It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Koch Bros are trying to destroy social security through misinformation, Must watch video!

page: 2
29
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 01:18 PM
link   
reply to post by David9176
 





“Social Security is not going broke,” Sanders insisted. “Social Security has a $2.2 trillion surplus… The Koch brothers want to invest your retirement funds on Wall Street, and you may lose all of your retirement savings when you get old.”


the lie

the truth:

www.usdebtclock.org...

social secuirty liability at the bottom left and read right and start reading the red numbers.

sanders is a liar and anyone who support that view are liars as well.

the numbers dont lie people do.

edit on 25-6-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 01:24 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


Yes I've seen the debt clock before...I've often wondered who is actually funding the website and how it is calculated. Do you know?

And for the record I have posted the link to that page a few times on ATS myself.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 01:26 PM
link   
reply to post by David9176
 


dont know who funds it but first time i ever seen one was on msnbc on joe scarborough.

back when the national debt was a big issue and not so big now.

there are few others i beleive.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 01:34 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


Well how can one know the numbers on social security are true? It doesn't show how that number is calculated...just a number? Is that liabilities for 30 years down the road? It's certainly not in the red as now as the debtclock can fool one into believing.

Yes, eventually, years down the road, social security funds will be drained...and yes, some things will need to be changed....but it certainly doesn't have to happen now. Social Security is not part of the general fund, and yes the government should keep their frickin hands off of it to pay off other things...but that doesn't mean we should end the program altogether.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 01:37 PM
link   
reply to post by David9176
 


i have see msm media outlet use it i was clicking the bottom tabs and checking out the state debts,energy output and gold shares etc.

they say that are not tied to the us government or any political party but who really knows.

its up to you beleive the numbers or dont your choice.

i honestly have no idea how they are caculated.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 





i honestly have no idea how they are caculated.


Well all I'm reading is that it's "Social Security Liabilities." It doesn't state how far into the future it's taken into regard. What Sanders is stating is that there is currently a 2.2 trillion surplus in the account...yes sometime in the future...I think in the 2020's...social security will be drained and only be able to pay about 70 or so percent compared to what it's paying out now to seniors and those with disabilities who cannot work.

If he is not tellign the truth, that means someone should be held accountable for stealing the funds and they should be repaid....not destroying the entire program altogether....and therefore letting the thieves get off the hook.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 02:21 PM
link   
Bernie Sanders is great. It's too bad there aren't more people like him in office, in fact there is hardly anyone like him in office, which is pretty sad and concerning.

Raising the retirement age to 70 or higher would just be another nail in the coffin for this country.

It's pretty alarming how the "echo chamber" works, and of course the media just plays right along, having various "experts" (ie, paid shills) on TV talking about these topics in a very slanted and choreographed way ("we'll have to raise the retirement age") repeat, repeat, repeat until everyone believes it.

It'd be nice if there were more (or any?) influential billionaires that actually care about this country, instead of the few at the top.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 02:26 PM
link   
reply to post by David9176
 




Well how can one know the numbers on social security are true? It doesn't show how that number is calculated...just a number? Is that liabilities for 30 years down the road? It's certainly not in the red as now as the debtclock can fool one into believing.


It's not in the red now? Are you really that naive?

SS is now a giant Ponzi scheme where the current contributions are funding the current withdrawals, and even that is not enough. Soon SS will suffer the same fate that all Ponzi schemes suffer - the pipeline dries up.

Ponzi schemes also rely upon lack of knowledge on the part of the donors, and that is where you fall.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 02:28 PM
link   
reply to post by origamiandurbanism
 


Right now I'm reading a few articles about Social Security bankruptcy...and from what I'm gathering...funds currently in the system will start to go negative in 2037. At that time payouts would only be at about 70 percent to stay solvent and to keep Social Security from going into DEBT....not bankruptcy.

It just needs to be tweaked...and it doesn't have to happen for quite awhile as Social Security is perfectly fine.

There is no reason for Social Security to be attacked as it is now by the media unless the funds are gone...and if that is the case then those who have stolen from it should be held liable and imprisoned.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 02:29 PM
link   
reply to post by mishigas
 





It's not in the red now? Are you really that naive?


It's in the red right now? Prove it. It still has a positive balance that is going down as now the money being paid out is now more than what is being paid in...but that doesn't mean it's in the red does it? 2.2 trillion surplus that will slowly decline. Are you stating this is untrue?




SS is now a giant Ponzi scheme where the current contributions are funding the current withdrawals, and even that is not enough.


Everything can be labeled a Ponzi Scheme. Any kind of tax can be labeled a Ponzi scheme. This argument is used to belittle the program, nothing more.

I'm naive? haha. That's fine if you think that...I'll keep my opinion of you to myself.
edit on 25-6-2011 by David9176 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 03:05 PM
link   
reply to post by David9176
 



reply to post by mishigas




It's not in the red now? Are you really that naive?


It's in the red right now? Prove it. It still has a positive balance that is going down as now the money being paid out is now more than what is being paid in...but that doesn't mean it's in the red does it? 2.2 trillion surplus that will slowly decline. Are you stating this is untrue?


I'm saying it is a big LIE and the more you slide into the socialist scam, the more you will be a fool.



Here is a link to a report produced by the Trustees of the Social Security Trust Funds (“SSTF”).

This is a status report on the health of America’s Social Security and Medicare system. The conclusions contained in this report should come as no surprise. The system is bankrupt. It is just a matter of time. The magnitude of the problem is enormous. The Trustees estimate that the present value of the unfunded portion is $13.6 trillion. It is virtually certain that unless the imbalances are addressed in the near future, the U.S. Legacy Costs will destroy our economy.

The US is currently spending trillions of dollars in borrowed money to shore up a weakened economy. All of that money will be wasted. At best it will result in a resumption of economic growth for a few more years. By the end of President Obama’s first term the Social Security problem will already be a drag on the economy. By 2016 the damage will be impossible to reverse.

SS




SS is now a giant Ponzi scheme where the current contributions are funding the current withdrawals, and even that is not enough.


Everything can be labeled a Ponzi Scheme. Any kind of tax can be labeled a Ponzi scheme. This argument is used to belittle the program, nothing more.


Uh huh. Keep denying. You're in the denial stage.

It's a good thing you aren't on charge of anything important. Keep believing those socialist con men. They rely on fresh new neophytes to survive.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by mishigas
 


You are going to have to give me some time to look through a 214 page PDF! Nothing like making something that should be simple far more technical than it needs to be.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 07:59 PM
link   
I still find it really hard to understand how a government - any government would not wish to honour their senior citizens with pensions. A portion of all income goes to pay for it; correct? Its not like a free handout. Or a bail out.

I laugh when I see the "anti-socialists" bashing government programs, and the involvement of government in business.

When the governments handed out cash left right and centre to mismanaged corporations to "save" them, that was the biggest example of socialistic behaviour I have ever witnessed. Just ultra twisted thinking.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 08:10 PM
link   
reply to post by David9176
 




You are going to have to give me some time to look through a 214 page PDF! Nothing like making something that should be simple far more technical than it needs to be.


Why bother, David? So you can cherry pick details and take things out of context as "proof" you are right?

Can't you see the absurdity of your beliefs? There is absolutely NO WAY that SS has a 2.2$T surplus. You used to be a well reasoned debater. I always thought you were conservative, if not moderately liberal. But this recent trend towards socialism has me puzzled. I have no intention of fighting with you, or insulting you. But I cannot let these outright absurdities go unchallenged.

I thought you once supported Ron Paul. Right? Do you think he thinks SS is solvent with a surplus? I doubt it. Now you agree with Bernie Sanders? Aye yi yi!



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 08:12 PM
link   
reply to post by ItsEvolutionBaby
 




When the governments handed out cash left right and centre to mismanaged corporations to "save" them, that was the biggest example of socialistic behaviour I have ever witnessed. Just ultra twisted thinking.


And who do you think the strongest opponents of these handouts were? Let's see what you know...



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 08:22 PM
link   
if social security has a surplus, it just means that it is a successful ponzi scheme. But it's still a ponzi scheme. Are the Kock brothers suggesting we should abolish the social security system? They should be, all Americans should be unless you enjoy paying into a ponzi scheme.

How about we legalize freedom of choice: you can choose your own retirement, not have Uncle Sam dole out your own savings.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 08:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by pplrnuts
There better be a MAJOR UPRISING in this country if there EVER comes a day that our seniors get SCREWED over from what is RIGHTFULLY theirs when they are in time of NEED for it.

When money is TAKEN every week from the working American's paychecks for a benefit that is meant to assist us when we cannot work any further due to old age, IT BETTER BE THERE WHEN IT IS NEEDED!!!!!!!!!!!

PERIOD!!!!!!!



edit on 24-6-2011 by pplrnuts because: (no reason given)


Will you join a major uprising when everything everyone has "contributed" over the decades is gone because the government spent it all and couldn't keep the Ponzi scheme going?

The New Steal was a sham and FDR knew it. People should be allowed to opt out and do whatever they want with their money: stuff it in a mattress, put it in a mason jar and bury under an oak tree, spend it all on hookers and smack, whatever. But if you are younger than I, then YOU fund MY Social Security. Thank you for "donating" your hard work and resources to MY retirement. Feel good about that?

If you are under 35 it's unlikely that you will ever see a full return on the funds you donated as it's scheduled for bankruptcy by 2037. Yay².

/TOA
edit on 25-6-2011 by The Old American because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 11:41 PM
link   
reply to post by mishigas
 

reply to post by ItsEvolutionBaby



"When the governments handed out cash left right and centre to mismanaged corporations to "save" them, that was the biggest example of socialistic behaviour I have ever witnessed. Just ultra twisted thinking.


And who do you think the strongest opponents of these handouts were? Let's see what you know..."

umm..
Socialists
edit on 25-6-2011 by ItsEvolutionBaby because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-6-2011 by ItsEvolutionBaby because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 12:23 AM
link   
Their finding legal ways to ripp off, - steel social security form us...my fathert in the 80's growing up, used to tell me the government one day wants to do this, and they will win. sot he talk of nding social security has been around for quite some time now. its not fair though...when yuor old and elderly, what are you supposed to do? check into a retirement home and become some forgotten relic of life? thats really creul. they wnat the money back* thats what thier doing.
when my father passed away 2007, lung cancer..where he had worked for 34 years in data processing, for OLIN corporation..he was pink slipped after 34 years fo faithful service. ( they make a popular chlorine for pools and ammunition for the government). we had called about his SS, collecting it. apparently, it ends up in some pool with others the same...and not even the next of kin or spouse can touch it.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 01:12 AM
link   
Who are these "socialists" that people keep talking about? There are none unless you want to talk about Bernie Sanders, who is a Democratic Socialist.

Social Security is NOT a ponzi scheme. It seems like this is repeated over and over again, but people I guess don't understand what the hell a ponzi scheme even is. When people completely mislabel it with that word, it's like a way not to even have a discussion on it. It's ridiculous.

And the bank bailouts began under Bush NOT Obama, so I guess Bush is a "socialist"? It's scary, there have been polls taken and almost half of America thinks the bank bailouts were done under Obama ("the scary socialist!"). It must be that "lamestream liberal media" at work again, huh?



new topics

top topics



 
29
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join