Comments on: Here’s what they think about ya

By: Nebgreen

Nebgreen — Fri, 29 Apr 2005 17:12:00 +0000

RTV is obsolete, as is every other “Youth Vote Campaign”. Get it through your thick heads….the 2000 and 2004 “elections” were RIGGED. Two weeks before Election Night (2004 “election”), I told my parents that Bush WOULD WIN. And win he did. They were so disappointed, but I ended up telling them, “I TOLD you so”. The “elections” are shams, and RTV, Lead Or Leave, and every other youth voter group would do well to simply shut down their sites and disband their organizations. The Globalist, cashless society control grid IS HERE. “Elections” are bread and circus CONTROL MECHANISMS. “Democracy” is GONE, if it ever existed to begin with.

You may as well shut down the blog. The party’s over. Besides, the Democrats are simply the flip side of the same coin. They’re really no different from teh Republicans. They are both largely comprised of wealthy elites who take money from political action committees such as AIPAC (American-Israeli Political Action Committee) and the Big Oil PAC’s. Both parties are full of total sell-outs.

And please don’t feed us this “voter apathy” nonsense. Ex-voters are not apathetic. They’re AWARE and AWAKE to what it happening, and they’re not going to be suckered into participating in another sham “election”, sponsored by Diebold, Inc.’s electronic voting machines, which don’t leave verifiable paper trails and which can be easily hacked and altered by skilled computer programmers.

Give it up, RTV. Go “rock” something else.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 25 Apr 2005 17:15:00 +0000

This has nothing to do what I alone will gain. Believe me, I'm 28 and well on my way to not have to rely on any SS program, private or not. I'm more concerned with what will be there for my daughter. Explain to me who will not benefit from private accounts and why? And don't give me this crap about the stock market being to volatile. Even your liberal leader Bill Maher doesn't believe that. Anyone making that arguement really shows their lack of understanding of the stockmarket and is trying to scare people.

I can think of many ways people get screwed in the current system. For one, if your a black male, your life expectancy is shorter than when SS starts paying benefits, but I guess your compassion doesn't cover them. Who gets screwed next when the age is raised by politicians?

Next, how about the return you get. I don't think anyone is trying to get rich off of SS, but to get a 70% return on what I put in or at best 100%, that is ridiculous. Even the AARP agrees that SS funds should be invested in the stock market as a solution to the problem, but they believe only the gov't should do the investing and not you should have no say in the matter.

Anyway, why are you even arguing the matter? The proposal is going to be voluntary. You can stay in the existing system and I can take a so called risk and go the privatization route. Liberals are usually for choices.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 23 Apr 2005 02:56:00 +0000

I believe your compassion is misguided.
Do you honestly believe that privatizing social security will make us all educated and rich? That is giving this plan a little too much credit. Some people will benefit from privatization but many, maybe even you, will not.
Your passion for this issue seems to stem from what you alone could potentially gain. I see that as selfish.
As I said earlier and a point you seem to have missed, I’m not cheerleading for social security the way it is now. It is messed up, but privatization will not be the blessing to save us all. Bush knows this too. That is why he is selling this plan to town hall meetings with preselected audience members who already agree with him.
And labeling someone a liberal, which believe it or not isn’t an insult, does not make my oppion matter less than yours.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 22 Apr 2005 19:46:00 +0000

Cry me a river anonymous. This is the most charitable country in the world. You probably don't give anything to charity, but that is not how a liberal gages charity. Your definition of charity is measured by how many people I can force to pay into a socialist scheme that is supposed to care for the poor. Then you feel all nice and warm inside.

My definition of charity is providing someone with real means to an end. That's right, don't ensure poverty upon someone like the current SS system does. Show them how there money can work for them. Allow them to own a private account that is an actual asset. This may be the only asset the poorest among us may own. They can then watch how an invest works. They can watch there interest compound and grow. If the unfortunate person passes, they can leave there asset to a surviving spouse or child. This child will see this asset and understand that investing or proper money management is important. Then who knows, maybe we will have a more educated and informed society generations to come. To me, that is compassion. Active participation and learning. The current system already proves that no one learns anything except how to raise taxes.

Your compassion is misguided my friend.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 22 Apr 2005 17:21:00 +0000

I’m blown away by the stupidity of many RTV members who post here. Do a little research into why social security is such a mess, exactly how likely you are to benefit from it if it gets privatized, and just how much control you’ll actually have before you spout such insanity.
Social Security is a good thing. Let’s not forget, we do live in a society. It should be managed much better, I’ll admitt, but I’d hate to live in a country where we don’t feel any obligation to care for the weakest among us.
This isn’t about being paritsan. It’s about really caring about the future for this country and honestly believing we’re heading in the wrong direction.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 20 Apr 2005 20:58:00 +0000

Yes, AARP and RTV (er, LibDemRTV that is) .. They say politics makes strange bedfellows. Looks like a match made in heav… (er..)
The .gov can have my ss money (I’m 40) – IF they shut it down.

By: Sean Foushee

Sean Foushee — Sat, 16 Apr 2005 06:23:00 +0000

Dream, You’re right I have no control over the investments, however my account is currently gaining a higher rate of return than anything SS would ever pay. Sorry to hear your mom’s plan was mismanaged, but our plan is working just fine. Now, after saying that, I DO NOT want this plan or SS I want my own account or no SS at all. It is not the government’s role to make sure we save our paycheck, and this system is currently responsible for lower wages and employment. The system is broke, lets fix it but lets not defend the dead horse that got us into this mess in the first place.

By: Beast

Beast — Wed, 13 Apr 2005 13:18:00 +0000

I have to agree with all that has been said. I am actually thinking of starting my own website. If anyone is interested in starting a moderate website where people on both sides of the party our welcomed, email me at bhyde4@hotmail.com We can do this and stop the extremism that continues to persist.

By: John

John — Tue, 12 Apr 2005 22:05:00 +0000

this site is a bunch of michael moore crap. 3/4 of the stuff on here isn’t true. Read Factcheck.org and dont listen to anyone that bashes a side. This site is hurting america and giving our youth a bad mentality

By: imtheamericandream

imtheamericandream — Tue, 12 Apr 2005 19:02:00 +0000

Prof. Foushee – please follow the thread (and read old posts) if you’re going to keep commenting. Members of Congress DO pay into Social Security. They also have another fund that goes above and beyond SS. I believe, as does Congresswoman Lynnn Woolsey, that every American should have access to such a program.

http://www.senate.gov/reference/
resources/pdf/RL30631.pdf

and per R.Edgar:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/
taxes/pensions.asp