You won’t get any argument from me.
Now I’ll start something...
Social security is the same. People say they were forced to pay in and now they want theirs. It doesn’t matter to them that their money was already spent. That they are enslaving those still working by ever increasing amounts to make good on promises those working people never made. And for those who say well the government shouldn’t have spent the money I ask what generation was it exactly that voted in the politicians that did spend it and continued electing them? People love “free” stuff...
Now I’ll go hide...
> Social security is the same. People say they were forced to pay in and now they want theirs. It doesn’t matter to them that their money was already spent. That they are enslaving those still working by ever increasing amounts to make good on promises those working people never made. And for those who say well the government shouldn’t have spent the money I ask what generation was it exactly that voted in the politicians that did spend it and continued electing them?
That was beautiful, right straight down the line.
No need to hide. Just don't pretend to give validity to all the welfare that has been hung onto Social Security with no contribution whatsoever and treat it with the same disdain as the original contract (enforced, with no choice in the matter) between government and every long-term worker of the last 70 years.
Get rid of all the parasitic welfare first, then we can have a rational discussion.
The fact that one party to a contract engages in criminal neglect does not invalidate the other party's claim of non-performance.
The half of the SS budget, including Medicaid, and all welfare programs can make no such claim.
And we can dispense with the related claim that not taxing all actually working taxpayers more is a form of subsidy.
I wonder where in the Federal Rules of Evidence that one shows up.