post script: you are aware that communism is a bad thing right?

Communism itself isn't a bad thing just a stupid economic plan. However it has been used in the 20th century as a cover for criminals to come to power and has killed tens of millions of people. All in all communism in practice is pretty much as bad as it gets, even with dictatorships the people seem slightly better off.

How many people this century have communist countrys killed? I thought Stalins count was up to 20+ mill before he died. This is one system that will be gone soon and hopefully humanity never gets crazy enough to try it again.

__________________
2016 Corvette Stingray 2LT
1969 280SE
2023 Ram 1500
2007 Tiara 3200

Communism is a fantastic idea... but as is true for so many things, the devil is in the implementation.

All "yes" answers to the direct questions. But they offer no support for your conclusion. If we do not agree to maintain some minimum standard of living for people so they can get old and not visibly disturb us by dying in the streets based on your logic, shouldn't we agree that opting out of taxes that pay for government services we don't use ourselves, or we feel we could do better and cheaper ourselves should be allowed? If you agree that all this tax is taking away your life I would expect you to find that paying for police, the legal system, banking oversight, schools, etc. etc. right up to defense of the nation should be optional. And I guess many of us would not opt to pay any taxes. I mean, we could subscribe to the plan of leaving the country a big charitable donation when we die if we had one then if that would work.

America would not be what it is today without a goal for a minimum standard of living for all its people, especially the elderly who have contributed a lifetime of labor to making America great. My view of America is not one where our strength comes from selfishness. Calling support of Social Security Communism is a very ineffective cloak for such selfishness.

Jim

__________________
Own:
1986 Euro 190E 2.3-16 (291,000 miles),
1998 E300D TurboDiesel, 231,000 miles -purchased with 45,000,
1988 300E 5-speed 252,000 miles,
1983 240D 4-speed, purchased w/136,000, now with 222,000 miles.
2009 ML320CDI Bluetec, 89,000 miles

Owned:
1971 220D (250,000 miles plus, sold to father-in-law),
1975 240D (245,000 miles - died of body rot),
1991 350SD (176,560 miles, weakest Benz I have owned),
1999 C230 Sport (45,400 miles),
1982 240D (321,000 miles, put to sleep)

you are omitting the most important part.

yes, those things that you state are good and noble; until you force my will. then freedom is lost.

i agree and support monetarily of my own free will above what the gov. takes from me. what irks me is when those who take it force me to give it.

communism as an idea is nice to hear, but, as we see, it robs the human spirit. that is a bad thing.

there are alot of things i need so i do what i can toi provide as best i can. if i, with threat of life or liberty take what is yours it is robbery.

somehow though, if i use the gov. with the sun shinning brilliantly up your skirt, it's noble.

i don't get that.

if you want to support what ever programs you see as fit, do so. i'll support the one's i see fit.

man is too corrupt in the position of power, and increases expontially so as power becomes more absolute, to be trusted with taking from one with means and giving to one with needs.

it is wrong.

these arguements are but versions of the arguements used to convince the youth in chaing's china to convert to mao's china........and the millions-MILLIONS of people were murdered to convince the rest. those people didn't die in the streets did they?

i guess the question is where is the greatest evil? which way of governing one's life creates the most growth of the individuals and promotes the most freedom? you want my money/life to power those systems of which you speak? fine. you ASK for it nicely and say please and thankyou and understand that you have no right to it other than what I give. that is freedom and choice.

how did our country survive without social programs before FDR?

Well it was a different world before the Great Depression. People would starve but last I heard people still are? I don't think any old people will be "starving in the streets" without SS. That sounds an awfull lot like a political scare tactic. All social programs sound like a great idea until you think about the real world of the gov running them. The gov's job is the screw up everything it can so that it won't work. I have zero faith in the government to do anything right, judging by the amount fo tax dollars that are pissed away they are proving me right.

Defense is the only thing the gov can get right part of the time, they seem to have a half way decent track record with that.

__________________
2016 Corvette Stingray 2LT
1969 280SE
2023 Ram 1500
2007 Tiara 3200

therein lies the reason that the feds. role and limitations were delineated in the constitution. the socialization of this nation is happening because enough people allow it to happen. they are in my opinion mis/mal-informed.

they are led to believe that the clause "provide for the general welfare" means provide for the individual welfare. if that is what was intended, don't you think that is what would have been delineated? Roosevelt himself warned of the "narcotic affect" of welfare/social programs.

we are also told that the constitution is a living breathing document. i agree that the mechanism to adjust was created. it was also designed to freakin' difficult to do. were it not so, we'd end up with prohibition-like adjustments with every direction the wind blows. it seems that the "living, breathing" arguement exists to break down the difficult to change part of the adjustment considerations of our founding fathers......or are we just so much smarter?

sorry for the rant.

i'll prolly delete this post later.

I think life was a little tougher then. I suppose you would prefer to have lived then? Unless you were an adult in those days struggling to provide for your familiy, I think comparing your woes of government thievery of your personal fortune today to the good old days of the Depression and its aftermath is a little unrealistic.

Social Security is another government funded program like the department of defense, or the commerce department, or any other department. All are funded by taxes. If you are a worker they take it from payroll taxes. No nice polite requests, it just comes off the top before you see the money. I am also never asked if I want to contribute my tax burden according to some "investment plan" where if I like bombs and missiles, I could send it all to the DoD, for example. Or if I am a Liberal sucker, I could give all my taxes to the Welfare programs.

All this *****ing about Social Security is being prompted by a group of experts at manipulating the working people's minds. They would love nothing better than to never have to pay any of the funds they plundered from the Social Security account back. A shake up of Social Security is attractive to them because they want this huge bill for the money they plundered to go away before the marker is called. The debt could easily be dismissed in the transition from Social Security to some other non-plan by saying over and over that Social Security was going bankrupt. Eventually people begin to believe it, so, when Social Security becomes "privatized" and all of the money paid in sort of disappears, no one will be shocked because their expectations were that the money was no longer there anyway. Now that would be theft of your wealth by the government worthy of your vigilance and attention. Somehow I detect you are already convinced you personally will be better off though. If you are young enough, and wise enough to save some money for later, good for you. Maybe you can hire someone to keep the diseased and dying old baby boomers off your property.

If you want to find Communism alive and well in the United States, look no further than the Defense Department and its procurement practices. The Congress rules over this process and neither performance, nor cost to the government are deciding factors. It is how many jobs and in what States, and who is the most influential Congressman or Senator that decides which contract goes to what contractor.

Jim

__________________
Own:
1986 Euro 190E 2.3-16 (291,000 miles),
1998 E300D TurboDiesel, 231,000 miles -purchased with 45,000,
1988 300E 5-speed 252,000 miles,
1983 240D 4-speed, purchased w/136,000, now with 222,000 miles.
2009 ML320CDI Bluetec, 89,000 miles

Owned:
1971 220D (250,000 miles plus, sold to father-in-law),
1975 240D (245,000 miles - died of body rot),
1991 350SD (176,560 miles, weakest Benz I have owned),
1999 C230 Sport (45,400 miles),
1982 240D (321,000 miles, put to sleep)

i prefer freedom over the promise of security provided by the likes of govt.

i know what SSI is. it is law and it is no longer solvent because the pecuniarily responsible spent the money. it was a poorly managed good intention to fix a desparate problem...temporarily.

except for the derogatory boomers comment which is a gratuitous assertion, i agree with you. either someone is trying to cover his back side or someone is trying to save the program.....it depends on your political perspective.

i'll never accept the existence of corruption as a justifaction for the existence or promotion of communism. it is a bad thing as implemented by men. it fosters the loss of individual freedom and the loss of the human spirit/will. give me liberty of give me death.

ofcourse, im speaking of priciple here. we have the SSI program like it or not. the principle is wrong and as such, the practice of it will lead us closer and closer to socialism. by the way, socialism doesn't work either....in case you were wondering. it takes longer to breakdown than communism but breakdown it will. and if you want to look ahead and see what it will be like....imagine opening the cage to milliuons of domesticated animals at the same time to fend for themselves for the first time. you'll have some survive but it won't be pretty. ever see a domesticated cat get lost in the city to fend for it's self? woooohoooo that's nasty!

How about the promise of security from the government oversight agencies for your savings in banks? How about the government agencies watching over your Wall Street and other investments? How about the government's role providing for police? How about the Defense Department? How about the government agencies making drug companies run a minimum test protocol to determine if their drug products are safe for you? How about the agencies inspecting the food processing plants? Along with Social Security I think these services are a relative bargain.

How was the money spent? Surely you do not believe the money spent "before its time" was some unanticipated influx of people who retired without paying in their fare share do you? The real risk to Social Security becoming insolvent is the Federal Government paying for deficit spending caused by cutting taxes on rich people for all those other services they enjoy more throroughly than the average person by failing to pay back the money they plundered. Fiscal responsibility was a sound Republican characteristic until the people with all the money noted if the government bought expensive crap from them, and lots of it, it was ok to have the government go into debt. It became another means to redistribute wealth from the middle class to the wealthy.

I am not so sure how political perspective fits. You either believe the government money handlers do not have your best interests at heart, or you believe they do. I don't. I believe they would love to figure out how to use that money to make a tax increase to pay for the deficits be put off until the next generation shows up aged and empty handed.

You misunderstood me. I am not a fan of Communism. But I think the back room deals in Congress where DoD spending is doled out in a "one for you and two for me" arrangement if I am more influential than you, are far from the ideals of capitalism. Doing a good job is one of the last considerations in a contract award. Cost to the government or even effectiveness of a weapons system are secondary to the priorities of Congress in awarding big contracts. Even little contracts. So, my point was not that there was something good about it. My point was if you want to ferret out Communist practices in Government, our Government, to save us all money and make the land more secure from external enemies, go check the DoD out. Social Security is peanuts by comparison, and Social Security is not Communism. It is an insurance policy. And selling insurance on a "pay if you play" or "no-choice" basis in the insurance business has been demonstrated to lower premiums for everybody except those driving illegally, without insurance.

Go after Communism. Stomp it out. I am all for your goal. Just don't pick something cheap and easy to attack, incorrectly and inaccurately label it Communism and act like you are doing a good deed. Find some real decay, some real Commies and root them out. Merry Christmas. Jim

__________________
Own:
1986 Euro 190E 2.3-16 (291,000 miles),
1998 E300D TurboDiesel, 231,000 miles -purchased with 45,000,
1988 300E 5-speed 252,000 miles,
1983 240D 4-speed, purchased w/136,000, now with 222,000 miles.
2009 ML320CDI Bluetec, 89,000 miles

Owned:
1971 220D (250,000 miles plus, sold to father-in-law),
1975 240D (245,000 miles - died of body rot),
1991 350SD (176,560 miles, weakest Benz I have owned),
1999 C230 Sport (45,400 miles),
1982 240D (321,000 miles, put to sleep)

gotta go to bed...good points....will respond tomorrow.

Boloney. The US federal government has done more good for more people than any organization in the history of the world. It screws up a lot, no doubt, but I don't know of any other systems that work any better.