ADVERTISEMENT

Haley jumped out to 6-0 lead after Dixville Notch completed vote just after midnight.

He’s out there on some stuff & not sure how effective he would be as President, but I have a real appreciation for how he handles hecklers & opposition. Much like our own CoH, he doesn’t try to demean & belittle people attacking & berating him with opposing views, but listens & seeks to understand, always making it about issues, not people, & always coming out on top.
I agree and it's not very hard when you are smarter than your audience. He is confident and that shows in his actions and how he speaks.
 
Much like our own CoH, he doesn’t try to demean & belittle people attacking & berating him with opposing views, but listens & seeks to understand, always making it about issues, not people, & always coming out on top.
You mean like this?:
you stupid senile old man.

That’s just stupid.

people are dumber than I assumed when I wrote the OP.

The Democratic wet dream.
And that's just from one thread.
 
Having a couple friends die in the last month between 59 and 62 has really changed my retirement views. I joked about getting out but always figured to go until 67, at least. Not now. Though it is scary to go earlier, 1/3 cuts if a deal isn't reached is pretty scary. 65 is now my target because of Medicare. Affording healthcare without it or an employer plan seems risky.

I appreciate your answer, it has to be difficult to tout raising the cap given your overall views. I think the solution will have to include some cuts and some increases. Moving the retirement age a year and raising the cap should do a world of good. To pass both parties are going to have to be able to claim a victory, just doing what America needs isn't good enough any longer.

But any time I think of raising the age it does mean that people who do real physical labor are screwed. I cannot imagine anyone wanting to be hanging drywall or fighting fires at 70. So raising the age does screw over people who actually work. Though I don't know any other way to get both parties to support a plan.
Not all that difficult really. I am much more open to discussion around economics than I am other things. I believe it is more of an ebb and flow. People have spoken that they want the safety net. Therefore we need to fund it. I just came to the conclusion awhile ago that you did. Telling a white collar worker that they have to go to 70 before they can retire is pretty crappy. They could conceivably do it though. Telling a factory worker, your garbage man, a plumber, etc. that they have to go to 70 is just unrealistic.
 
Not all that difficult really. I am much more open to discussion around economics than I am other things. I believe it is more of an ebb and flow. People have spoken that they want the safety net. Therefore we need to fund it. I just came to the conclusion awhile ago that you did. Telling a white collar worker that they have to go to 70 before they can retire is pretty crappy. They could conceivably do it though. Telling a factory worker, your garbage man, a plumber, etc. that they have to go to 70 is just unrealistic.
They don’t have to go to 70. You can retire before you’re eligible for social security. That is if you take funding your own retirement seriously.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jet812
Then you my friend are not as Conservative as you like to think.
I think that protecting people from economic theft from a program that was forced on them by threat of prison is pretty conservative.

The government forces everyone that works into that program. That isn't right but it is the way it gies. To arbitrarily snatch it away because you have some rage boner against "boomers" is wrong. I am completely on board with overhauling the system as we go forward though. Yanking benefits from a 70 and 80 year olds that they had to pay into all their working lives is the government stealing from my parents...unless you want to give them a lump sum payout of what they put in and was put in for them, with interest, no deal.
 
Not all that difficult really. I am much more open to discussion around economics than I am other things. I believe it is more of an ebb and flow. People have spoken that they want the safety net. Therefore we need to fund it. I just came to the conclusion awhile ago that you did. Telling a white collar worker that they have to go to 70 before they can retire is pretty crappy. They could conceivably do it though. Telling a factory worker, your garbage man, a plumber, etc. that they have to go to 70 is just unrealistic.


Social security is not and never was a retirement plan.
 
Social security is not and never was a retirement plan.
Yeah it was bullshit from Roosevelt. Old age and survivors disability insurance. So insurance for when you got old and could not work anymore. That is how he sold it. Supreme Court ruled it was just a tax years later but I believe in holding the government to what they sold people on back in the 1930's and have been claiming ever since (other than when they wanted to withhold benefits from an immigrant they were booting after he had paid in).

I know what Social Security is, what it was sold as, and the promise the government keeps selling people on. I also stand by the opinion that suddenly changing the terms of the deal on people who paid in their entire lives and are either past the age where they were able to collect, or quickly approaching that age, would be a bunch of horseshit.

And that is coming from someone that would much rather of been able to keep that money that was paid by myself and my employers in the TSP program. I and most people who work would have been far better off if 10 out of the 12% went into a plan like that and the other 2% was set aside for truly disabled individuals but we weren't given that choice.
 
Sure it was. It's why she refused to participate in the caucus which is the only one that mattered and went into the primary instead.
She didn't participate at all. You're no Republican, you're nothing but a Trumpster.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT