Forum Post: proof of corrupt government.
Posted 13 years ago on Nov. 8, 2011, 7:39 p.m. EST by gestopomilly
(497)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
when they cant think of any other way to make it work .. they change the rules to keep the status quo. why do they not think of cutting foriegn aid welfare .
news.yahoo.com/formula-reduce-social-security-increases-201418202.html
New formula would reduce Social Security increases
You want to know why because that means that globalist and neocons can't dream about ruling the world if they cut the money.
there is never a mention of reducing the money they take from you check though. if they reduce that spending .. they have to reduce that amount. but never a mention
I know it's hard to believe but you have to: WE ARE FREE!!! (Take off the blinders) Isn't that why we're here?
http://WeAreFree.osixs.org Wake----Up! It's time to throw off the chains...
FIGHT THE CAUSE - NOT THE SYMPTOM
People already get more out of socail secutiry than they put in, why not reduce the deficite
then why not reduce the amount taken from your check? why not cut foriegn aid? why pick on the old and dying segment of the population? why not cut student grants and loans? they are young they can work or sell thierselves for a living.. old people will actually die as a result. young people wont.
i say get rid of social security. Why should they get any money they didn't make
they did make it. it is the FICA that is taken from your check.. you did not make that money?
If you put in $50000, you should get out $50,000. It's not right that I put in $50,000 Tom puts in $100,000 and yet for some reason we each get $75000 back
thats not how it works.. high wage earners get around 2/3 rds more per month that low wage earners when they start soc security.. so your premise is correct and each gets back according to what they put in. also adding in that more money makes you healthier,, therefore you collect for about 10 yrs longer than a low wage earner.
The corruption may be about population controll. People will die at an earlier age without money to pay for their heath care.
After all it's not their tax dollars they are spending. They want to get results and a world wide reduction in population growth means more resources for them to waste.
Population reduction is definitely part of their agenda, although you'll never hear them openly speak of it.
Population reduction is taken seriously in China and they have been in the news lately for it. It makes me sick to read about the extreme measures they are taking. Their government set quotas for regional leaders meet. Some mothers have lost their own live in the process of induced labor that was not needed.
Not to mention the attitude the Chinese have over having a girl as opposed to a boy. There's been countless stories over the years of women simply abandoning newborn baby girls to starve to death or throwing them away like so much trash rather than paying the fine.
I feel so sad for the children.
Agreed. I have little respect for the Chinese. I saw a clip on line taken from a street camera somewhere in China (traffic light camera, I believe) that showed a child, maybe five years old, get run over by a van and no less than TEN people walked or rode by before someone finally went over to the boy to see if he was alright. Needless to say, the van just kept on going. There's something seriously wrong with those people.
Maybe because foreign aid is measured in millions while SSI is measured in 100s of billions.
foriegn aid is measured in 1 trillion get an update.
Are you high? in 2008 it was $25 billion and much of that was in disaster emergency aid which is unusual. You need to get an update unless you are counting the TARP scam. That isn't foreign aid.