Political Test

57 posts / 0 new

Last post

Sun, 04/02/2017 - 22:31

(Reply to #31) #32

GarfeildRepublican

That's why it's in crisis- we

That's why it's in crisis- we should reform it to become like that.

Sun, 04/02/2017 - 22:56

(Reply to #32) #33

Nyarlathotep

You can't really turn an

You can't really turn an insurance system into an investment system (without reneging on the insurance).

Sun, 04/02/2017 - 23:13

(Reply to #33) #34

GarfeildRepublican

Yes you can, do it like you

Yes you can, do it like you do now, tax on them and their employer, then have that money be equally split up amongst all payers, and allow them to chose their investments.

Sun, 04/02/2017 - 23:27

(Reply to #34) #35

Nyarlathotep

Yes you can, do it like you

GarfeildRepublican - Yes you can, do it like you do now, tax on them and their employer, then have that money be equally split up amongst all payers, and allow them to chose their investments.

So where does that leave the baby boomer, who has paid into the system for decades, several of which at an inflated rate to insure his insurance would be there when they retired? You going to issue them bonds for their half century of mostly inflated premiums? What about the disabled, who haven't paid and will never be able to pay, who get by with SSDI? Will they get bonds as well?

And your idea to split of the payments between all payers. So a small business owner who makes $130,000/year who pays 10 times as much as someone who earns $20,000/year will be rewarded with the same amount in bonds? Sheesh, and they call me a socialist! Sounds like the biggest welfare program in history.

Mon, 04/03/2017 - 00:04

(Reply to #35) #36

GarfeildRepublican

"So where does that leave the

"So where does that leave the baby boomer, who has paid into the system for decades, several of which at an inflated rate to insure his insurance would be there when they retired? You going to issue them bonds for their half century of mostly inflated premiums? What about the disabled, who haven't paid and will never be able to pay, who get by with SSDI? Will they get bonds as well?"

I'm not sure I understand the first question. As far as the disabled are concerned, I want to keep SSI as it is

"And your idea to split of the payments between all payers. So a small business owner who makes $130,000/year who pays 10 times as much as someone who earns $20,000/year will be rewarded with the same amount in bonds? Sheesh, and they call me a socialist! Sounds like the biggest welfare program in history."

I was just speculating, a better idea is to place a minimum sum, regardless into each persons account. Say, 5k annually, or some other sum.

Mon, 04/03/2017 - 05:50

(Reply to #36) #37

Nyarlathotep

And I have another question.

And I have another question. So by your system, people will pay the tax, then receive a certain amount in bonds of their choice. What happens when someone loses 50 years worth of this system by choosing bonds from OTC dark markets? Are you going to implement regulations to prevent people from acquiring dodgy bonds with their social security? If so, that sounds like government barriers to people buying and selling what they want, exactly the opposite of what you told us was a "free market"!

Mon, 04/03/2017 - 00:49

(Reply to #37) #38

Harry33Truman

You fucking communist

Mon, 04/03/2017 - 05:28

(Reply to #38) #39

mykcob4

Stupid idea. You would take

Stupid idea. You would take money that a person earned and make them EACH speculate their future. And what about people that just don't earn very much in the first place? Due to lack of opportunity, they will never secure enough income to actually have sufficient funds to grow a retirement through investments even if their employer matches their income. It is a pipe dream. No, SS is fine the way it is designed as long as conservatives don't keep robbing it to pay for bullshit and pork barrel projects.

Mon, 04/03/2017 - 08:29

(Reply to #39) #40

GarfeildRepublican

Like I said, Treasury bonds

Like I said, Treasury bonds would still be there. Either way, this is just an idea- I think though that we should replace all taxes with a single progressive income tax, following the NIT model, and that would mean no more SS taxes, it would come out of the Income Tax.

Also, there is a bond bubble building, so it would be smarter to invest SS in Gold or another solid investment like it

Mon, 04/03/2017 - 10:31

(Reply to #40) #41

mykcob4

Ridiculous. A bond bubble? I

Ridiculous. A bond bubble? I don't even think that is possible with T-bills.
Apparently, you have been exposed to conservative propaganda. For decades conservatives have been publishing all sorts of bullshit to destroy Social Security.
The fact is that Social Security has been and is the most successful government program in history. The conservatives would LOVE to bring it down.
NIT is just another smoke and mirrors scam.
How about the top 1% start paying taxes? That might help and end the deficit as well.

Mon, 04/03/2017 - 10:51

(Reply to #41) #42

GarfeildRepublican

I don't want to destroy SS, I

Yes, US Bonds are overvalued:
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/07/06/bond-market-is-in-an-epic-bubble-of-colos...

Just a little bit of conservative propaganda myckob4- I'm sure CNBC isn't too conservative for your liking. I don't want to destroy SS, I think we need it- I was just speculating ways to give people more control over their retirement. You convinced me otherwise.

How is NIT a smoke and mirrors? I think its a great system- what about some specific objections?

With regards to the rich, I agree- Mitt Romney only pays 15% of his income in taxes. I think the solution is a simple income tax with no loopholes.

Mon, 04/03/2017 - 18:26

(Reply to #42) #43

mykcob4

Actually, for me, CNN has a

Actually, for me, CNN has a credibility problem. I watch PBS, BBC, and MSNBC. I listen to NPR. NIT seems okay on the surface but you still would have to enact levels and cutoff points based on income. Since the rich and corrupt giants corporations never report an income they would never pay taxes. I would rather have a flat tax although modified.
Mitt pays 15% of what he reports he makes in the US. Most of his income resides in Belize, Cyprus, and the Grand Caymans. He pays NO tax on that money.

Mon, 04/03/2017 - 18:39

(Reply to #43) #44

GarfeildRepublican

CNBC, not CNN. I agree with

CNBC, not CNN. I agree with you regarding CNN though- did you know they released North Korean Propaganda as news?

I listen to Thom Hartman and BBC.

I think we can get rid of tax loopholes, but people are always going to devise another tax dodgins scheme no matter what you do. The Negative Income Tax is a modified Flat Tax!

Sat, 04/01/2017 - 15:45

#45

SecularSonOfABi...

Mine is pretty accurate.

Mine is pretty accurate. Although I am not a libertarian. No offense to those who are.

Attachments

Attach Image/Video?:

Yes

Sat, 04/01/2017 - 19:18

(Reply to #45) #46

GarfeildRepublican

You are actually a moderate

You are actually a moderate who is leaning liberal and libertarian

Sat, 04/01/2017 - 21:26

(Reply to #46) #47

SecularSonOfABi...

Yeah. I was just thinking out

Yeah. I was just thinking out loud. I predicted the moderate leaning to liberal part. I was actually surprised that it put me near the Libertarian area too.

Sun, 04/02/2017 - 02:38

(Reply to #47) #48

Endri Guri

Yeah, that's my result also.

Sat, 04/01/2017 - 15:58

#49

charvakheresy

Left (Liberal).

Attachments

Attach Image/Video?:

Yes

Sat, 04/01/2017 - 19:36

#50

mykcob4

I didn't cut and paste my

I didn't cut and paste my result. I have taken this test and many like it. As you can imagine I am far left all the way off the chart.

Mon, 04/03/2017 - 00:52

(Reply to #50) #51

Harry33Truman

So the chart was empty and

So the chart was empty and you couldn't post it? If the dot was off the chart, how did you know it was left or right?

Sat, 04/01/2017 - 20:47

#52

BAACKJD

I'm alot more liberal than I

I'm alot more liberal than I'd expected.

Mon, 04/03/2017 - 00:54

#53

Harry33Truman

Leftie

Mon, 04/03/2017 - 07:01

#54

Nyarlathotep

I submit that it is no

I submit that it is no accident that those who have the most radical viewpoints on (US) politics and government, are those who talk the most about it, but know the least. For example: people who post about it all the time, but every other sentence contains factually incorrect information.

/e And by knowing the least I don't mean people who don't know anything about it, they clearly know much more than the radicals who think they know something about it, but what the radicals "know" is factually incorrect!

Mon, 04/03/2017 - 20:09

#55

GarfeildRepublican

Another test result:http:/

Another test result:
http://politics.beasts.org/scripts/results?surveyid=462548488

Attachments

Attach Image/Video?:

Yes

Mon, 04/03/2017 - 21:47

(Reply to #55) #56

Nyarlathotep

question: It is immoral to be

question: It is immoral to be lazy. You marked some form of agree. As a mathematician I have to take issue with this!

Mon, 04/03/2017 - 22:00

(Reply to #56) #57

GarfeildRepublican

I meant that in a specific

I meant that in a specific way

Pages

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.

You are here

Attachments

Attach Image/Video?:

Attachments

Attach Image/Video?:

Attachments

Attach Image/Video?:

Pages