is arranged, generally. In China, yes love does take precedence as well as in Japan and most of the other world as well. Even in the Muslim world as long as the spouse is Muslim too.

 

Republicans won't allow dems to raise the caps

do you support raising the caps on the rich?

 

Old plan, feudial 2.0 courtesy of the bought and paid for.

 

You misunderstand other cultures terribly, if you think they work the same way ours does in matters of marriage and family. You're wrong about China and Japan, for starters. The FIRST prompt for marriage - in both cultures - is societal obligation to form families. That's a pragmatic imperative. The romance comes only in terms of the final selection of mate.

 

Old and now new again .. I don't think your overlords care too much about being called Medieval.

The end result is the same. A handful of 'aristocrats', and an underclass who will own nothing.

 

I wasn't arguing the culture here generally. But I do think you are conflating two issues here into one: the reason why a person gets married and the culture on how that marriage is done. I was arguing about marriage and why one gets married. That is not culture, that is human nature. In China, a person does get married sometimes very quickly, like days after the "first date." In India, it is generally arranged, but that is mostly culture and Tradition, whether that Indian is Hindi, Christian, or Muslim. They marry within acceptable clans. And that is one of the few exceptions that love is forefront.

Yes, family is important, even here. And yes, as human nature, there is promulgation to form families. With our divorce rate being 50% on average, blended families are becoming more and more the norm. That is not culture, just a fact of life. But family is defined differently or more broadly in various countries and cultures. But the fact is that most people get married for love, not the obligation to the family. Obligation to the family comes whether you are married or not. As they say, marry the wife, you marry the family, which is exactly what happened to me when I married my wife. But it was still love for both of us.

 

then people would not just lose their 401k, but their social security too if the market crashed?

I said back then and republicans refused, if they choose to go the private method, but it's worth less, then the retiree get the old ss value, republicans said NO.... why, cause they knew it would be worth less

make it optional, they choose at retirement which they want, that is if you're so sure private will be worth more...

 

This isn’t a new problem. Neither side has done anything over the many years to fix social security.

 

What "trillions"? SS sends money to retirees almost as fast is it comes in.

Nonsense.

 

So what should be done about it?

 

By whom? Individuals? Govt?

 

Democrat Politicians that have control of something, that run certain things in America, enjoy ruining them. Then they blame it being ruined on the Republican Party.

their base is stupid enough to believe them, even though, they are the ones in major control of certain things.

 

Except it's been the law all my life that you must pay into SS from your first pay check. It didn't used to be looked down on to incorporate SS into your retirement plans; you paid for it after all. It's to big of plumb for the banksters to leave their mitts off of it.

 

The market has already fallen some 40%, I think. 401ks have their usefulness, bot too many people either don't put enough into them because of other financial hardships or just don't care until it is too late or something else. But I don't like Social Security being privatized even though my proposal will upset most conservatives who make the privatization their platform. It is simply a game to shift the cost and not caring about their fellow man. The Me, me, me groups have taken over, unfortunately.

 

only ones trying to ruin ss and medicare is the right

 

Because everyone makes enough money to play the stock market?

I have no problem paying social security so my parents have something to help them get by. Honestly, it’s such a small amount out of a paycheck you have to be a psychopath to have a problem with it.