Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Social Security started out as a ponzi scheme, and it's still a ponzi scheme. it was never a pay-as-you-go system, the first recipients never paid in a dime.
It was morally wrong to begin with, and it hasn't changed.
Explain what's "fantastic" about forcing a person to pay 15.4% of his income into a scam that yields a rate of return under three percent when that same money could be earning three times that in the equities.
1. If it were a ponzi scheme, it WOULD be a pay as you go. But because it's a pay as you go doesn't mean it's a ponzi scheme, it just means it was poorly planned.
2. It was initially a prefunded system. If that were maintained, the system would work just fine.
3. It's not 15.4%, it's 12.4%. The rest is for Medicare, SSI, etc.
4. The fact that the system is risk free and 3% means that it's a choice by the govt where to invest it. I would agree that the system should be privatized into a national form of the Thrift Savings Plan, to offer a much better return. Doesn't mean the plan itself should be eliminated.
Explain what's moral about taking money from people that are working for it now to buy votes from people that aren't working anymore.
If both parties support it, I'm confused as to how it's buying votes. SS is the most popular federal program in history.
No, we live in a republic and the way its supposed to work is that people carry their own burdens. Unless you find it acceptable for someone to rob a bank and keep the money, you can't justify the same immorality when a mob of people called 'voters' does the same thing to everyone else. Stealing is stealing is stealing.
I don't know what bizarre version of public policy you took, but that's not quite how it works. The legislature is well within its rights to tax the people however it likes, and spend however it likes. You don't like it, elect different people.
Oh, so since I don't vote for the thieves, I should be exempt from the theive's taxes? You do realize that this second sentence totally invalidates the first sentence your paragraph, right?
I have no clue what you're talking about.
Is it? or are you throwing that out in the presumption that I'll find some point of disagreement?
1) Technically the military is a legitimate function of government, intended to protect all persons equally. It has Constitutional grounding, a logical existence, and a definable purpose. But hey, I know what we can do. Instead of just taking money away from people, we give them a flat tax rate, plus a form listing all the things they want their money spent on. They fill in the percents and those programs get paid that percentage, nothing more.
I'd be willing to bet that the military remains suitably funded, the old codgers and the welfare maggots don't. But that would be a reasonable thing to do, so it won't happen.
Right, except that's not how the government works. Sorry. You lose.
2) Since the government shouldn't be providing "services", why should an anarchist or anyone else be paying for them?
And that's your view, which you're perfectly entitled to. Unfortunately, the vast majority (read: everyone who matters) disagrees with you. So, you don't get priority.
Ah, the boring old "don't like it leave, I'm a blind flag waving fool" argument.
You apparently have some discomfort over my exercise of the First Amendment. I suggest that the First Amendment is even more important than the Sixteenth and that you get over it. Skip my posts if you can't argue better. I see you've failed to justify the morality of taxation, you've merely said "taxes exist, pay them or get out."
I've never said you shouldn't complain, but rather that if you're so angry about them, why don't you do something? Rather than wasting your time here, why don't you form a PAC? Run a candidate in a local election. Create a website, message board, forum, etc, dedicated to your cause. Get out there and volunteer on the campaign of someone whose views you support. Do something other than complain about how the form of government which has served us for 200+ years isn't good enough for you.