General Political Thread

[Tweedling]

I'm pretty positive that SS won't be around for me when I hit the retirement age. Seems like a hoax to me

 

[Guest Jules]

Of course it won't.

[IRememberDBoon]

I bet you every kid at kent state in 68 or whenever said that exact same garbage.

SS is an unmitigated success and one of the best things this nations ever done.

It pays for itself and isn't going anywhere at all. And to think the right laughed and laughed at Al Gores lockbox..................

Republicans would rather see sickly elderly bums shitting in the river or whatever Maher said the other night.


SS is the last thing we need to worry about.



 

[LouieB]

There are some cold motherfucking Wilco fans in this place.  Just sayin.

 

LouieB

[Tweedling]

I bet you every kid at kent state in 68 or whenever said that exact same garbage.

SS is an unmitigated success and one of the best things this nations ever done.

It pays for itself and isn't going anywhere at all. And to think the right laughed and laughed at Al Gores lockbox..................

Republicans would rather see sickly elderly bums shitting in the river or whatever Maher said the other night.

SS is the last thing we need to worry about.

 

It pays for itself? In theory or reality?

 

Oh and Maher is a pussy take away his laughing audience and you're left with a short smug know-it-all who tells lousy jokes while bringing in a lopsided liberal guest panel to gang up on the one conservative guest. However I do stop and watch him every once in a while just to see what he's twisting.

[JUDE]

There are some cold motherfucking Wilco fans in this place.  Just sayin.

 

LouieB

 

 

It's the NRA thing isn't it?

 

I didn't think you'd approve.

[Hixter]

I join the NRA whenever anti-gun politicians start making noises about bans. I joined a few months ago for a reduced price of $25. They threw in a $25 Bass Pro gift card, so it was essentially free.

 

I wish they didn't send me so many mailings asking for more money. I really hate it when organizations do that.

[LouieB]

Well yes and no.  I get the NRA strangely. I don't get dumping on poor people, old people, and the disabled. 

 

LouieB

[Mr. Heartbreak]

I join the NRA whenever anti-gun politicians start making noises about bans. I joined a few months ago for a reduced price of $25. They threw in a $25 Bass Pro gift card, so it was essentially free.

 

I wish they didn't send me so many mailings asking for more money. I really hate it when organizations do that.

Fixed it for ya.

Enjoy the mailbox clutter!

I'm with LouieB and IRememberDBoon on Social Security. I don't see where it's anything but a success.

Of course, we should all save more for our old age. Hell, I've been plowing money into stocks in an IRA for twenty years. I got totally reamed in 2001 when 9/11 hit, and I got totally reamed again just seven years later when the big financial crisis hit. So, no matter what, I will seriously need Social Security to survive even if I wait until 69 or 70 to retire.

Didn't that happen to a few other million people?

Raising the retirement age is no solution. People whose bodies are shot out from years of manual labor are not going to be able to keep working beyond age 63 or 64 anyway.

[Hixter]

Fixed it for ya.

Enjoy the mailbox clutter! 

Thanks. I'm pretty good at proofreading my writing (I spent a few years on the copy desk of a newspaper) but sometimes things slip by.

 

I think charities and non-profits should be required to offer an opt-out for further mailings and pleas for cash. I could live with a single "it's been a year since you donated -- would you like to donate again?" letter; the money they spend on mailings must really eat into their funds.

[Hixter]

I don't get dumping on poor people, old people, and the disabled. 

I don't recall seeing anything like that posted here.

[Mr. Heartbreak]

I did not realize the NRA was a non-profit, but of course they are. Never thought much about it, really.

Yeah, they are going to be on a fundraising tear for a while. I suspect you will get so much junk mail from them it will make your head spin.

Not really sure what they are so upset about in the first place. Even an "assault weapons ban" (which will never get through anyway) would only ban future sales of weapons. Anyone who wants them can still get them for the foreseeable future, and a ban would just spike sales until it goes into effect. Am I right?

[Hixter]

Even an "assault weapons ban" (which will never get through anyway) would only ban future sales of weapons. Anyone who wants them can still get them for the foreseeable future, and a ban would just spike sales until it goes into effect. Am I right?

Sales spiked several months ago and the surge continues. You can't really find an AR-type rifle or most calibers of ammunition and, if you do, they're selling for 3x the normal price.

 

An 'assault' rifle ban passed before, so there's no reason it couldn't pass again. The NRA is upset that the term is being applied to even more rifles than in the past. Add a folding or adjustable stock to your grandfather's hunting rifle and it becomes a banned 'assault' weapon. The same goes for adding a bayonet lug -- not an actual bayonet, just the mount for one. Wrap a piece of fiberglass around the barrel and it's banned. Screw on a flash suppressor: banned. Add a pistol grip: banned. It's ridiculous.

[Mr. Heartbreak]

So, if the fear of a ban is selling guns faster than the manufacturers can ship them, and it's hard to even find most ammunition, what's the problem?

 

I read recently where only 35% of American households even own a firearm (down from 42% in 2005). Yet there are roughly 300 million firearms owned by civilians in the United States (as of 2010). Aren't there plenty out there already? We are a heavily armed nation thanks to the 1/3 of us who are gun owners....

 

And background checks? That should be universal. Hell, I can't even sell my car without having to transfer the registration. Seems like a no-brainer to me...

 

I do agree with you about the mounts, pistol grips, etc. That is ridiculous. I think the concern should be with selling more and more of these high capacity magazines. That's where us non-gun people want some lines drawn (again, for future sales...no one is talking about coming and taking your guns away).

[KevinG]

I did not realize the NRA was a non-profit, but of course they are. Never thought much about it, really.

 

I never thought of the NRA as a non-profit, nor do I really think they are truly an advocate for gun rights.  IMHO they advocate for gun producers and gun sellers.  Though PBO and the Dems have done more to help gun sales then any NRA campaign in recent memory.  

 

I don't recall seeing anything like that posted here.

 

I think he must have being thinking about when Jules said "Be your own safety net" back on page 22.  Which is pretty cold.  

[Hixter]

I read recently where only 35% of American households even own a firearm (down from 42% in 2005).

I'd reckon it's very close to 100% in my neighborhood. Hell, it's probably close to that for the entire state.

And background checks? That should be universal.

Every new firearm sold is subject to a background check. Much fuss has been made about the so-called 'gun show loophole.' Most people who advocate closing it don't even understand what they're talking about. Could you explain it accurately?

 

For what it's worth, the government did a study of criminals -- guess how many of them purchased their firearm at a gun show. The answer is 0.7%.

I think the concern should be with selling more and more of these high capacity magazines. That's where us non-gun people want some lines drawn

Do you understand that the very term 'high-capacity magazine' is something invented by the anti-gun lobby? The AR-style rifles ship with a 30-round magazine as standard equipment. Most pistols are designed to hold 10-17-round magazines as standard equipment. The push to ban magazines larger than 7 rounds is a backdoor attempt at outlawing most pistols other than revolvers that typically hold 5 or 6 rounds. Feel free to ban the ridiculously large, bulky and unreliable aftermarket magazines that hold a hundred rounds; anyone with half a brain wouldn't waste their money on them. The Aurora shooter used some sort of way over the top magazine and it jammed, probably saving lives as he had to switch to a shotgun.

 

A magazine capacity limit will do nothing to stop a determined killer and won't make any positive impact on our rate of gun crimes or murder.

[Hixter]

I think he must have being thinking about when Jules said "Be your own safety net" back on page 22.  Which is pretty cold.  

I didn't see it as cold. Self-reliance is always a good thing. 

 

In the event of a natural disaster, I'm going to take care of myself and not count on the government to take care of me. If they eventually do, great, but I won't bet my life on it. The same goes for Social Security: I'm going to try to pave the way for a comfortable retirement. If the Social Security funds I've been promised materialize they'll be icing on the cake. (It won't surprise me if Uncle Sam tries to take my icing and give it to someone else.)

[KevinG]

I didn't see it as cold. Self-reliance is always a good thing. 

 

In the event of a natural disaster, I'm going to take care of myself and not count on the government to take care of me. If they eventually do, great, but I won't bet my life on it. The same goes for Social Security: I'm going to try to pave the way for a comfortable retirement. If the Social Security funds I've been promised materialize they'll be icing on the cake. (It won't surprise me if Uncle Sam tries to take my icing and give it to someone else.)

 

The average social security recipient receives about 12K a year, I don't think anyone is living off of that. 

 

You know not everyone in the country is as well off as you, of course people should be self reliant and do for themselves.  But those that can't will need social security.  Take for example Mr. Heartbreak's story, from his story he didn't doing anything wrong, but his 401K was wiped out (as well as many others) in the economic down turn.  Also with a lot corporations decreasing their contributions to 401K's and eliminating pensions and with another economic collapse that so many are predicting I think there will be a need for social security more then ever.  Just because you are so well off an where, for all accounts, smart/lucky with your finances do you think it necessary to condemn those that aren't?  

 

That is what seems cold, this attitude that says, "hey I am doing alright so there is no need for social security or program X.  Why can't everyone be like me?"  

 

Again I think the Social Security crisis is another in the line of ginned up things for those on the Right to complain about.  Social Security is solvent and will be for a long time, though if we feel we must fix it to make go farther the easiest and best way is means testing.  So if you are smart and have a generous savings then you don't get as much in social security.  What is wrong with that? 

[Hixter]

The average social security recipient receives about 12K a year, I don't think anyone is living off of that. 

They're dead now, but up until a few years ago my grandparents survived on no income other than Social Security.

 

You know not everyone in the country is as well off as you

Just because you are so well off an where, for all accounts, smart/lucky with your finances do you think it necessary to condemn those that aren't?

That is what seems cold, this attitude that says, "hey I am doing alright so there is no need for social security or program X.  Why can't everyone be like me?" 

I never said that I was well off, I never condemned anyone and I never said that everyone had to be like me. Why make up stuff like that?

 

So if you are smart and have a generous savings then you don't get as much in social security.  What is wrong with that?

It's money that's been taken from me involuntarily for the last 35 years with the promise that it'll be there for me when I retire. That's why.

[lost highway]

So, you make more money than most people.  You are paying for someone else's grandfolks, same as someone paid for yours.  Welcome to America, a social democracy.

[Hixter]

So, you make more money than most people.  

Where do you people get this stuff?

 

P.S. My grandparents paid for my grandparents.

[lost highway]

From you.

[Guest Jules]

Well yes and no.  I get the NRA strangely. I don't get dumping on poor people, old people, and the disabled. 

 

LouieB

 

No one did that.

 

I think he must have being thinking about when Jules said "Be your own safety net" back on page 22.  Which is pretty cold.  

 

I'm just saying I don't think it will be around when we're at that age. I hope I'm wrong. I personally have no issue paying into it knowing I'll never see one dollar of it. I also said above they should raise the cap.

[KevinG]

No one did that. I'm just saying I don't think it will be around when we're at that age. I hope I'm wrong. I personally have no issue paying into it knowing I'll never see one dollar of it. I also said above they should raise the cap.

 

But you also said that Social Security should be cut by 100% and then in response to that you said be your own safety net.  I guess I inferred from those statements that you desired to have SS drastically cut and for those that will not get SS (or significantly less) that they are on their own.  I guess I misunderstood. 

 

 

 

I never said that I was well off, I never condemned anyone and I never said that everyone had to be like me. Why make up stuff like that?

 

True, I took your statement and extrapolated a lot more into it.  I really did not mean to put words in your mouth and I do apologize.  For all of those of you who are planning for retirement good for you.  But there are situations out there where people don't have jobs with 401Ks, or for market reasons their 401Ks have decreased in value.  These people will need social security.  It seems to be the way of some people (and I am not saying you) to look down at those who need government assistance because they don't.

 

 

It's money that's been taken from me involuntarily for the last 35 years with the promise that it'll be there for me when I retire. That's why.

 

And you pay taxes for things you will never use.  It is kinda how government works.  So you are ok with a retired multi-millionaire getting the same $1,000 a month check that a retired factory worker with no 401K does?  The millionaire doesn't need the money, the factory worker does.  

[Hixter]

From you.

Please explain.