Skip to main content

View Diary: Social Insecurity (219 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  They've stolen all productivity gains in the (2+ / 0-)

    workplace for the past thirty years and now they've convinced you that they shouldn't have to pay anymore into SS 'cause it would make it a welfare system.'

    By that logic all wages earned are in fact not due to workers but are just welfare the corporate kleptomaniacs bequeath upon us.

    They stole our productivity/intellect and now they don't want to contribute to SS beyond some (to them) meager amount, because they would call it welfare.

    Clever of them. Not very bright of us.

    "I freed a thousand slaves, I could have freed a thousand more if only they knew they were slaves" Harriet Tubman

    by BrianParker14 on Thu Mar 28, 2013 at 10:06:41 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  That isn't what I said, in fact, (0+ / 0-)

      if you read carefully you'd see that I do, in fact, favor lifting the cap- thus requiring the rich to pay more.

      My contention was the idea of "Means Testing," or reducing benefits owed to the rich. That is something I disagree with for two reasons:

      1. It will lead to the death of SS, because it will introduce reduction in benefits as a cost-savings engine. This will turn the rich againt the program, and will destroy the faith of the upper middle class that it will be there for them as well. Rich + Upper Middle Class = Almost all the damned capital in this country. SS could not survive such enemies.

      2. As a matter or principle: If you pay into SS, you should recieve the benefits you are owed. If you are a billionaire, and pay in tens or even hundreds of millions into the program, and this means that you are caculated to be due a 1 million per month check when you start collecting... so be it. You paid in, you take out. Confidence in that system is the reason SS has survived as long as it has.

      •  Yeah, I get it. (0+ / 0-)

        First we let them take our productivity/intellect gains then we let them tell us if we want that productivity/intellect gains back by way of them paying more into SS w/o taking more for themselves then ....oh yeah that would make them mad.  So, the result is just don't annoy them and beg them not to cut SS further. Bec. of 1. and 2.

        My point is
        A. they don't deserve more cause they've stolen so much already that they need to put it back in the form of SS w/o taking more out for  themselves, they are already our enemies and have declared war we just keep ignoring it while they slowly (sometimes not so slowly) destroy us, and

        B. manipulating the meaning of words (eg. entitlements) and attaching false negative words (lies) to outcomes (eg. turning SS into a welfare program) is only us rolling over even before the fight.

        We're begging them for the scraps. And being told not to upset them 'cause they'll take the scraps away.

        Sorry, remove the contribution cap, include all forms of income (cap. gains etc.), set a hard cap on payouts to the wealthy and call it RPS - return of productivity stolen.

        They're not so slowly killing us anyway and we are cowering.

        "I freed a thousand slaves, I could have freed a thousand more if only they knew they were slaves" Harriet Tubman

        by BrianParker14 on Fri Mar 29, 2013 at 06:10:35 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site