Ocasio-Cortez prepares for war… on her own party

[Dexter]

I do.  It requires a life-long sacrifice to make it happen, but it's available to every working person.  Most don't avail themselves and that is not my fault.

It's none of your business. Young people want social security and medicare and it has nothing to do with you.

[mirraflake]

I do.  It requires a life-long sacrifice to make it happen, but it's available to every working person.  Most don't avail themselves and that is not my fault.

Saving is hard work and takes discipline but here is also a huge amount of luck involved.

Many follow the rules and save  but a lifelong illness ( example stroke)  of the breadwinner of the family at middle age and many life savings are wiped out.

Also seen people go through several long term downturns and get laid off through no fault of their own and eat up their life savings.

A friend of the family got laid off at age 58 and the only companies that would hire him was minimum wage. p/t  no benefits due to his age.

@Cyber Liberty

[roamer_1]

It's none of your business. Young people want social security and medicare and it has nothing to do with you.

Sorry, but us old codgers have a whole lot to do with it, because we are here to block your silly notions until you grow old enough in years to obtain wisdom. And by then you will think  quite a bit like we do, and you will be the codger, blocking the exuberant idiocy of the youth in your day.

[roamer_1]

Many follow the rules and save  but a lifelong illness ( example stroke)  of the breadwinner of the family at middle age and many life savings are wiped out.

It happened to me. Went from hale and hearty to a POS in screaming pain within 2 months... another 6 months and everything I had built and saved was gone. Insurance bailed on me by technicality, and I had to eat my seed corn.

Prince to pauper in nothing flat.

[Dexter]

It happened to me. Went from hale and hearty to a POS in screaming pain within 2 months... another 6 months and everything I had built and saved was gone. Insurance bailed on me by technicality, and I had to eat my seed corn.

Prince to pauper in nothing flat.

You would have been in big trouble without social safety nets. You are the perfect example of why these things exist. You shouldn't have lost everything because of an illness in a world where it's possible to prevent that from happening. We all deserve better than that. I especially want better than that for my son and hopefully grandchildren someday.

[roamer_1]

You would have been in big trouble without social safety nets. You are the perfect example of why these things exist. You shouldn't have lost everything because of an illness in a world where it's possible to prevent that from happening. We all deserve better than that. I especially want better than that for my son and hopefully grandchildren someday.

That is exactly wrong. I HAD to take advantage of those safety nets simply because those safety nets have entirely subsumed the nets that ought to be there.

If the government were not taxing wealth and inheritance, my family would be infinitely more prepared to help me without a broader scale. And if the government had not removed churches from the ownership of hospitals and health, medical charity would be far more available, and that at far less cost. And if the government had not vastly curtailed non-profit means (as they were competition to their monopoly on 'charity'), non-profit assistance without governmental intervention would be far more robust at far less cost.

I am not against governmental charity. It has always been there. But it should be very last as an option. The focus should be family, then community, then county, then state - and the federal government should have NO role whatsoever, in either welfare or healthcare.

That is the fact of the matter.

[Cyber Liberty]

That is exactly wrong. I HAD to take advantage of those safety nets simply because those safety nets have entirely subsumed the nets that ought to be there.

If the government were not taxing wealth and inheritance, my family would be infinitely more prepared to help me without a broader scale. And if the government had not removed churches from the ownership of hospitals and health, medical charity would be far more available, and that at far less cost. And if the government had not vastly curtailed non-profit means (as they were competition to their monopoly on 'charity'), non-profit assistance without governmental intervention would be far more robust at far less cost.

I am not against governmental charity. It has always been there. But it should be very last as an option. The focus should be family, then community, then county, then state - and the federal government should have NO role whatsoever, in either welfare or healthcare.

That is the fact of the matter.

Sounds like liberal logic:  Create a problem that puts a hurt on innocent people so they'll demand socialism to fix the pain caused by liberals.  That describes Obastardcare to a "T," doesn't it?

[Cyber Liberty]

It's none of your business. Young people want social security and medicare and it has nothing to do with you.

Utter leftist bullshit.  It becomes my business when youthful idiots start plotting ways to plunder my nest egg.  Don't be obtuse.

[musiclady]

That is exactly wrong. I HAD to take advantage of those safety nets simply because those safety nets have entirely subsumed the nets that ought to be there.

If the government were not taxing wealth and inheritance, my family would be infinitely more prepared to help me without a broader scale. And if the government had not removed churches from the ownership of hospitals and health, medical charity would be far more available, and that at far less cost. And if the government had not vastly curtailed non-profit means (as they were competition to their monopoly on 'charity'), non-profit assistance without governmental intervention would be far more robust at far less cost.

I am not against governmental charity. It has always been there. But it should be very last as an option. The focus should be family, then community, then county, then state - and the federal government should have NO role whatsoever, in either welfare or healthcare.

That is the fact of the matter.

This analysis is historically correct and precisely hones in on the source of the problem.

But we see that the liberals on this board (young, I believe) have been convinced that government is the answer and that without it, societies fail.

The truth is that it is because of government programs and interference, we can no longer take care of family and community as we once did.

They are asking for more of the disease, and ignoring the cure.

[roamer_1]

Sounds like liberal logic:  Create a problem that puts a hurt on innocent people so they'll demand socialism to fix the pain caused by liberals.  That describes Obastardcare to a "T," doesn't it?

Next comes the accusation of hypocrisy which is so circular that the only way I would not be rendered an hypocrite is to have sucked a bullet... The ONLY other way is to admit the benevolence of the system and bow before our liberal overlords. Watch and see. 

[roamer_1]

This analysis is historically correct precisely hones in on the source of the problem.

But we see that the liberals on this board (young, I believe) have been convinced that government is the answer and that without it, societies fail.

The truth is that it is because of government programs and interference, that we can no longer take care of family and community as we once did.

They are asking for more of the disease, and ignoring the cure.

That is PRECISELY right.
In the end it quintessentially ends where I go so very often:

Liberty has responsibilities
Freedom has consequences.

We have an inherent responsibility to help those who succumb... to give a hand up to those who have fallen. To care for those who have no means to care for themselves in true charity.

Giving over that responsibility to government gives the individual freedom instead.
Freedom from enacting that responsibility oneself.
And freedom has consequences, which we are seeing, as they exponentially unfold.

Nearly every social moray can be viewed through that prism to find the true answer to the problem.

[Cyber Liberty]

Next comes the accusation of hypocrisy which is so circular that the only way I would not be rendered an hypocrite is to have sucked a bullet... The ONLY other way is to admit the benevolence of the system and bow before our liberal overlords. Watch and see. 

You forgot "racist." 

[txradioguy]

The vast majority of young people today don't want social security and medicare to end. They want those things to still be around when they are seniors. Maybe the seniors of today shouldn't be dictating what world the seniors of tomorrow will be living in by deciding that they'd be better off without those things. It seems kinda ridiculous and wrong.

The "Seniors" should just be dictated to by the no nothing snowflakes like yourself...we should leave our destiny up to a bunch of clueless Socialists like you?

Yeah right.

The seniors have a world of experience you lack and a sense of history that you are absent of. 

[jmyrlefuller]

It's none of your business. Young people want social security and medicare and it has nothing to do with you.

Yet they're not having nearly enough children to make such programs viable.

[Cyber Liberty]

Yet they're not having nearly enough children to make such programs viable.

Wouldn't you know it?  They literally had ONE JOB, and a thoroughly enjoyable one at that, and they effed it up.  And they swim in a sea of STDs. 

[sneakypete]

It's none of your business. Young people want social security and medicare and it has nothing to do with you.

@Dexter

HorseHillary! Young people think the need for medicare and social security doesn't apply to them because they won't be old for another 1,000 years or so.

[InHeavenThereIsNoBeer]

I wonder if these supposed young people are really stupid enough to think that these programs can go on indefinitely, or if they're just hoping it isn't their generation that gets screwed.

[Cyber Liberty]

I wonder if these supposed young people are really stupid enough to think that these programs can go on indefinitely, or if they're just hoping it isn't their generation that gets screwed.

I think they know it's coming, that's why they are thumping the tub for "reform."  They hope to screw over the preceding generations, if we let them.

[Dexter]

Utter leftist bullshit.  It becomes my business when youthful idiots start plotting ways to plunder my nest egg.  Don't be obtuse.

I don't think young people want to take away your nest egg.

[Dexter]

Next comes the accusation of hypocrisy which is so circular that the only way I would not be rendered an hypocrite is to have sucked a bullet... The ONLY other way is to admit the benevolence of the system and bow before our liberal overlords. Watch and see. 

I'm just amazed that so many people here can't see any good in social security and medicare.

[Dexter]

we can no longer take care of family and community as we once did.

Can churches and other form of community charity really replace what these programs do to help people? We have a population of over 330 million. Would it perhaps be the case that a lot of people wouldn't get the kind of help they currently get from the government?

[Dexter]

You forgot "racist." 

Disappointing.

[Wingnut]

I don't think young people want to take away your nest egg.

You are a special kind of stupid if you believe that.

[Dexter]

The "Seniors" should just be dictated to by the no nothing snowflakes like yourself

You're not being dictated. It has been suggested that you shouldn't be pushy in a race you have no horse in, like the future of social security. This issue doesn't concern you. Let young people decide. Ultimately you have no choice but to entrust the future to them. They might not be as "no nothing" as you assume.

[Dexter]

You are a special kind of stupid if you believe that.

Quality post.