You didn’t do it (in fact did just the opposite). You couldn’t do it and it can’t be done, because of the simple fact there is no difference.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Nice try.
You definitely do sound like a politician.
You probably think Shaniqua rates the EBT card because her contribution to society is, has been and will continue to be, to produce more mouths to feed.
You are probably against a Military Retirement check at 37 ‘because’ the troop has held a steady job for 20 years at or about the same rate of pay that you have been getting.
At least that is what the ‘studies’ seem to prove.
The only fallacy with the ‘studies’ is you work an 8 hour day and that troop is subject to 18-24 hr days more often than not.
Now I may (or may not) be an anomaly, but I am 72 and have yet to collect one day of unemployment, have never been on welfare, never used or drew food stamps, don’t owe for a college loan, been given a job or advancement because of my race, I just spent my life contributing to society in general, either by being in the Military, creating jobs and paying taxes and FICA.
For you to say that my collecting Social Security (after contributing for over 50 years) is parallel to Shaniqua getting issued food stamps, while your example may be true as far as words go, the comparison is ludicrous.
Like I said, Bill Clinton.
Depends on what ‘is’ means.
“It depends on how you define alone”.
Yeah, because there have been so many politicians who have called old people out on their welfare checks. Sure. Whatever.
paying taxes and FICA.
No, not "paying taxes and FICA." It's paying FICA taxes. You're the one who needs semantics to rationalize their check. It's not me playing word games by parroting politicians.
For you to say that my collecting Social Security (after contributing for over 50 years) is parallel to Shaniqua getting issued food stamps, while your example may be true as far as words go...
It has nothing to do with words. It's reality. There is no fund that you contributed to.
You know it's really been eye-opening to me to get on these SS threads on FR, and see the lengths to which some people will go to rationalize their getting a government welfare check.
And it's mind-boggling to listen to supposed conservatives not actually talk about the law as it was passed but instead use what were lines in Democrat campaign literature in 1934 and 1936. That's where this whole "insurance", "pension" and "account" language entered into the public square.
I mean can you believe it? You as a self-identifying conservative are not arguing the actuality of it, but just repeating what are 75 year old Democrat campaign slogans. It truly fits in the ironic category.