Social Security is Not a Ponzi Scheme, Mr. Perry (It's Worse)

How about they extorted money for over 30 years from these “geezers” who actually want to see a return on what they paid into? Think about it... 30 or 40 years of paying into a bogus bullsh@t program... that was supposed to fund at least a portion of your retirement.. and it was MANDATORY!!!! Now you are told you are sh@t out of luck... sorry bud... This Kenyan knows what he is doing and it is not only class warfare, it is generational warfare. He is trying to blow us all apart.

RE :"If grandma is reaping anything, it’s because she spent 45 to 50 years paying FICA withholding just like you are.

That is like arguing that because grandma's dad raped her regularly when she was four then she 'paid in' so it is OK if she abuses her own daughter when she is four. Good luck selling that line of logic.

Grandma pulls the lever and thinks 'Them young kids would waste their money anyway and I really need it .'

RE :"If grandma is reaping anything, it’s because she spent 45 to 50 years paying FICA withholding just like you are.

That is like arguing that because grandma's dad raped her regularly when she was four then she 'paid in' so it is OK if she abuses her own daughter when she is four. Good luck selling that line of logic.

So now you're comparing all seniors who get Social Security to parents to rape their children. There really isn't any limit to how low you will got to denegrate people who spent 45 to 50 years paying their FICA withholding as required, and otherwise doing what they were required to do by law is there?

Grandma pulls the lever and thinks 'Them young kids would waste their money anyway and I really need it.

Seniors get Social Security checks. It only just started, and was focused on you because Seniors wanted to be unfair to you.

You poor thing.

I note you didn't answer my question. Why haven't you gotten the Social Security sytem changed yet?

You say it's soooooooooooooo bad, and you damn others for not doing it. Why haven't you done it yet?

How about they extorted money for over 30 years from these “geezers” who actually want to see a return on what they paid into? Think about it... 30 or 40 years of paying into a bogus bullsh@t program... that was supposed to fund at least a portion of your retirement.. and it was MANDATORY!!!! Now you are told you are sh@t out of luck... sorry bud...

It's self-service considering the arguments I've been making, but I think you're right on target here. I started working when I was 14. I didn't work solid until I was about 18, but I will have worked about 49 years by the time I retire. At that time I'm supposed to say, hey I don't need to eat anymore, don't need to have a home anymore, don't need to live anymore?

This Kenyan knows what he is doing and it is not only class warfare, it is generational warfare. He is trying to blow us all apart.

And sadly, even people who do get it on some things, are playing right into his hands on this. It's a real shame.

None of us likes what Social Security was drawn up to be, but until it is replaced, we're going to have to keep the faith with our older citizens.

You’re “sick of libs” yet it’s so funny... you sound like one. Your disrespect of “Grandma” is getting old son.

But Social Security collects money from new investors, uses some of it to pay previous investors, and spends the surplus on programs for politically favored groups—minus the cost of supporting a massive bureaucracy.

I don't fault the seniors or anyone else who has had to fork over money for years and earn enough credits to be eligible. What really gets me is the annual surplus was not for SS recipients, but to finance other perpetual government programs.

RE "You’re “sick of libs” yet it’s so funny... you sound like one. "

Your defense of Marxist redistribution puts you on the side of Pelosi and the Black Congressional Caucus. They have sworn to protect seniors from having their SS welfare checks (taken from younger others) reduced in any way.

So anyone can see who is taking the 'lib/Marxist' position. Those on DU would welcome your comments to me.

Idiot.

Bump

Do you think the idea that Social Security won't be there when you retire, is something new? It's not. People have been saying that since before I got my first job. You and your children are not being any more unfairly treated than anyone else who held a job post 1933.

I want to see Social Security privatized. What you and your kids pay in, should be placed in a fund you control. Until we get that up and working, we're stuck with what we have.

<>What other rational thing do you suggest?

theres simply no way to *control* how the gubmint will spend the money...the only way to privatze my retirement is to let me keep my money, and the responsiblity for my own future...

youve railed on and on here about how 'unfair' my position is towards granny, and that i should just suck it up and bite the pillow, all the while wondering what granny shouldve/couldve done...

evidently her only option was biting the pillow, cause if she wouldve suggested what we are suggesting today, shed be branded a 'hater' or a tightwad...

that '50 or a hundred' bucks you keep mentioning is really nice...glad YOU can set an arbitrary tax on me for the support of someone else...whats next, making me buy a cup of coffee for kids in africa ???

the only way that granny [or my own 25 years of armed robbery] can be 'fairly' repaid, is for gubmint to take a meataxe to the budget, buy only things that are Constitutional, and spend the rest paying back granny [and me] for the stolen dollars...

but that would be like me taking money outta my left pocket and puttin it in my right pocket...minus the % deemed 'fair' to give to somebody else that i dont know, and that im not responsible to feed...

the progressives have won a huge battle in the war, as we obviously have been divided and easily manipulated to perpetuate the theft of generational trillions...

the question keeps coming back to what shouldve been done ??? tar/feathers/lynchings shouldve begun in the 30s and continued every time a feelgood commie scheme like this was suggested...

if its a choice between granny eating alpo, or my kids eatin it, then granny gets the alpo...

if she thinks thats unfair, her and grandpa can hoveround to the capitol and beat a couple congresscritters to death with canes and walkers, and i'll gladly nullify a jury for em...

hopefully, when the time comes, somebody will do that much for me...

Do you think the idea that Social Security won't be there when you retire, is something new? It's not. People have been saying that since before I got my first job. You and your children are not being any more unfairly treated than anyone else who held a job post 1933.

I want to see Social Security privatized. What you and your kids pay in, should be placed in a fund you control. Until we get that up and working, we're stuck with what we have.

What other rational thing do you suggest?

Whre is the answer to my question? <> theres simply no way to *control* how the gubmint will spend the money...the only way to privatze my retirement is to let me keep my money, and the responsiblity for my own future...

If you got your way, you would be investing post tax dollars for your future. The program I would rather see, is you investing pre-tax dollars for your future. What's more I would like to see you able to invest far more than you can today under such a program. That would benefit not only you, but the nation at large, creating one massive pool of re-investment funds that would spur massive economic activity.

youve railed on and on here about how 'unfair' my position is towards granny, and that i should just suck it up and bite the pillow, all the while wondering what granny shouldve/couldve done...

I know you see it as me defending the Social Security system, bit it isn't. The Social Security system is indefensible. The problem is, you can't just pull the rug out from under 50 million people, when doing so would leave them with zero income after them paying out funds for 45 to 50 years.

evidently her only option was biting the pillow, cause if she wouldve suggested what we are suggesting today, shed be branded a 'hater' or a tightwad...

Nobody is calling you anything for advocating change in the Social Security system. When it comes to cutting off senior's only source of income, when they paid out funds for 45 to 50 years under the agreement that they would get those funds back when they retired, is wrong. Of course I'm going to rail on that.

How would you like to go to work on Monday and find out that you still have a job, it's just that you wouldn't get paid for doing it any longer? You wouldn't get one penny for a days worth of work. How would you like it? How would you put food on the table, pay the mortgage or anything else that required an income?

These people worked for 45 to 50 years, and paid out funds from every paycheck. Now you want our nation to renege on the agreement to pay them back. I'm saying you can't do that, and if you were honest, you'd admit to it and agree that we need to find another way out of this problem.

that '50 or a hundred' bucks you keep mentioning is really nice...glad YOU can set an arbitrary tax on me for the support of someone else...whats next, making me buy a cup of coffee for kids in africa ???

You keep making this seniors or me against you. You still haven't come to grips with the fact that seniors, you, and I have no control over this. I've laid it out for you, what the obsticles are with trying to change the system, and you keep saying Seniors or I are taking money from you. No, the government is taking money from you, just like it has taken money from every worker since 1933.

This is not me against you. It's not seniors against you. It is the government against you.

the only way that granny [or my own 25 years of armed robbery] can be 'fairly' repaid, is for gubmint to take a meat axe to the budget, buy only things that are Constitutional, and spend the rest paying back granny [and me] for the stolen dollars...

Actually, you're on to something there, finally. The government should not be paying out one dime in welfare. I will bend a little when it comes to people who are truly incapable of working, mental illness, physical deformity or some such. Even then, I'd rather see some private sector non-profit organiztions devised to help these people rather than the government do it.

but that would be like me taking money outta my left pocket and puttin it in my right pocket...minus the % deemed 'fair' to give to somebody else that i dont know, and that im not responsible to feed...

Once again, this all boils down to poor you. It's so UNFAIR to you and your family that you have to pay out $50 to $100 per paycheck. And to you there's no unfairness at all if Senior's who paid out funds every paycheck like you are, for 45 to 50 years, have their Social Security cut to zero. You pay out only a small percentage of your check to FICA, and 100% of most seniors meager incomes after 65 is Social Security, but you think you are getting the worst end of the deal and Seniors should have their only income cut off.

I don't think it's Conservative to support Social Security in it's present form, but at the same time, I don't think it's Conservative to advocate cutting off the incomes of 50 million people, so you can have $50 to $100 more dollars in your paycheck.

The result of what you advocate would rival some of the barbarity that took place in Europe in the 30s and 40s. You seem not to care at all, what 50 million people would be forced into, if they had no income at all. They would quickly have no homes, no food, no clothing, no transportation, and quickly no health or life.

I don't like the fact that you have to pay out that $50 to $100 dollars per month. I would love to see the S.S. system changed. I'm still not going to sign on to a deal that would in short order cause the deaths of 50 million people. That fact that some of you can, is very distrubing.

the progressives have won a huge battle in the war, as we obviously have been divided and easily manipulated to perpetuate the theft of generational trillions...

My God you are one dense individual. Today's seniors paid out funds from every paycheck during their 45 to 50 year careers, so that elderly people in their day could have an income after retirement. Today it's your turn to do it, and you're livid about it. In fact you're so livid that you actually find it reasoned to kill off 50 million seniors, so you can increase your take-home by $50 to $100 per paycheck.

Just damn...

the question keeps coming back to what shouldve been done ??? tar/feathers/lynchings shouldve begun in the 30s and continued every time a feelgood commie scheme like this was suggested...

So what you're suggesting is, that if a group of people doesn't like what certain Senators and Congressmen and women are doing those Senators and Congressmen and women should be tared, feathered, and lynched. That's brilliant. Why didn't anyone think of this before. Oh, that's right, SEIU would just love to take you up on that idea. They are livid because government officials are cramping their style. You've just given union thugs the go-ahead, because they don't like what some of our public officials are doing.

When you suggest insane things, the insanity doesn't run in one direction.

In 1933, the nation was mired in a serious depression. In march of the previous year the banks in 38 states had been closed. The New York Reserve bank had closed. Something had to be done, and a number of things were instituted. I disagree with many of them, but I can understand the thinking in that time frame, which made those programs look more appealing.

The remedy is to come up with something better, and get rid of the present program. The remedy isn't to kill off 50 million U.S. Citizens.

if its a choice between granny eating alpo, or my kids eatin it, then granny gets the alpo...

If you get your way, what's granny going to buy that Alpo with Mr. Brainiac? And you feed your kids Alpo because of the terrible burden that $50 to $100 dollars puts on your family. Really?

if she thinks thats unfair, her and grandpa can hoveround to the capitol and beat a couple congresscritters to death with canes and walkers, and i'll gladly nullify a jury for em...

Oh I'm sure you would. $50 to $100 a paycheck being all that critical in your life and all...

It's so charming to see how little it would take for you to sign on to killings and mass genocide.

hopefully, when the time comes, somebody will do that much for me...

Hopefully not. Because if people are given license to kill others on your whim, then people will also be given license to kill on Leftist's whims. And who knows, those little tykes you say you care about might become some Leftist's object lesson. Ah, but killin folks is the way to handle this in your mind, so whoopie, off we go.

Look on the bright side, at least your Alpo bill would go down, and after all, small sums of money are more important than tens of millions of lives anyway, so what the hey.

You need to give some serious thought to the ramifications of what you're advocating.

my apologies Sir...

i have taken all the condescending insults that i care to in this one sided 'discussion' of my resistance to perpetual tyranny and armed robbery...

go bite yer pillow and be comforted in the fact that you'll 'get yours' at the expense of the next sucker...

my apologies Sir...

In the overall scheme of things, I'm not looking for an apology, and I understand that these comments reflect your reluctance to provide one anyway.

One of the toughest things to learn about life, is that it isn't fair. This is something that children constantly say to their parents, teachers, and others that act as their guardian to one extent or another. "That isn't fair." As adults we have to come to terms with the unfair moments in our life. That's the ugly part of adulthood. Should we do our best to limit those moments if we can, sure. In that, I am with you.

I have tried to express agreement with you where possible. I don't think it is right that you should have to contribute $50 to $100 per paycheck to a seriously flawed Social Security system. I do think the present Social Security system needs to be seriously overhauled. I do want to see something devised that will vastly improve your chances at achieving your long term financial goals.

The one thing I cannot agree on, is seeing today's seniors total source of income cancelled, after them paying out FICA withholding for 45 to 50 years. That would not be equitable.

i have taken all the condescending insults that i care to in this one sided 'discussion' of my resistance to perpetual tyranny and armed robbery...

It's not your resistance to perpetual tyranny and amred robbery that bothers me. It's your willingness to see 50 million seniors destroyed because you deem life to have been more unfair to you than it has been to them. I cannot sign on to that. Besides, it's simply not true.

go bite yer pillow and be comforted in the fact that you'll 'get yours' at the expense of the next sucker...

Frankly, I would be a lot happier if Social Security had been addressed prior to this. I and tens of millions of U.S. Citizens would spend our senior years with a lot broader horizons and quality of life.

What we have now is not fair. It's still all we have, and as adults we have to accept it until things are changed. We should support that change too, but within limits.

We cannot completely sell out one generation to make things nice for another.

One thing that caught my eye, was your comments that the $50 to $100 dollar FICA withholding was forcing your kids to eat Alpo, but that you knew best how to save for your own future.

You telegraphed that you need that $50 to $100 dollars desperately, just to have a meager living today. How does that gell with the premise that you would utilize those funds to protect your own future?

How could you do that, if you obviously need those funds to pay for today's essentials?

You and I agree about many things related to Conservatism. We even agree with certain primary concepts related to Social Security. It's too bad we have to differ on what if anything we owe our Seniors.

nice song and dance there D1...

i dont 'owe' anything to the ederly generation of today...roughly half of which has regularly voted to paint themselves, as well as me and my kids into a financial corner...

your whole argument is that im unsympathetic, un charitable, and at the end of the day, a murderer of 50 million people if i dont buy into some fairy tale of a *fix* to SS which, will necessarily involve trusting the same politicians, and the same voting demographic to do the right thing, if i would just contribute more, and sell my kids into it as well...

'charity' cannot be bought with other peoples money, and yeah, those geezers that perptuated this fruad from day one, im unsypethetic towards...still doesnt get you around the fact that youd rather see a new generation of suckers forced into the system, rather than letting them be FRee...

youve already acknowledged that for your entire working life, you knew the system was unsustainable...as have i...

if its 'unfair' to todays seniors, how is it going to be any less for me or my kids ???

no, life aint fair, and i never said it was, but expecting me to climb into the cattle car and just deal with it, is not the solution...

more veiled insults about how im so irresponsible that big brother mUST manage my last 50-100 bucks, cause obviously i havent done such a bang up job in the past, so Id be better of just bitin the pillow...well, yeah, most of you guys know that ive made a lot of piss poor decisions in the past...so robbing me of more of my future really doesnt sound like much of a bargain from here...its called FReedom, to succeed or fail...

glad you outed yerself in yer 'social'ist collective leanings in this discussion...

Im pretty damned sure that once you miss a meal, youd gladly sell me out for a slice of pizza...

no matter how many other things we *seem* to agree on, personal FReedom and Liberty to chart my own destiny is something that i dont take lightly...if youre afraid of the coming battle, thats alright, but at least have the decency to admit that youre simply terrified of the *ONLY* lasting fix to this charade, which will be the imlposion of the system, or the 'reset' button...or bOTH...

even better, with all the condescension and insults, i have yet to see where all this majoc money is going to come from, or what *assets* it could possibly be held in at the government level...the money simply doesnt exist, and the markets wouldnt support being gamed by the handlers if it did...

its over, stick a fork in it...somebody will necessarily be left holding the bag, why should i volunteer myself, or my children to be the patsy ??? I would honestly rather die tryin, to than go quietly along with more evil graft and corruption...

once again, thanks for your honesty about what you really think the value of my kids are to the commune...i will not reply to you further...

Just call it a Mandatory Madoff scheme, and see how the MSM reacts.

nice song and dance there D1...

Thank you.

i dont 'owe' anything to the ederly generation of today...roughly half of which has regularly voted to paint themselves, as well as me and my kids into a financial corner...

Well then, that would make them no better or worse than the populace at large. I'm glad we agree on that. One could also make the case that the young voted for Obama is vastly larger numbers than older people did. As for whether you owe those seniors anything or not, there is a moral obligation to carry through with the program that those seniors paid into for 45 to 50 years.

your whole argument is that im unsympathetic, un charitable, and at the end of the day, a murderer of 50 million people if i dont buy into some fairy tale of a *fix* to SS which, will necessarily involve trusting the same politicians, and the same voting demographic to do the right thing, if i would just contribute more, and sell my kids into it as well...

Actually, that charge concerning 50 million people would not be related to you NOT supporting some fairy tale fix, but to you actually signing on to a fix that cut off all Social Security payments to seniors.

As for what I would like to see, I would like to see you not to have to pay many of the things you do today. If you like having to pay an insurance companines for things you could self-insure for, then you would object to my plan. If you objected to not having to pay auto insurance of a couple of thousand bucks a years, you would object to my plan. If you objected to paying high costing health insurance premiums instead of one low cost one, you would object to my plan. If you would object to using pre-tax dollars to quickly build wealth, you would of course object to my plan. If you object to saving enough for a down payment on a home by the time you're 30 perhaps 25 to 27 if you're marreid, then of course you would object to my plan. If you objected to seeing your wife and you wind up owning your own home by the time you were 55 to 60 and still wind up with over $2 million dollars in savings by the time you retired, then of course you would object to my plan.

'charity' cannot be bought with other peoples money, and yeah, those geezers that perptuated this fruad from day one, im unsypethetic towards...still doesnt get you around the fact that youd rather see a new generation of suckers forced into the system, rather than letting them be FRee...

Actually, I'm all for changing the Social Security system and have said so a number of times to you directly here. So far you have yet to acknowledge that fact. Instead you continue to ramble on about me being a Lefty and think my standing behind our current seniors is evil.

youve already acknowledged that for your entire working life, you knew the system was unsustainable...as have i...

Yes I have. The problem you continue to ignore, is that to change things, we have to change the make-up of our government. We not only have to quit voting in Democrats to the White House, the House, and the Senate, we have to quit voting in RINOs as well. Look what happned when we had an open window from January 2001, to December 2006. With regard to Social Security, nothing happened.

None the less, when I rail on Bush around here, his adoring fans crawl out from behind the woodwork to praise him, some even calling him better than Reagan.

Blame seniors excusively for this? LOL

if its 'unfair' to todays seniors, how is it going to be any less for me or my kids ???

It won't be, but there has to be a new plan put in place that gives your family as well as today's seniors some consideration.

no, life aint fair, and i never said it was, but expecting me to climb into the cattle car and just deal with it, is not the solution...

It wasn't the solution for us either. We are all nearing retirement with far less than we could have had, had the S.S. system been corrected. The difference between you and I, is that I realize why things were not changed, and you simply cannot. It's easier for you to blame things on folks who didn't have a chance of changing things, than come to terms with the reality we all face.

Seniors did not elect to do this to you, or continue to do this to you, pure and simple.

more veiled insults about how im so irresponsible that big brother mUST manage my last 50-100 bucks, cause obviously i havent done such a bang up job in the past, so Id be better of just bitin the pillow...well, yeah, most of you guys know that ive made a lot of piss poor decisions in the past...so robbing me of more of my future really doesnt sound like much of a bargain from here...its called FReedom, to succeed or fail...

I'm not here to rip you. I have no personal knowledge of your family situation. I haven't keyed in on things that have been discussed in other areas at other times on the forum. That's none of my business. I merely keyed in on your comments about Alpo and what that seemed to indicate to me. I considered your Alpo comment to be somewhat fictional, and addressed it in terms that would counter some of your premises. That's it.

glad you outed yerself in yer 'social'ist collective leanings in this discussion...

What is statist, socialist, collectivist about saying that I would prefer Social Security be converted into a privately held and managed fund that would alter and reduce your exposure to some high-ticket items your family has to spend money on today, that would see your family beome much more financial stable, with less effort, paying less taxes, and wind up making you rather wealthy in the process?

Im pretty damned sure that once you miss a meal, youd gladly sell me out for a slice of pizza...

Well, right now I'm doing my best to advocate for a system that would be far better for you. I've dealt with pre-tax contributions, and I would like to see you be able to save money into a fund of your own that would see you only lose around $0.33 cents of take home, for each $1.00 dollar you saved. I would like to see you stop having to pay for car insurance, once you had saved up enough money. I would like to see you save in a number of areas, that would make your family life better. I would like to make it possible for you to become much more successful, than you could be today. We all get raked over the coals paying out for things we could handle on our own easily with a small catestrophic coverage policy.

no matter how many other things we *seem* to agree on, personal FReedom and Liberty to chart my own destiny is something that i dont take lightly...if youre afraid of the coming battle, thats alright, but at least have the decency to admit that youre simply terrified of the *ONLY* lasting fix to this charade, which will be the imlposion of the system, or the 'reset' button...or bOTH...

Electing the right people to turn this nation around, is about the only choice, if you value your family's safety. The chaos associated with an implosion or reset button scenario, is not something you should look forward to. You invision some sort of reborn 'Founding Fathers' popping up to do it all again. What you would more likely wind up with is some evil Leftist inspired overlord situation with massive gunpower behind them, and a society experiencing constant upheavel.

even better, with all the condescension and insults, i have yet to see where all this majoc money is going to come from, or what *assets* it could possibly be held in at the government level...the money simply doesnt exist, and the markets wouldnt support being gamed by the handlers if it did...

The major money would come from the same place it always has, your paycheck. It would also come from seeing a vastly reconfigured family exposure to certain necessities they spend money on today. As much as possible, these things would become things you would pay for with pre-tax dollars. That's rather misleading though, because I would like to see most of these types of monetary outlays, be circumvented so you wouldn't have to make the outlays any longer.

If you have $100,000 in the bank, do you need vision or dental insurance? If you have $100,000 in the bank, do you need a $500 deductable automobile insurance that costs you $2,000 per year? If you have $100,000 in the bank, do you need health insurance that covers you from the very first dollar? You start buying $10,000 deductable health insurance. You pay out only enough car insurance to protect you against catastropic loss, above $10,000. This brings your health and automobile insurance costs down drastically. You reap the savings in an account that you could draw from in case of real emergency.
<>New government tax policies would allow you to accumulate wealthy quickly, so that this type of system would work for you. The government would no longer be able to tap your contributions. Those contributions would be collecting interest.

Once you had saved enough money, you could use part of it to place a down-payment on a home, and pay for that home with funds you used to pay out for services, that you no longer need..

its over, stick a fork in it...somebody will necessarily be left holding the bag, why should i volunteer myself, or my children to be the patsy ??? I would honestly rather die tryin, to than go quietly along with more evil graft and corruption...

Frankly, I don't see anarchy as a particularly Conservative thing to admit being in favor of.

once again, thanks for your honesty about what you really think the value of my kids are to the commune...i will not reply to you further...

And thanks to you for being honest about what you advocate for.

I'm looking for solutions and a better life for our citizens. I'm not looking for crybabies and anarchists. Get a grip. If you want support, advocate for something rational people can sign on to.

RE :”Idiot”

I believe THIS woman agrees with you on that, and on Social Security too. That alone would make me re-think my position if I agreed with her like you seem to.

Pelosi: Medicare, Social Security Benefit Cuts Are Line In The Sand On Debt Limit Bill Brian Beutler | July 7, 2011,

Pelosi vows to protect Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security from cuts By Pete Kasperowicz - 08/08/11

Nancy Pelosi crying because heartless Republicans call SS a ponzi scheme

RE :”Idiot”

I believe THIS woman (Nancy Pelosi) agrees with you on that, and on Social Security too. That alone would make me re-think my position if I agreed with her like you seem to.

Well, Nancy and Jessie probably agree with me on where to take a dump when the urge strikes too. Although it does cause me some misgivings to know that you won't be able to use a restroom after this, I'll get over it.

Please point to one person on this thread that endorsed Social Security in it's present format. I must have missed it if someone did. Just link me to where anyone did. Thanks in advance.

You are calling people Marxists if they refuse to see seniors have to do with less than they were promised over the 45 to 50 years they were paying into the Social Security system. That is not Marxism. It's merely the honorable thing to do. That is a Conservative trait. I wouldn't dream of watching you hold up your end of an agreement for 45 to 50 years, then back someone who wanted to renege on what you were promised. Call me whatever you like, I'm not buying into cutting or outright eliminating Social Security for our seniors.

There is a natural lessoning of purchasing power that afflicts seniors, because they become stuck on a fixed income. Cost of living increases don't begin to cover the loss of their purchasing power. If you start cutting their Social Secruity too, before long they won't be able to subsist on what you have left them. Gas costs twice what it did two years ago. Did seniors income go up? No. Food costs go up. Are seniors getting raises? Barely. Our older citizens are frequently unable to go out and work any longer. They have no other source of income than Social Security. I'm not backing a plan that whittles away at the income they were promised. If you want to stab them in the back, I'll stand between you and them any day of the week.

Advocate for a better plan than our current Social Security system, and I'm on your side. Advocate for reneging on what our seniors worked 45 to 50 years for, and I'm not.

Frankly, I support what AntCeeCee said LINK to you regarding those comments LINK, and I'm right here on good old Free Republic.

Pelosi: Medicare, Social Security Benefit Cuts Are Line In The Sand On Debt Limit Bill Brian Beutler | July 7, 2011,
Pelosi vows to protect Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security from cuts By Pete Kasperowicz - 08/08/11

As I stated, if you wish to advocate for a better system, I'm all for it. If you're going to advocate for cutting or eliminating services to people who spent 45 to 50 years paying into a system without major complaint, I'm not with you. You can jump up and down. You can roll on the floor kicking and screaming. You can hold your breath. I'm not joining you to call for a reduction or ceasation of programs crafted for Seniors after they retire.

Nancy Pelosi crying because heartless Republicans call SS a ponzi scheme

Nancy, like you, will have to personally answer for what she has done or advocated. I've made it very clear that I do not agree with the present Social Security system. I have also made it clear that until something else comes along, we're stuck with it. This is the reality.

You're clearly NOT alone in your opinions on this

Dems:' Protecting the promise of Social Security is absolute'
Democratic Party on Social Security
Party Platform

Senate Democrats Rally Against Social Security Cuts

Democrats Rally To Support Social Security

Democrats Oppose Talk of Cuts to Social Security

House Democrats)(Pelosi) : No dice on Medicare, Social Security cuts

Pelosi :"You will take away seniors Social Security over my dead body. Fortunately even SOME Republicans are siding with me on ripping off young people"