djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,448
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 29, 2015 20:03:44 GMT -5
Trump's claim that his tax plan is revenue neutral is false: The conservative Tax Foundation, which has been scoring candidates’ tax proposals throughout the race, found that Trump’s changes to the individual tax code would add $10.2 trillion to the deficit using traditional scoring methods, his corporate tax cuts would add $1.54 trillion and his proposal to eliminate the estate tax would add another $238 billion. www.msnbc.com/msnbc/donald-trumps-tax-plan-costs-12-trillion-according-analysis
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Sept 29, 2015 21:19:54 GMT -5
Carson is gaining for sure. Gee, I wonder why? he never said that. he said that ISLAM is incompatible with the constitution, which is a bit different. edit: to his credit, he also said Christianity is incompatible with the constitution. Correct. He was pointing out that we don't live in a theocracy. It wasn't that difficult to figure out- and frankly, it's not all that controversial. Where he got into the soup was when he began to dissect islam and explain that within islam it is OK to lie- means to an end- to advance islam; it is OK to lie to infidels, and that this doctrine of islam along with the doctrine of hijrah which we are seeing all over the world right now presents a unique problem for a Muslim seeking the highest office in the land. He did not, however, propose a religious test. He simply pointed out the reasons why HE would not support a muslim for POTUS. Most thinking Americans agree. Even those who outwardly disagree but have to put up a front to remain cool to their liberal friends.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Sept 29, 2015 21:20:58 GMT -5
Trump's claim that his tax plan is revenue neutral is false: The conservative Tax Foundation, which has been scoring candidates’ tax proposals throughout the race, found that Trump’s changes to the individual tax code would add $10.2 trillion to the deficit using traditional scoring methods, his corporate tax cuts would add $1.54 trillion and his proposal to eliminate the estate tax would add another $238 billion. www.msnbc.com/msnbc/donald-trumps-tax-plan-costs-12-trillion-according-analysisStatic vs. dynamic scoring is the trouble. We've been over this. I don't intend to rehash it, or to even pay attention to the revisionist history of the massive success of virtually the same tax plan under Reagan.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Sept 29, 2015 21:33:21 GMT -5
... I have issues with the tax proposal. It is basically Reagan 1981. ... I have issues also with another round of Voodoo Economics: Amount Added to the Debt for Each Fiscal Year Since 1960:
Barack Obama: Added $6.167 trillion, a 53% increase to the $11.657 trillion debt level attributable to President Bush at the end of his last budget, FY 2009. ...
George W. Bush: Added $5.849 trillion, a 101% increase to the $5.8 trillion debt level at the end of Clinton's last budget, FY 2001. ...
Bill Clinton: Added $1.396 trillion, a 32% increase to the $4.4 trillion debt level at the end of Bush's last budget, FY 1993. ...
George H.W. Bush: Added $1.554 trillion, a 54% increase to the $2.8 trillion debt level at the end of Reagan's last budget, FY 1989. ...
Ronald Reagan: Added $1.86 trillion, 186% increase to the $998 billion debt level at the end of Carter's last budget, FY 1981. Also see Did Reaganomics Work? ...
Jimmy Carter: Added $299 billion, a 43% increase to the $699 billion debt level at the end of Ford's last budget, FY 1977. .... Actually, presidents have very little say in spending. The proper analysis is to look at who controlled the purse strings. This is why so many conservatives have had it with the Boehner / McConnell GOP. They are responsible for ALL the spending since 2010, NOT Obama. On the flip side, Tip O'Neil and company are responsible for Reagan-era spending. You might be sorry you posted this because of what I'm about to show you: Tip O'Neill and the Democrats promised three dollars ($3.00) in spending cuts for every one dollar ($1.00) in taxes raised in the 1983 budget deal credited with "saving Social Security". This is why it's so difficult to sucker conservatives into deals to hike taxes. You can fool some people again, but you only get to fool conservatives once. Bill Clinton would seem to have the best record- borrowing and spending the least- but it was Speaker Newt, the first Republican controlled Congress in two generations that prompted Bill Clinton to deliver those iconic words in the State of The Union, "The Era of Big Government is over". There is no doubt W was a profligate spender; however it was Speaker Pelosi that held the gavel from 2006 until 2010.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,448
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 29, 2015 23:16:49 GMT -5
he never said that. he said that ISLAM is incompatible with the constitution, which is a bit different. edit: to his credit, he also said Christianity is incompatible with the constitution. Correct. He was pointing out that we don't live in a theocracy. It wasn't that difficult to figure out- and frankly, it's not all that controversial. Where he got into the soup was when he began to dissect islam and explain that within islam it is OK to lie- means to an end- to advance islam; it is OK to lie to infidels, and that this doctrine of islam along with the doctrine of hijrah which we are seeing all over the world right now presents a unique problem for a Muslim seeking the highest office in the land. He did not, however, propose a religious test. He simply pointed out the reasons why HE would not support a muslim for POTUS. Most thinking Americans agree. Even those who outwardly disagree but have to put up a front to remain cool to their liberal friends. yes, that is quite clear to me. i actually pointed this fact out to a couple of liberal friends who hadn't looked into it.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,448
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 29, 2015 23:18:26 GMT -5
Trump's claim that his tax plan is revenue neutral is false: The conservative Tax Foundation, which has been scoring candidates’ tax proposals throughout the race, found that Trump’s changes to the individual tax code would add $10.2 trillion to the deficit using traditional scoring methods, his corporate tax cuts would add $1.54 trillion and his proposal to eliminate the estate tax would add another $238 billion. www.msnbc.com/msnbc/donald-trumps-tax-plan-costs-12-trillion-according-analysisStatic vs. dynamic scoring is the trouble. We've been over this. I don't intend to rehash it, or to even pay attention to the revisionist history of the massive success of virtually the same tax plan under Reagan. you mean the tax plan that resulted in the most massive budgetary shortfalls since WW2? yes, that is precisely what we are trying to avoid, thanks.
|
|
dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on Sept 30, 2015 0:04:48 GMT -5
And the subsequent 11 tax increases and raiding of the SS funds to cover the Reagan deficit ass! Yeah, what a great tax plan.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,448
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 30, 2015 0:49:47 GMT -5
if i were Trump, i would be DEEPLY concerned about the latest WSJ poll.
why?
because among the top five candidates, he is polling WORST in head to head races with the Democrats.
he is polling 11% worse than Fiorina and Carson -vs- Clinton he is polling 9% worse than Bush -vs- Clinton he is polling 13% worse than Bush and Carson -vs- Biden he is polling 15% worse than Fiorina -vs- Biden he is a 16% underdog in a race with Sanders
now, he can say that these numbers don't mean anything, but they mean something to the GOP, and they mean something to fundraisers. they mean that among the top tier candidates, he is MOST LIKELY to lose in the GE.
for those of you that wonder how this stuff plays out- it generally results in reduced support for a candidate by voters that want to win, which is most voters. particularly in a race where there are plenty of other "conscience candidates".
note: Bush is still quite in the thick of things in these matchups. he is not done, yet.
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Sept 30, 2015 8:30:23 GMT -5
Yea, Trump has played another card in this game.
Tax Plan = More free stuff, Now all Trump has to do is convince more liberals of more free stuff and the conservatives of lower taxes, No new debt. That's the ticket.
I only need to remember the interview with the young at one of Obama's campaign speeches, What momentous occasion took her kids out of school to hear his speech,
How wonderful it was, She would never have to worry about paying her rent or putting gas in her car again.
Hhhmmm, maybe I have been doing this wrong, How do I sign up for all the free stuff!
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Sept 30, 2015 8:43:16 GMT -5
Yea, Trump has played another card in this game. Tax Plan = More free stuff, Now all Trump has to do is convince more liberals of more free stuff and the conservatives of lower taxes, No new debt. That's the ticket. I only need to remember the interview with the young at one of Obama's campaign speeches, What momentous occasion took her kids out of school to hear his speech, How wonderful it was, She would never have to worry about paying her rent or putting gas in her car again. Hhhmmm, maybe I have been doing this wrong, How do I sign up for all the free stuff! How do you sign up? Just give up any thoughts of free thinking, and drink the kool-aid. Or be a hipocrit.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Sept 30, 2015 10:01:45 GMT -5
Static vs. dynamic scoring is the trouble. We've been over this. I don't intend to rehash it, or to even pay attention to the revisionist history of the massive success of virtually the same tax plan under Reagan. you mean the tax plan that resulted in the most massive budgetary shortfalls since WW2? yes, that is precisely what we are trying to avoid, thanks. As usual, we had a spending problem, not a revenue problem. Total federal revenues doubled from just over $517 billion in 1980 to more than $1 trillion in 1990. In constant inflation-adjusted dollars, this was a 28 percent increase in revenue. The problem is that government spending was not reigned in. Most notably, Tip O'Neill and the Democrats who promised $3 in spending cuts for every $1 in tax increases. From Ronald Reagan's own memoirs, “I made a deal with the congressional Democrats in 1982, agreeing to support a limited loophole-closing tax increase to raise more than $98.3 billion over three years in return for their agreement to cut spending by $280 billion during the same period; later the Democrats reneged on their pledge and we never got those cuts.”
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Sept 30, 2015 10:06:21 GMT -5
if i were Trump, i would be DEEPLY concerned about the latest WSJ poll. why? because among the top five candidates, he is polling WORST in head to head races with the Democrats. he is polling 11% worse than Fiorina and Carson -vs- Clinton he is polling 9% worse than Bush -vs- Clinton he is polling 13% worse than Bush and Carson -vs- Biden he is polling 15% worse than Fiorina -vs- Biden he is a 16% underdog in a race with Sanders now, he can say that these numbers don't mean anything, but they mean something to the GOP, and they mean something to fundraisers. they mean that among the top tier candidates, he is MOST LIKELY to lose in the GE. for those of you that wonder how this stuff plays out- it generally results in reduced support for a candidate by voters that want to win, which is most voters. particularly in a race where there are plenty of other "conscience candidates". note: Bush is still quite in the thick of things in these matchups. he is not done, yet. Ronald Reagan was down 5% a month before the 1980 election. In just over 30 days, he was up 5%- a 10 point turn-around. Trump has to get the nomination first, but assuming he does- there is one thing I'm certain of: it will be mathematically impossible for the Democrat nominee-- whoever it is-- to beat him. The thing no one is talking about is the massive support of Donald Trump in the African-American community. www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/09/poll_shows_trump_receiving_25_of_black_vote_against_hillary.htmlI think this shift has been brewing for some time just in general-- more African Americans are switching to the GOP. And I think this explains the sense of urgency to get illegal aliens eligible to vote. Amnesty is just step one.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Sept 30, 2015 10:07:30 GMT -5
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Sept 30, 2015 10:11:44 GMT -5
Or be a hypocrite.
If there is a bunch of free money in it I could do that.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Sept 30, 2015 10:29:54 GMT -5
I don't know when it happened, but at some point it wasn't enough just to be liberal- liberalism became synonymous with anti-Americanism.
I have said it before, and I'll say it again-- I think conservative support for Trump, as mind-boggling as it is, is explained by putting Americanism / Patriotism over political ideology.
Americans are sick and tired of having their country trashed; they are sick and tired of seeing the institutions, the traditions, and the culture that has made America great, trashed.
They probably intuitively know its over. There is certainly a strong sense that we're well past the point of no return in terms of the national decline.
However, they're willing to roll the dice on take a chance that Trump might actually "Make America Great Again".
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Sept 30, 2015 10:37:49 GMT -5
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,448
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 30, 2015 10:43:38 GMT -5
you mean the tax plan that resulted in the most massive budgetary shortfalls since WW2? yes, that is precisely what we are trying to avoid, thanks. As usual, we had a spending problem, not a revenue problem. Total federal revenues doubled from just over $517 billion in 1980 to more than $1 trillion in 1990. In constant inflation-adjusted dollars, this was a 28 percent increase in revenue. The problem is that government spending was not reigned in. Most notably, Tip O'Neill and the Democrats who promised $3 in spending cuts for every $1 in tax increases. From Ronald Reagan's own memoirs, “I made a deal with the congressional Democrats in 1982, agreeing to support a limited loophole-closing tax increase to raise more than $98.3 billion over three years in return for their agreement to cut spending by $280 billion during the same period; later the Democrats reneged on their pledge and we never got those cuts.” tax cuts don't increase revenues. revenues might increase DESPITE tax cuts, but not BECAUSE of them. www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/09/tax-cuts-dont-lead-to-economic-growth-a-new-65-year-study-finds/262438/www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CB4QFjAAahUKEwjOgOrUjp_IAhXQL4gKHZJxBlg&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.treasury.gov%2Fresource-center%2Ftax-policy%2Ftax-analysis%2FDocuments%2Fota81.pdf&usg=AFQjCNEW74nmNYnH6_raKO6CywAxFNghxgoh, and by the way, revenues as a % of GDP did not go UP under Reagan. they declined. in 1981, revenues were 19.1% of GDP. in 1989 they were 17.8% of GDP. the other half of your "fact" is also false. SPENDING as a percent of GDP fell under Reagan, as well. in 1981, spending was 21.1% of GDP. in 1989, it was 20.5% of GDP. finally, all of you folks that like to bitch about Obama's spending should realize that both revenues AND SPENDING are lower as a percent of GDP at this time under Obama than they were under Reagan. in year six, the numbers were 17.0 as 21.8, for a deficit of 4.8% for Reagan. they are 17.5 and 20.3 for a deficit of 2.8% under Obama. now, i will wait for everyone to curse Reagan and praise Obama for their fiscal stewardship. (crickets)
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,448
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 30, 2015 10:44:14 GMT -5
one of the biggest knownothing assholes out there. i would sooner listen to YOU, Paul.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,448
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 30, 2015 10:45:06 GMT -5
Or be a hypocrite.If there is a bunch of free money in it I could do that. free money is an oxymoron.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,448
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 30, 2015 10:46:29 GMT -5
I don't know when it happened, but at some point it wasn't enough just to be liberal- liberalism became synonymous with anti-Americanism. it happened in the 60's, and again in 2003, when i was protesting the Iraq War. and i will never trust "patriots" again, because of it.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,448
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 30, 2015 10:47:12 GMT -5
Americans are sick and tired of having their country trashed; they are sick and tired of seeing the institutions, the traditions, and the culture that has made America great, trashed. then i can't understand why people like Trump. he trashes America constantly.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 64,440
|
Post by Tennesseer on Sept 30, 2015 10:49:48 GMT -5
Yea, Trump has played another card in this game. Tax Plan = More free stuff, Now all Trump has to do is convince more liberals of more free stuff and the conservatives of lower taxes, No new debt. That's the ticket. I only need to remember the interview with the young at one of Obama's campaign speeches, What momentous occasion took her kids out of school to hear his speech, How wonderful it was, She would never have to worry about paying her rent or putting gas in her car again. Hhhmmm, maybe I have been doing this wrong, How do I sign up for all the free stuff! How do you sign up? Just give up any thoughts of free thinking, and drink the kool-aid. Or be a hipocrit. It seems you already did as you are receiving Medicare and more than likely a Social Security check every month. Oh you paid into those programs for sure, but eventually, and if you live long enough, you will get more out of those two entitlements than the monies you ever put into them. That's the free stuff. So cheers on you having drunk the Kool-Aid.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,448
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 30, 2015 10:51:25 GMT -5
How do you sign up? Just give up any thoughts of free thinking, and drink the kool-aid. Or be a hipocrit. It seems you already did as you are receiving Medicare and more than likely a Social Security check every month. Oh you paid into those programs for sure, but eventually, and if you live long enough, you will get more out of those two entitlements than the monies you ever put into them. That's the free stuff. So cheers on you having drunk the Kool-Aid. with medicare, it will happen VERY quickly. that program is wildly underfunded.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,448
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 30, 2015 11:12:38 GMT -5
if i were Trump, i would be DEEPLY concerned about the latest WSJ poll. why? because among the top five candidates, he is polling WORST in head to head races with the Democrats. he is polling 11% worse than Fiorina and Carson -vs- Clinton he is polling 9% worse than Bush -vs- Clinton he is polling 13% worse than Bush and Carson -vs- Biden he is polling 15% worse than Fiorina -vs- Biden he is a 16% underdog in a race with Sanders now, he can say that these numbers don't mean anything, but they mean something to the GOP, and they mean something to fundraisers. they mean that among the top tier candidates, he is MOST LIKELY to lose in the GE. for those of you that wonder how this stuff plays out- it generally results in reduced support for a candidate by voters that want to win, which is most voters. particularly in a race where there are plenty of other "conscience candidates". note: Bush is still quite in the thick of things in these matchups. he is not done, yet. Ronald Reagan was down 5% a month before the 1980 election. In just over 30 days, he was up 5%- a 10 point turn-around. . this is precisely why i don't think Trump is going to make it. someone else will "Reagan" him. i just don't know who, right now.
|
|
dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on Sept 30, 2015 11:35:01 GMT -5
I don't know when it happened, but at some point it wasn't enough just to be liberal- liberalism became synonymous with anti-Americanism.
No, it didn't.
I have said it before, and I'll say it again-- I think conservative support for Trump, as mind-boggling as it is, is explained by putting Americanism / Patriotism over political ideology.
It's not mind boggling at all and has more with pandering to the extremists than "Americanism' unless that means sending code words to the White supremacists.
Americans are sick and tired of having their country trashed; they are sick and tired of seeing the institutions, the traditions, and the culture that has made America great, trashed.
No one is trashing America at all...not our institutions, traditions, or culture. We are still great.
They probably intuitively know its over. There is certainly a strong sense that we're well past the point of no return in terms of the national decline.
We have slowly been recovering from the national decline that occurred under the last repo regime and it's majority in the House and Senate.
However, they're willing to roll the dice on take a chance that Trump might actually "Make America Great Again".
They must all realize that the narcissistic buffoon makes for fun and frolic now, 13 months before the election, but he has no legs. Eventually an adult will enter the room and the R's will have a real candidate. In the meantime, America is still great.
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Sept 30, 2015 12:02:47 GMT -5
How do you sign up? Just give up any thoughts of free thinking, and drink the kool-aid. Or be a hipocrit. It seems you already did as you are receiving Medicare and more than likely a Social Security check every month. Oh you paid into those programs for sure, but eventually, and if you live long enough, you will get more out of those two entitlements than the monies you ever put into them. That's the free stuff. So cheers on you having drunk the Kool-Aid. I retired at 66. The first thing the government made me prove to them was that I had insurance after 65. They wanted to make me pay a penalty for not having insurance for the year between 65 and 66. I had to furnish the fact that I had insurance to them, and yet they knew that because of my income tax statement that listed my cost of insurance deducted from my paycheck. So.... so much for being a hipocrite. I suppose I could have private insurance, in retirement, but since they demanded money from me for decades through the deductions they forced from me, I think I will just take the Medicare and the supplemental insurance that I am paying for. As an American citizen they are making you take it
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 64,440
|
Post by Tennesseer on Sept 30, 2015 12:11:31 GMT -5
It seems you already did as you are receiving Medicare and more than likely a Social Security check every month. Oh you paid into those programs for sure, but eventually, and if you live long enough, you will get more out of those two entitlements than the monies you ever put into them. That's the free stuff. So cheers on you having drunk the Kool-Aid. I retired at 66. The first thing the government made me prove to them was that I had insurance after 65. They wanted to make me pay a penalty for not having insurance for the year between 65 and 66. I had to furnish the fact that I had insurance to them, and yet they knew that because of my income tax statement that listed my cost of insurance deducted from my paycheck. So.... so much for being a hipocrite. I suppose I could have private insurance, in retirement, but since they demanded money from me for decades through the deductions they forced from me, I think I will just take the Medicare and the supplemental insurance that I am paying for. As an American citizen they are making you take it You will still be getting someone else's money over time.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 30, 2024 13:22:44 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2015 12:22:43 GMT -5
I retired at 66. The first thing the government made me prove to them was that I had insurance after 65. They wanted to make me pay a penalty for not having insurance for the year between 65 and 66. I had to furnish the fact that I had insurance to them, and yet they knew that because of my income tax statement that listed my cost of insurance deducted from my paycheck. So.... so much for being a hipocrite. I suppose I could have private insurance, in retirement, but since they demanded money from me for decades through the deductions they forced from me, I think I will just take the Medicare and the supplemental insurance that I am paying for. As an American citizen they are making you take it You will still be getting someone else's money over time. Unless he dies, then someone else will be getting his money. My dad died at age 64, though he started social security at age 62.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,448
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 30, 2015 13:42:32 GMT -5
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 64,440
|
Post by Tennesseer on Sept 30, 2015 16:36:18 GMT -5
The multiple bankruptcies and multiple wives (previously mentioned on these boards) haven't seemed to bother Trump supporters here yet. Time will tell.
|
|