I don't see the Rich getting shafted by the Dems either.
As a matter of fact, they've become EXTREMELY richer during Obama's tenure. And when Hillary holds these $50k a plate fundraisers, she'll certainly let the attendees know she will be working hard to make laws, forcing them to pay their gardeners and housekeepers higher wages.
Really???!!! When there was nbcnews, msdnc, and cnn with similar links? Yeah, OK.... Nothing sinister, just your history of posting half truths...
A history of half truths??? As I told you, I clicked on a link, which went to the NEWS SMACK site. I could have found that same story elsewhere but this was the first that I had heard of it. Again... sorry that the truth doesn't fit your agenda.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
You didn't bother to mention that means testing will begin at $80,000 of non-SS income...So, that will include most good union pensions... I guess all of a sudden, they're rich too....
So... TBird thinks that "MOST GOOD UNION PENSIONS" pay over $80,000 per year!!! My guess... most "good union workers don't make $80,000 per year when they are working no less when they are retired!
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics: Median weekly earnings in 2010 of union members is $917 (48,000 per year) Yet, in Bucky's world, that $917 union workers pension will be $80,000 per year. I gotta get me one of those Union Jobs
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Which Candidate Can Lead The Republican Party... To Another Crushing Defeat?
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
So... TBird thinks that "MOST GOOD UNION PENSIONS" pay over $80,000 per year!!! My guess... most "good union workers don't make $80,000 per year when they are working no less when they are retired!
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics: Median weekly earnings in 2010 of union members is $917 (48,000 per year) Yet, in Bucky's world, that $917 union workers pension will be $80,000 per year. I gotta get me one of those Union Jobs
BOXY... Living in a fantasy world...I said GOOD Union pensions, not AVERAGE union pensions. Good union pensions such as: UAW pensions from auto workers that have spent 30+ years with an auto maker Tier 1 and 2 NY state pensions in grades 18 and above NYS Teachers pensions, even Tier IV...My brother and sister-in-law are tier IV teachers...BOTH will make over 80K from their pension when they retire... BOXY's definition of rich
Again, Boxy says I got mine and want to keep it coming, so screw the rest of you... work till you die and for you "rich" ones, keep your hands off my cheese...typical hypocrite liberal...
"Arguing with liberals is like playing chess with a pigeon; no matter how good I am at chess, the pigeon is just going to knock out the pieces, crap on the board, and strut around like it is victorious." - Author Unknown
Hmmmmm...2 teachers that will retire with total of $160,000+ pension and likely another $40,000+ SS = $200,000 (i.e. $16,000/mth approx.), would final out to likely approx. $11,000/mth after deductions. I would be very happy and not complain with that kind of income! Good live very very well!!!
JUST BECAUSE SISSY SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO...BUT HE THINKS IT DOES!!!!! JUST BECAUSE MC1 SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO!!!!!
Hmmmmm...2 teachers that will retire with total of $160,000+ pension and likely another $40,000+ SS = $200,000 (i.e. $16,000/mth approx.), would final out to likely approx. $11,000/mth after deductions. I would be very happy and not complain with that kind of income! Good live very very well!!!
They are not complaining...but I wouldn't exactly call them rich...
Living very well depends on where you live...in the five boroughs? That money doesn't go as far as you think. And soooooo what if they still get the SS money? They've contributed to it all these years.
In reality, since there are so few "rich", the actual hit on the trust fund shouldn't be that great anyway...
"Arguing with liberals is like playing chess with a pigeon; no matter how good I am at chess, the pigeon is just going to knock out the pieces, crap on the board, and strut around like it is victorious." - Author Unknown
the next generation is getting shafted......it's that plain.....you shouldn't have to pay into a government system that is a SOCIAL system for EVERYONE'S USE, and then not get it back......
the next generation will no longer follow the retirement set up of old.....
like I said....Hillary Clinton is to old
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
They are not complaining...but I wouldn't exactly call them rich...
Living very well depends on where you live...in the five boroughs? That money doesn't go as far as you think. And soooooo what if they still get the SS money? They've contributed to it all these years.
In reality, since there are so few "rich", the actual hit on the trust fund shouldn't be that great anyway...
Outside the boroughs, they are rich when compared to so many other middle class Americans. I would not stay in the boroughs if I had that kind of money...definite time to move. I also agree, they paid into the SS system and deserve to receive that money. If there were to be a cap, then there has to be a line in the sand to define it....but personally, it's a stupid idea that has no chance of enforcement. Just a political ploy to make people think the Gov would save them money and Christie is a man of change for the better....NOT!!!!!!
JUST BECAUSE SISSY SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO...BUT HE THINKS IT DOES!!!!! JUST BECAUSE MC1 SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO!!!!!
Outside the boroughs, they are rich when compared to so many other middle class Americans. I would not stay in the boroughs if I had that kind of money...definite time to move. I also agree, they paid into the SS system and deserve to receive that money. If there were to be a cap, then there has to be a line in the sand to define it....but personally, it's a stupid idea that has no chance of enforcement. Just a political ploy to make people think the Gov would save them money and Christie is a man of change for the better....NOT!!!!!!
Drop the income tax cap for SS taxes and problem is just about solved.
"Arguing with liberals is like playing chess with a pigeon; no matter how good I am at chess, the pigeon is just going to knock out the pieces, crap on the board, and strut around like it is victorious." - Author Unknown
Drop the income tax cap for SS taxes and problem is just about solved.
but it has to be paid back to those who put in...what you put in is what you get out.....the government cannot put limits on it's people and their aspirations.
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
A new Public Policy Polling survey in New Hampshire finds Scott Walker leading the GOP presidential field with 24%, followed by Ted Cruz at 14%, Rand Paul at 12%, Jeb Bush at 10%, Chris Christie at 8%, Marco Rubio at 8%, Ben Carson at 7% and Mike Huckabee at 7%.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
WASHINGTON — Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz's argument that the Second Amendment provides the "ultimate check against government tyranny" is a bit too extreme for potential 2016 rival and fellow Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC).
"Well, we tried that once in South Carolina. I wouldn't go down that road again," Graham said, in an apparent reference to the Civil War. "I think an informed electorate is probably a better check than, you know, guns in the streets."
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
"Well, we tried that once in South Carolina. I wouldn't go down that road again," Graham said, in an apparent reference to the Civil War. "I think an informed electorate is probably a better check than, you know, guns in the streets."
The funny thing about Graham's statement is that it wasn't a "civil war". It was a war to prevent secession. The confederate states didn't seek to control the federal government, they wanted to leave the union. Graham is actually misinforming the electorate by continuing the "civil war" lie.
Logged
