[Jonty30]

There will be people, just not the income to pay for the dreams of liberals. The debt doesn’t shrink because the number of people paying for it shrinks. It will consume a larger portion of their income than ours. So, they will be paying the debt and very little on social benefits for themselves.

I get the reason for the war, but that does not justify socialism. Going off to war should have given every reason to resist socialism. That contract you mentioned have given very little future to the children. They will have neither socialism for themselves nor any income to build a life through their efforts. That’s what that social contract will have amounted to in the end.

It was a mistake to agree to accept.

As I said, it should have never been done. The future of AMerica is more Venezuelan than American, because socialism always robs the future until the productivity capacity of the future is spent.

It’s not that I have any empathy for those who went to war but that empathy is coming out of the future of the future generations. I can always tell how liberal somebody is by little value they place on the ensuring there is a future for future generations.

It used to be a given that people lived and sacrificed everything to ensure a better future for their children. That value is non-existent in modern society, because modern society wants all the spending for the present and don’t care what the future holds.

I’m forced to pay into a system to make life better so my elders can live as well as they can, without anybody in the future doing that for me. Aborted children don’t contribute to the tax base for their elders and 2 billion have been aborted throughout the West since Roe and Wade. We aborted enough children to populate an earth of a 1920’s population.

Yes, America will collapse under the weight of debt. That is why the socialists gave America $34 trillion in debt, to collapse. It is all but inevitable at this point as to what is going to happen. It’s a matter of when and not if.

Society survive when we build futures for the children and not support for the elderly. That’s just economics.

You don’t understand how impoverished we’ve made the future, for our present benefit, as to why some people might object? Could it be because those objecting know that everything has been taken from them and they will have nearly nothing for themselves?

You paid into a con is what you did. It was never going to work forever. As Christopher Hitchen said, “It only worked for one generation and it will work for nobody else.” That’s a paraphrase of his actual words, but the meaning is the same.

[Brian Griffin]

“Society survive when we build futures for the children and not support for the elderly. That’s just economics.”

Are you prepared to refund the school taxes, adjusted for 1982-2024 NYSE/NASDAQ opportunity costs?

[Political Junkie Too]

It's an easy position to take from the safety of 80 years, but you might as well call Washington and Jefferson dead white slave-owners if you're going to play the history revisionist game from far off in the future.

The time was what it was; the people in it were making the decisions that were best for them at the time. If you're going to play the socialism card, why not play the entire hand? The 100 million people of the past six generations were conned and only you see the truth?

Nobody planned a central economy here; nobody assigned you the task of bricklayer because your town needed bricklaying and you were available no matter how smart or strong you were; nobody decided what jobs were surplus and what would be paid for the job that were assigned.

The Boomer generation was free to choose what jobs they wanted or didn't want. Some worked, some stayed home; some excelled, some failed.

What you call a socialist con, other might call a tithe. It's all a matter of perspective. Personally, I think you've been led astray by the philosophy of Christopher Hitchens, a Brit, an atheist, and a contrarian of anything establishment. I remember reading his essays when they were published because he was a critical voice of the times, but I didn't subscribe to them. It's a shame that he died at age 62 -- I wonder if he might have had an epiphany if he had the chance to reach old age.

-PJ

[Political Junkie Too]

I’m forced to pay into a system to make life better so my elders can live as well as they can, without anybody in the future doing that for me.

The future hasn't happened yet. Why are you so sure that won't be the case, unless you think everyone in the future will be just like you?

-PJ

[Political Junkie Too]

You don’t understand how impoverished we’ve made the future, for our present benefit, as to why some people might object?

Okay, now you straying waaay beyond the topic of the thread of health care (and my inclusion of social security in general). Those programs were not going to bankrupt future generations.

-PJ