Lets Slash Entitlements

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, OP. You may be a Blue Stater, but you are not a good person. We are all Americans, Red or Blue, senior or not, rich or poor.

Uh, you realize the blue staters are willing to sacrifice personal income for the greater good, right?

Lady, states pay no income taxes. It's people who do. Around 50% Americans pay federal income tax and subsidize the rest -- the poors in the cities and the poors in rural areas.

Much of the other half you are talking about are retirees. It's not just poor people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, OP. You may be a Blue Stater, but you are not a good person. We are all Americans, Red or Blue, senior or not, rich or poor.

Uh, you realize the blue staters are willing to sacrifice personal income for the greater good, right?

Lady, states pay no income taxes. It's people who do. Around 50% Americans pay federal income tax and subsidize the rest -- the poors in the cities and the poors in rural areas.

Except the latter get a disproportionate amount of said taxes. That's the point.

Not true, run the numbers. The urban poor are the main drain of public resources.

Wrong. Quite wrong and there have been numerous studies and reports on this. Seriously you are dumb.

Once upon a time, posters routinely included links to prove their arguments. Now we call each other dumb.

No links, no intelligent discussion, just name-calling. Sad, DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, OP. You may be a Blue Stater, but you are not a good person. We are all Americans, Red or Blue, senior or not, rich or poor.

Uh, you realize the blue staters are willing to sacrifice personal income for the greater good, right?

Lady, states pay no income taxes. It's people who do. Around 50% Americans pay federal income tax and subsidize the rest -- the poors in the cities and the poors in rural areas.

Except the latter get a disproportionate amount of said taxes. That's the point.

Not true, run the numbers. The urban poor are the main drain of public resources.

Wrong. Quite wrong and there have been numerous studies and reports on this. Seriously you are dumb.

Once upon a time, posters routinely included links to prove their arguments. Now we call each other dumb.

No links, no intelligent discussion, just name-calling. Sad, DCUM.

+1.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, OP. You may be a Blue Stater, but you are not a good person. We are all Americans, Red or Blue, senior or not, rich or poor.

Uh, you realize the blue staters are willing to sacrifice personal income for the greater good, right?

Lady, states pay no income taxes. It's people who do. Around 50% Americans pay federal income tax and subsidize the rest -- the poors in the cities and the poors in rural areas.

Except the latter get a disproportionate amount of said taxes. That's the point.

Not true, run the numbers. The urban poor are the main drain of public resources.

Poverty rate is higher in rural america than urban america.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, OP. You may be a Blue Stater, but you are not a good person. We are all Americans, Red or Blue, senior or not, rich or poor.

Uh, you realize the blue staters are willing to sacrifice personal income for the greater good, right?

Lady, states pay no income taxes. It's people who do. Around 50% Americans pay federal income tax and subsidize the rest -- the poors in the cities and the poors in rural areas.

Except the latter get a disproportionate amount of said taxes. That's the point.

I'd be very interested in seeing the amount of taxes paid by voting demographic. The top 10% pays 70+% of income taxes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a reasonably well off Blue State Democrat, meaning that not only do I pay high income taxes but my state is a net payor to the Red States. So, since Seniors voted for Trump and Republicans, and Republicans want to slash SS and Medicare/Medicaid, lets do it. My reduced taxes mean I win. Lets give our Seniors what they apparently want. I will be enjoying another bottle of some overpriced wine.

52% of seniors voted for Trump, which means that 48% did not.

What you propose is collective punishment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, OP. You may be a Blue Stater, but you are not a good person. We are all Americans, Red or Blue, senior or not, rich or poor.

Uh, you realize the blue staters are willing to sacrifice personal income for the greater good, right?

Lady, states pay no income taxes. It's people who do. Around 50% Americans pay federal income tax and subsidize the rest -- the poors in the cities and the poors in rural areas.

Except the latter get a disproportionate amount of said taxes. That's the point.

Not true, run the numbers. The urban poor are the main drain of public resources.

Wrong. Quite wrong and there have been numerous studies and reports on this. Seriously you are dumb.

Once upon a time, posters routinely included links to prove their arguments. Now we call each other dumb.

No links, no intelligent discussion, just name-calling. Sad, DCUM.

+1.

Oh my gosh, it took me all of 5 minutes to find on Google. Why are you lazy, PPs?

https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700/#main-findings

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a reasonably well off Blue State Democrat, meaning that not only do I pay high income taxes but my state is a net payor to the Red States. So, since Seniors voted for Trump and Republicans, and Republicans want to slash SS and Medicare/Medicaid, lets do it. My reduced taxes mean I win. Lets give our Seniors what they apparently want. I will be enjoying another bottle of some overpriced wine.

You're an awful person. Wishing that on the most vulnerable people says a lot about you.

I don't share OP's glee about this, but those vulnerable people voted for this themselves. There's a cognitive dissonance, or simply ignorance, out there that despite the fact that REpublicans keep saying that they want to cut entitlements people can vote them in and it won't happen. Well now Ryan seems determined to make it happen. Nothing the rest of us can do except enjoy the tax break, I guess.

I'm not happy about it, but the only person wishing for this stuff are the people who voted into office the party that will do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let's not slash entitlements, but instead reduce the 100 billion dollar overhead administrative costs to deliver those benefits. And cut out the fraud too.

OK. As a senior, I'd like a refund of the money (plus interest) that I was required to pay into Social Security for almost 40 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, OP. You may be a Blue Stater, but you are not a good person. We are all Americans, Red or Blue, senior or not, rich or poor.

Uh, you realize the blue staters are willing to sacrifice personal income for the greater good, right?

Lady, states pay no income taxes. It's people who do. Around 50% Americans pay federal income tax and subsidize the rest -- the poors in the cities and the poors in rural areas.

Except the latter get a disproportionate amount of said taxes. That's the point.

Not true, run the numbers. The urban poor are the main drain of public resources.

Wrong. Quite wrong and there have been numerous studies and reports on this. Seriously you are dumb.

Once upon a time, posters routinely included links to prove their arguments. Now we call each other dumb.

No links, no intelligent discussion, just name-calling. Sad, DCUM.

+1.

Oh my gosh, it took me all of 5 minutes to find on Google. Why are you lazy, PPs?

https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700/#main-findings

That's irrelevant to this diacussion. We already know the rich tend to be in coastal states, which vote blue. The question is, who's sucking most taxpayer money, the urban or the rural poor?

To give you an example. DCPS spends more than $15k per student -- a majority of whom are urban poor. Do you really think some poor district in the middle of nowhere Arkansas is spending $15k per kid?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, OP. You may be a Blue Stater, but you are not a good person. We are all Americans, Red or Blue, senior or not, rich or poor.

Uh, you realize the blue staters are willing to sacrifice personal income for the greater good, right?

Lady, states pay no income taxes. It's people who do. Around 50% Americans pay federal income tax and subsidize the rest -- the poors in the cities and the poors in rural areas.

Except the latter get a disproportionate amount of said taxes. That's the point.

Not true, run the numbers. The urban poor are the main drain of public resources.

Wrong. Quite wrong and there have been numerous studies and reports on this. Seriously you are dumb.

Once upon a time, posters routinely included links to prove their arguments. Now we call each other dumb.

No links, no intelligent discussion, just name-calling. Sad, DCUM.

+1.

Oh my gosh, it took me all of 5 minutes to find on Google. Why are you lazy, PPs?

https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700/#main-findings

That's irrelevant to this diacussion. We already know the rich tend to be in coastal states, which vote blue. The question is, who's sucking most taxpayer money, the urban or the rural poor?

To give you an example. DCPS spends more than $15k per student -- a majority of whom are urban poor. Do you really think some poor district in the middle of nowhere Arkansas is spending $15k per kid?

Or $100, $200 million per shiny new school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's not slash entitlements, but instead reduce the 100 billion dollar overhead administrative costs to deliver those benefits. And cut out the fraud too.

OK. As a senior, I'd like a refund of the money (plus interest) that I was required to pay into Social Security for almost 40 years.

Statistically, you've already gotten this back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's not slash entitlements, but instead reduce the 100 billion dollar overhead administrative costs to deliver those benefits. And cut out the fraud too.

OK. As a senior, I'd like a refund of the money (plus interest) that I was required to pay into Social Security for almost 40 years.

Statistically, you've already gotten this back.

Not even close. Have worked for 40 years. Love what I do and still working part-time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's not slash entitlements, but instead reduce the 100 billion dollar overhead administrative costs to deliver those benefits. And cut out the fraud too.

OK. As a senior, I'd like a refund of the money (plus interest) that I was required to pay into Social Security for almost 40 years.

Statistically, you've already gotten this back.

Depends on PP's age.

You are right that people as a whole get out more than they put in, but we don't know PP's details.

Now, it gets little sense to get a refund on an entitlement...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let's not slash entitlements, but instead reduce the 100 billion dollar overhead administrative costs to deliver those benefits. And cut out the fraud too.

https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/admin.html

SSA has overhead costs of less than 1% of their total expenditures. Can you name any other entity, public or private, that operates that efficiently? Yeah, didn't think so.