Great New Ad In Answer to The DNC Scare Seniors Ad

[The Finman]

<embed width="420" height="323" src="http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_100402/content/blank_page.Par.0003.FlashFile.swf">

________________


<img src="http://www.ronaldreagan.com/images/wing.jpg" alt=" - " /> <a href="http://www.ronaldreagan.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php" target="_blank"> <img src="http://www.ronaldreagan.com/images/bbtitle_small.jpg" alt=" - " /></a><br />

 

[Penn]

Great Answer to the DNC Scare Ads

When can we go national with it?? Let's stick to these people who would stoop to the lowest level to try anything to get votes.
penncam

 

[demsformd]

Of course the seniors are scarred. The Republicans' way of dealing with Social Security may be the most terrifying thing I have ever seen. Creating personal savings accounts? Reducing benefits? Raiding the Social Security fund when we attack places like Iraq. Hell yeah its scary.

 

[vraiblonde]

Creating personal savings accounts?

Oh the horror! Next thing you know those bad Republicans are going to be saying that it's your money in the first place and you should have the right to do with it what you want!
@ demsformd

 

[Kyle]

Originally posted by demsformd
Of course the seniors are scarred. The Republicans' way of dealing with Social Security may be the most terrifying thing I have ever seen. Creating personal savings accounts? ...

The idea...

It IS terrifying... Why should we save our money for retirement when we can just live off the next generation much easier.

And we all know how demoraps can save money for us muuuuuuuuuuuch better!

 

[Heretic]

I never understood how social security could be a good thing. I mean the government takes your money and basically gives you less than 2% interest on it with big restrictions of when you can have it. If you stick it in any old savings account and any bank you make more than that. I guess some people are just scared that they will have to think and that they may be so irresponsible that they cant handle it.

Give me my money if I blow it all and have to eat dog food when im old Ill deal with it.

 

[Frank]

Originally posted by Heretic
I never understood how social security could be a good thing. I mean the government takes your money and basically gives you less than 2% interest on it with big restrictions of when you can have it. If you stick it in any old savings account and any bank you make more than that..

Which is exactly the point of personal savings accounts for Social Security. It doesn't even MAKE money in Washington - that money gets piled into a fund, payouts are made, and what's left over gets spent - "raiding the fund" although it does no such thing, because Congress has always spent the leftovers. Where does the money come from, then? You know what's in that lockbox? A pile of IOU's, straight out of "Dumb and Dumber". All you have is the government's promise they'll pay you.

If they were SMART in Washington, they'd have some way of taking money put INTO Social Security and investing it, so it will make money. For some reason, this horrifies Democrats - to invest money and at LEAST make *interest* off of it. The alternative is of course to do NOTHING with the money, and deal with the fact that there won't be enough in the lockbox when it's time to pay YOU, because of the ridiculous way the whole thing works. When it was put in place, there were a LOT more working people to pay in than retirees taking out. That number is shifting.

The ONLY way to keep it in place is to :
a) INCREASE the payroll tax (which Dems hate to do, because it affects the poor more severely)
b) DECREASE benefits (and there are MANY that should never have been added)
c) CUT payouts
d) FIND *some* way to make more money with it
e) LEAVE the "extra" money alone (something that will NEVER happen in Washington)
f) LET it die and blame the other party for its demise

 

[watercolor]

I will have to agree with Frank. I dont know why it is that the dem's get so scared of investment. Intrest on the bigger bill equals larger account balance. omm DUH! It only makes sense to put it in a savings account.

 

[demsformd]

In my previous post, I was referring to personal savings accounts that will be invested in the stock market. Such accounts do not provide a guarenteed amount of benefits. Payouts would vary rapidly due to the inconsistency of the market. Seniors would have been goin great three years ago when the stock market was up but now they would have faltering accounts. Social Security as we see it today is a much better alternative than creating personal accounts.
And as for people who have questioned the point of Social Security; I cannot believe that you would dare to question such an important part of the American economic system. The program was created after the Depression and guess what, we haven't had one since. One person felt that he would deal with his own problems. This is an honorable notion but people need serious help from others when they have problems with money. Their way of "dealing with it" is to get help from the federal government. Seniors have done so much to help our nation develop so isn't it only morally right and compassionate to provide them with the best retirement we can? A true compassionate conservative would feel that they did.

 

[Heretic]

Yea that whole $200 a month that my grandma gets is really important.

There are more investments than the stock market.

For example if someone puts the money that goes into social security into a run of the mill savings account it will mean more money for them when they need it. If that money goes into long term CD's they will more than triple their payouts in their old age. If they invest in US savings bonds they will triple their payouts in 30 years. The onlt risk involved in many of these investments is that someone can't be trusted to leave the money alone, how many people would use it for gambling? booze? drugs? or even a DVD player?

We haven't had a depression since the 1940's...that wasn't what many politicians were saying in the early 90's. Social security has nothing to do with depression or recession anyway.

The biggest thing I see wrong with social security is with buisness owners, they put in their share and also have to put in their employers share. I think at the very least small buisness owners should be able to opt out of social security.

I don't ever plan on relying on someone to take responsibility, why should I have to take responsibility for someone else?

Social security was never designed so that the working folk take care of the old people, the more you put into it the more you get out of it. Generally the people that put more into it dont need what they put into it either.

Some politicians think social security is so great, why dont they then rely on it instead of the special retirement fund for Senators and Congressmen? Did you know they dont pay into SS? Im not going to trust someone telling me what I should believe in if they dont believe in it enough to rely on it themselves.

 

[vraiblonde]

Sticking up for the current Social Security scam proves that you are a racist, Dems. Black people die earlier than whites and are more likely to never receive Social Security benefits. The money they worked for all their lives and put into the system goes to support some old WHITE woman, not their own families. And contrary to what Democrats believe, not all blacks are living in a ghetto on public assistance. They earn money and own property and have a right to use it to support their families when they die.

Not only that, but you're a sexist too because men die younger than women, so women are the primary recipients of Social Security, even though the scam is primarily funded by MEN, not women.

AND you're a homophobe. Why? Because gay men have the lowest life expectancy of all. Why should THEIR money that THEY worked for go to some white woman?

Don't believe me, girlfriend? Check some statistics and get back with me.

 

[Frank]

Originally posted by demsformd
In my previous post, I was referring to personal savings accounts that will be invested in the stock market. Such accounts do not provide a guarenteed amount of benefits. Payouts would vary rapidly due to the inconsistency of the market.

Over any *30* year period in history, stocks have always proven to be the MOST beneficial place to put your money - *including* during the Depression. Social Security funds do not EVER earn *one dime* - they're not even earning interest in a bank somewhere. People pay in, people pay out, and the leftover is squandered, because money left in DC always gets spent. Over the years, the amount of money "left over" is dwindling, because benefits of SS are expanded, and more people are taking it than previously. In a few years - there will be NO money "left over", because payouts will exceed money taken in.

What's your solution for this? How can the govt. continue to pay for something without a) raising payroll tax b) cutting benefits c) putting the money in some kind of account that earns money, instead of wasting it.

An account also does something else - it tells Washington, this money is not "left overs" - it belongs to someone. They can't just dip into the left-over money, because then, it wouldn't BE left-over. Al Gore wanted to put it "in a lockbox" - you know, where it won't do anything. If you put money into SS and invest it wisely, over 40 years, you will have EARNED money. You will have created wealth. If it doesn't earn money because our economy has tanked for 40 years - it won't matter anyway, then, because any country in that dire circumstances after 40 years will be ruined anyway.

 

[Delilah903]

"THOSE POOR IGNORANT OLD FOLKS"

Originally posted by demsformd
One person felt that he would deal with his own problems. This is an honorable notion but people need serious help from others when they have problems with money. Their way of "dealing with it" is to get help from the federal government. Seniors have done so much to help our nation develop so isn't it only morally right and compassionate to provide them with the best retirement we can? A true compassionate conservative would feel that they did.

Oh Yes Demsford,

Lets let "Big Brother" take care of us!! I don't know about the rest of you, but I would trust my granny to protect her money better than the Federal Government. Not to mention the fact that there isn't enough money in the Social Security Fund to support one-tenth of the Americans who will be retiring within the next ten years. So tell me Demsford, where did our money go?? If "Big Brother" didn't invest it for us poor old ignorant folks what did he do with it??

By the way, Social Security was never intended to be a retirement fund, it was actually supposed to be a supplement to the average citizens own retirement fund which they would handle themselves!!

 

[demsformd]

Let me just say that I truly resent being called a racist, sexist, and homophobe. I think that that respondent owes me an apology. I cannot believe that you would do such a thing. After all, I am not in the party that denied Charles Newkirk a place on the Republican ballot. How can Vernon Gray lose in a primary three times prior to this year yet this year as a Republican he soundly defeats Mr. Newkirk? Racism? Looks like it is.
Back on subject...If personal accounts are so great, why is your Republican Party running away from it? Their strategists are advising all GOP candidates, especially John Thune in South Dakota, to run away from their support of the program. Public opinion polls show that the vast majority of people oppose privitatization of Social Security. Why hasn't President Bush proposed it to the Congress? I would like to know.

 

[Heretic]

IF social security is so great how come our lawmakers dont use it? Answer: Because they know better.

 

[The Finman]

demsformd, I'm not sure if you're simply misinformed, willfully trying to mislead or simply blinded by your partys disengenious partisian scare rhetoric.

The Personal Savings Acounts that President Bush is proposing would put a whole whopping 2% of your Social Security into it.

The problem isn't that they want to put 2%...THE PROBLEM IS IT'S ONLY 2%!!!

And this is over nearly 50 years for someone 16 coming into the workforce!!

This isn't some sort of crap shoot...diversified stocks have ALWAYS CONSISTENTLY GONE UP OVER THE LONG TERM!

Yes, there are down cycles (bear markets), but the consistent return over WELL DIVERSIFIED stocks has and will always a produce a higher rate of return.

You democrats have one consistent flaw...and that is that you forget that IT NOT YOUR GODD*MN MONEY!!!

Juda Freakin Preist, your slimeball democrats have almost bankrupted Social Security over the 40 years that they controlled either the one or both houses of congress!!

I'm sorry, if you are to freakin stupid to be able to manage your own damn money then by all means...let Government have your money so the can spend on their pork barrel projects like old Ted "I'm Sorry May Jo Kopechne Can't Swim" Kennedy does with all his liberal government "gimmee!!" projects!

As for me I prefer to keep and invest my money on my own!...same things with taxes, I pay mine quartely and I think everyone should actually pay instead of having the federal government withholding part of their paycheck!

I swear to God there is nothing more pathetic than the person who is HAPPY to get a refund check because withholdings was greater than their tax bite!...that's freakin sick!

I mean letting the federal government hold your own damn money while it earns interest instead of the actual tax payer and then to be greatful to get a small measley ### bread crumb back because your withholding rate was greater than your tax rate is just sick!!!

I guaran-damn-tee-you, that if EVERY ONE had to actually write a check out to the federal government every April 15th instead of this "Yay...I got a tax refund" bull$hit...there would be a revolt in this country the likes that haven't been seen since the Boston Tea Party!

Anyone who votes democrat is equivalent to a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders!

 

[Delilah903]

"YEAH"

Originally posted by The Finman
I guaran-damn-tee-you, that if EVERY ONE had to actually write a check out to the federal government every April 15th instead of this "Yay...I got a tax refund" bull$hit...there would be a revolt in this country the likes that haven't been seen since the Boston Tea Party!

Anyone who votes democrat is equivalent to a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders!

Yeah Finman!!!

I couldn't have said it better myself!!

 

[Heretic]

Your right Finman if I had to write the government a $20k check every year I would #### myself.

Man i always knew it but I just realized more of my money goes to pay taxes than into my rent and car payment combined every month. There is something wrong when your taxes are more than your living expenses.

 

[vraiblonde]

Let me just say that I truly resent being called a racist, sexist, and homophobe. I think that that respondent owes me an apology.

You can forget the apology. Don't act like a racist, sexist and homophobe and I won't call you one. Deal?

Hear, hear, Finman! My vote goes to C: "simply blinded by your party's disingenuous partisian scare rhetoric"

 

[Heretic]

It bothers some people when the shoe is on the other foot. Maybe some people should remember that before they call someone a racist, sexist or homophobe because someone disagrees with yet another law for a special interest group.

For example if you disagreed with the hate crime law you were labeled a racist or homophobe but most people that disagreed with it have enough faith in the laws regarding murder and assult. Is anyone really going to stop and think oh wait this murder is a hate crime, I better not do it or I will get a concurent 10 year sentance with my life in prison sentance.