Quote:
Originally Posted by bb1961
Hey SPEED be patient...don't get your panties in a wad!!
I predict Trump will win in a landslide by this majority ...
https://www.inquisitr.com/3666578/hi...lection-model/
SPEED you never proved me wrong about this...all indicators show the year 2039 that SS is be going to insolvent and try and lie your ass off about it. I could post a dozen links from ALL different sources and you'd say THEY'RE ALL WRONG..Got to protect your beloved Gumment!!If that ain't Gumment failure was is??
My statement:
Support a failing system...sure.
In ten years if the age for "retirement" hasn't increased I will be able to collect in 2029.. I'm not counting on it or worried about it...things are going to change in regard to it because at the present rate it is going to be insolvent in 2039. I look foward to 10 yrs. of getting SOME of MY money back...ain't that GRAND. What a stellar program the the Gumment has set up!!
I guess it's like the fans of a losing team...they're still your team.
You don't need to ask me anything...I'm "one of the less educated ones".
You still run from that totally stupid statement you made that using the word socialism is...NAME CALLING!!  |
I'm not sure what a 2016 prediction has to do with 2020 predictions. Again I ask -- how many electoral votes do you predict Trump will win in order to by a "landslide" and what states do you believe Trump will win that Clinton won in 2016? Bambino, Austin Ellen, and JD Barleycorn have answered that question.
Actually I believe I said SS would be insolvent by 2035, not 2039. Try reading what I write. I at no time said that SS would not run dry. NEVER. I see one of two things happening: (1) Politicians will come up with some sort of solution to keep SS funded, or (2) there will be a possible 20% reduction in SS benefits imposed at some point in time. About 61 million people currently receive SS benefits each month. 100s of millions have benefited from SS since its inception in 1935. I would call that a stellar program. Without it, many of those 62 million people would be living in poverty.
I have absolutely no problem with you or anyone else calling a socialist a socialist. Unfortunately you are in the habit of calling anyone who supports any policy that is the least bit socialistic, a socialist. THAT is ridiculous name-calling, especially when you know so very little about the people you are calling socialists.
