I took you off image ban, ***. Try to behave - very, very have.nuckinfutz » 25 Jun 2023, 7:30 pm » wrote: ↑ Good post! I gave you 4 Greenies!
Now give me my freedom back! And I will sing praises for yew!
Didn't you know? MAGATS have PROVEN time and time again that they don't mind being **** over by their own party... Just so long as they think they're owning the libs.razoo » 25 Jun 2023, 7:30 am » wrote: ↑ Rumors are every where that this bogus republican party has appointed a secret committee under the guise of reducing government spending however Medicare and SSI are the two main objects.......
Keep this is mind:
What impact would the conversion to private accounts have on the national debt? The government would have to borrow an additional $4 trillion over the next 20 years to make up the money that would be drained out of the system by private accounts.
Former President Bush and Congress racked up an average $793 billion deficit each year Bush was in office. Social Security privatization would raise the size of the government’s deficit by another $300 billion per year for the next 20 years.
This does not seem to bother Republicans, as long as they are in power. In fact, by the time the second Bush left office, the national debt had grown to $12.1 trillion. Over half of that amount had been created by Bush’s tax cuts for the very wealthy.
Another 30% of the national debt had been created by the tax cuts for the wealthy under Presidents Reagan and George H.W. Bush. Fully 81% of the national debt was created by just these three Republican Presidents.
How would the rest of the U.S. economy be affected if the private accounts replaced the current system? Put simply, moving to a system of private accounts would not only put retirement income at risk—it would likely put the entire economy at risk.
dollarsandsense /archives/2010/0111orr.html
You flatter yourself, but the truth is.....no one would want to own your sorry ***.B.See » 26 Jun 2023, 1:59 am » wrote: ↑ Didn't you know? MAGATS have PROVEN time and time again that they don't mind being **** over by their own party... Just so long as they think they're owning the libs.
Reading your titl, Republicans are only doing it to themselves. Kind of like Democrats do the **** to themselves. Every intellectual side does it to themselves first, then demand everyone else join or else.razoo » 25 Jun 2023, 7:30 am » wrote: ↑ Rumors are every where that this bogus republican party has appointed a secret committee under the guise of reducing government spending however Medicare and SSI are the two main objects.......
Keep this is mind:
What impact would the conversion to private accounts have on the national debt? The government would have to borrow an additional $4 trillion over the next 20 years to make up the money that would be drained out of the system by private accounts.
Former President Bush and Congress racked up an average $793 billion deficit each year Bush was in office. Social Security privatization would raise the size of the government’s deficit by another $300 billion per year for the next 20 years.
This does not seem to bother Republicans, as long as they are in power. In fact, by the time the second Bush left office, the national debt had grown to $12.1 trillion. Over half of that amount had been created by Bush’s tax cuts for the very wealthy.
Another 30% of the national debt had been created by the tax cuts for the wealthy under Presidents Reagan and George H.W. Bush. Fully 81% of the national debt was created by just these three Republican Presidents.
How would the rest of the U.S. economy be affected if the private accounts replaced the current system? Put simply, moving to a system of private accounts would not only put retirement income at risk—it would likely put the entire economy at risk.
https://www.dollarsandsense.org/archive ... 11orr.html
now, as Paul Harvey might say, "the rest of the story"; that's what happens to Socialism and apparently Social Democracies; other people's money runs out.razoo » 25 Jun 2023, 7:30 am » wrote: ↑ Rumors are every where that this bogus republican party has appointed a secret committee under the guise of reducing government spending however Medicare and SSI are the two main objects.......
Keep this is mind:
What impact would the conversion to private accounts have on the national debt? The government would have to borrow an additional $4 trillion over the next 20 years to make up the money that would be drained out of the system by private accounts.
Former President Bush and Congress racked up an average $793 billion deficit each year Bush was in office. Social Security privatization would raise the size of the government’s deficit by another $300 billion per year for the next 20 years.
This does not seem to bother Republicans, as long as they are in power. In fact, by the time the second Bush left office, the national debt had grown to $12.1 trillion. Over half of that amount had been created by Bush’s tax cuts for the very wealthy.
Another 30% of the national debt had been created by the tax cuts for the wealthy under Presidents Reagan and George H.W. Bush. Fully 81% of the national debt was created by just these three Republican Presidents.
How would the rest of the U.S. economy be affected if the private accounts replaced the current system? Put simply, moving to a system of private accounts would not only put retirement income at risk—it would likely put the entire economy at risk.
https://www.dollarsandsense.org/archive ... 11orr.html
Money is an intellectual social means, not part of actual evolving going on currently.sunburn » 26 Jun 2023, 7:08 am » wrote: ↑ now, as Paul Harvey might say, "the rest of the story"; that's what happens to Socialism and apparently Social Democracies; other people's money runs out.