[Calpernia]

ping

[rdl6989]

I think we got one here.

[Texas_Jarhead]

reads a little biased IMO

[John Lenin]

You just signed up to post this ?

[quantim]

Live one here...

[Texas_Jarhead]

What's your take newbie?

[cynicom]

You just driving by????

[ETERNAL WARMING]

If our sainted leaders are so worried about Social Security, how is it they still haven't protected the money that's coming in? When you see the SS tax on your paycheck, just add it to the Federal Income tax portion to get your true tax rate, because the simple truth is they're spending it on other things that they aren't held accountable for.

I'll believe they're 'worried' when they start saving it.

[msnimje]

...the system would still be able to pay about three-quarters of the benefits now promised.

This is the definition of BANKRUPT. I think I will pay 3/4 of my bills next month and see how that goes over.

[xm177e2]

Actually, even if it goes "bankrupt" a few decades from now, the system would still be able to pay about three-quarters of the benefits now promised.

If Bush was talking about cutting 1/4 of the social security benefits old folks are currently expecting in the next twenty years, liberals would have a s--- fit. They would behave as if nails and other sharp metal objects were being passed through their digestive systems. It would be The Passion of the Liberal.

But if the benefits are going to fail after 20 years from now, suddenly liberals don't care.

THERE IS NO CRISIS.

THERE IS NO CRISIS.

THERE IS NO CRISIS.

THERE IS NO CRISIS.

THERE IS NO CRISIS.

THERE IS NO CRISIS.

THERE IS NO CRISIS.

THERE IS NO CRISIS.

THERE IS NO CRISIS.

Keep repeating it and maybe it will come true! </sarcasm>

[xm177e2]

If social security constantly has money coming in, how could it possibly pay ZERO benefits? It would always have to pay out SOMETHING. By the liberals' definition, social security is INCAPABLE of going bankrupt. LOL.

[E Rocc]

Damn but that was a fast

-Eric

[KC_Conspirator]

You do a disservice to young Americans with your lies.

[Dallas59]

73-78%??????

+

[chudogg]

Just missed the Zot!

[Killborn]

Welcome to FR. Factcheck.org isn't as bipartisan as they want you to think. There are several posts debunking fc during the Presidential debates. SS is definitely going out.

Oh yes, and pay no attention to the drone buzzing around you.

[Dan from Michigan]

YER OUTTA HERE!!!!

[WestVirginiaRebel]

"Let's show this prehistoric troll how we do things downtown!"

[Ursus arctos horribilis]

Fine sucker, loan me 100 million bucks, I will pay you back 67.33 million and we will call it good, OK?

[SuziQ]

History suggests that will be so, but nobody can predict what stock and bond markets will do in the future.

Is the stock market higher now than it was 10 years ago? Was it higher then than it was 10 years before that? If so, then the stock market generally trends upward. There are corrections and slumps, but people's investments tend to increase over time. Even putting their money in a dedicated savings account in a savings and loan, credit union, or a bank earning the regular rate of interest would grow their money faster than it grows with Soc. Sec.

These people who complain about people privately investing part of their Soc. Sec. money always miss one very important point. That money is not only helping the person who owns the account, but it is also helping someone grow a business from the capital raised in a stock issue, or help someone buy a house from the money available from a bank or savings and loan. That money is being put into play in the economy, and that's always a good thing.