politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
If social security is cut, can I get all the money I put into it back? Because I'd have a sizeable retirement rather than losing all that money to the ether.
Fucking stupid.
Best we can do is a tax break to corporations.
Your money is already gone. It's one giant Ponzi Scheme. They take the money from you to pay all the old fucks currently living off of Social Security.
If you want to have any money - you have to hope that in 20 years everyone else puts in enough to cover you.
It's not a Ponzi scheme because withdrawals and deposits are scheduled and mandatory. You don't get into a situation where investors lose faith and ask for money that you don't have because that's not allowed. You get your money when you reach the requisite age. You also don't get into a situation where you run out of investors because it's a mandatory payroll tax.
Essentially the only issue facing social security is the fact that since 1974, wage growth has become decoupled from productivity gains, meaning the payroll tax that funds social security captures a smaller proportion of business revenue over time - because businesses spend less of their revenue on payroll than they used to.
Social security doomerism of the type on display here is a tacit acceptance of conservative propaganda on the subject. The government is fully capable of indefinitely maintaining a pension fund, we just have to stop accepting the lie that it isn't.
Ponzi scheme or adequately funded resource for no longer employable non-rich people? The difference is in the management and contributions, both of which need to increase up here.
We literally print the money. It isn't gone. There is always more money in the banana stand.
We have an entire province in Canada who thinks the same.
They also think they get way more than their share because they're soooo much more important -- and it's not the region where Toronto is!
The social security cut will be coupled with a tax cut. And you'll be told to invest the difference in the stock market
The social security cut will be coupled with a tax cut for the rich. And you'll be told to just be grateful the "job creators" blessed you with technically-slightly-better-than-slave wages you can spend renting your home from them
FTFY
Nah, Republicans aren't quite that stupid. They'll throw out a $200 increase to the child tax credit for six months or an increase in the standard deduction. Everyone (who isn't already zeroed out by the last round of tax cuts) will get a taste.
This record low unemployment is, unironically, the right-wing technocrat's wet dream. Everybody kicking and clawing for a seat at the table in a market that's very easy to enter and very unsteady to climb. It really is the War Of All Against All out there. Survival of the ~~Whitest~~ Fittest. Real Social Darwinism Hours.
You, too can gamble on Bitcoins / Sports Betting, win big, and pull together enough money to become a landlord, so you can tell the next generation to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps.
Or gamble and lose and just fucking die, to thereby decrease the surplus population.