Progressives want to kill the elderly and the sick

reply to post by woodwardjnr


If the elite are ever going to have their ideal population according to the Georgia guide stones. They need to find away to off right around Six billion eight hundred and ninty million human beings. I don't think that is going to happen all at once. Though they will be wanting to start somewhere soon by my estimates..

dp

Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by woodwardjnr

 

If the elite are ever going to have their ideal population according to the Georgia guide stones. They need to find away to off right around Six billion eight hundred and ninty million human beings. I don't think that is going to happen all at once. Though they will be wanting to start somewhere soon by my estimates..

I'm not sure I'm a believer in there being a concerted effort by the elite to depopulate humanity. If there is, they are not doing a very good job of it.

reply to post by randyvs

If the elite are ever going to have their ideal population according to the Georgia guide stones

They must have rocks in their heads if they are listening to stones

reply to post by Matrix Rising

There will never be enough workers to pay out benefits as life expectancy increases.

Just continually adjust the retirement age so that ratio of workers/receivers stays cca the same as the lenght of life increases. Problem solved.

Current widening of the top of the pyramid is temporary, and will go away with baby boomers. After that, the number of retired persons would again come down, since old people dont grow on trees. Thats how demographic transition works. The whole fear mongering about demographic crisis is greatly exagerrated.

People talking about Bernie Madoff but he's did the same thing. His scheme was like S.S. and Medicare. He goes to jail and the crooked Politicians in Washington get pay raises.

The only difference is we can print money to prop up the pyramid scheme but that will just sink us deeper into debt as life expectancy increases.

Check out this video:

www.youtube.com...

reply to post by Maslo


Nope, it will never work because there's no money in the system. The Government spends the money. Remember Al Gore's lock box? This is what he was talking about. Put a lock box on the money coming in for S.S. and the Government can't spend it and replace it with I.O.U.'s.

The system is designed to crash as life expectancy increases so they need to be phased out over time.

reply to post by Matrix Rising


Oh really? I don't recall ever supporting euthanasia for the sick and elderly.

I'm sorry, but posts like this just show your political ignorance and show that you're pushing the other guy's agenda, which as I hate to tell you, is not much different from what you claim that progressives support.

Can we get an "American Two-Party Ignorance" forum?

reply to post by whatukno


Wow wuk, you do not care.

Whoda thought! Oh that would be me.

Glad to see YOU posted a COMMERCIAL from the DNC.

WHODA THOUGHT

Shill.

Anyway, you know the last DEMOCRAT shill that got busted for running a Social Security scheme?

Oh, that would be Madoff, better known as a ponzeii scheme. Hey, just keep thinking that the government is here to help, that will get you ALL THE TIME.

I've stated this on other posts, but it's worth repeating. . . .

Someone one said that America is the land of equal oppourtunity, NOT equal outcome. People look at the social security/medicaid/medicare programs as entitlements. And people wonder why we've become a nation of gimmegimmegimme. . . .. . . .

Originally posted by beyondrainbow
No reason to do away with the elderly.

It is enough to do away with Social Security, Welfare and all the Wealth Distribution schemes.
That is just not a duty of the state. Let everyone care for themselves. That would be justice.
I am sick of socialism and communism.

I am tired of having other people's hands on MY pocket.
F-U-C-K them!

Nice way of looking at your fellow Americans. Personally, I think the biggest difference between Canada and the United States is that we have a greater propensity for protecting those of us on the margins...cuz they're Canadian, too.

Seems to be a lot of Americans that would line up to toss them under the bus and call it a matter of constitutional rights. Peculiar.

reply to post by saltheart foamfollower


Might want to check the vote record embedded in the video before dismissing it.

Oh, too lazy? Too hell bent on your own partisan ideology? Well, that's just too bad for you.

The congressional record is there for you to see.

Also, want to prove that Madoff voted Democrat? You accused him, but put forth zero evidence to substantiate it.

reply to post by Matrix Rising





You have been listening to Limbaugh for way too long friend. I am a progressive and I do not want to kill anyone nor do I want to institute "death panels" and I certainly do not want to mess with medicare. Oh I also do not want to "privatize" my only retirement, social security. Why? Because it is secure the way it is now but if the private sector gets the money to play with it will all be lost in fiscal schemes that profit no one but fat cat ceo's.

You need to expand your horizons and learn the reality of the issues that confront our country. You can never do this by listening to only one side of the social equation. Depending on any talk radio or TV will only fill your head with twisted information that will melt your brain down into a glob of something like old gum on a sidewalk that is not to be stepped on.

Learn to think for yourself and find out what the terms "progressive, liberal, conservative, socialism, free markets and so on really mean. Depend on real scholarly works for this such as what can be found in a local library.

reply to post by beezzer




Social security, my only income in my retirement, IS an entitlement. Why? Because for all my working life I invested my money into it. That's why. Social security is NOT funded by ordinary taxes and has no impact on our annual budget beyond administrative costs. To listen to you one would think social security was the same as welfare. 'Taint so. If you think it is then prove it to me right now. Unemployment insurance is also paid for out of paychecks.

If you want to know the truth quit listening to idiots like Limbaugh and Hannity. They lie.

Stopping the stupidity of constant wars and reducing our "defense" budget" to a reasonable amount would save our country close to a trillion dollars a year.

Originally posted by trailertrash
reply to post by beezzer

 

Social security, my only income in my retirement, IS an entitlement. Why? Because for all my working life I invested my money into it. That's why. Social security is NOT funded by ordinary taxes and has no impact on our annual budget beyond administrative costs. To listen to you one would think social security was the same as welfare. 'Taint so. If you think it is then prove it to me right now. Unemployment insurance is also paid for our of paychecks.

If you want to know the truth quit listening to idiots like Limbaugh and Hannity. They lie.

Stopping the stupidity of constant wars and reducing our "defense" budget" to a reasonable amount would save our country close to a trillion dollars a year.

edit on 27-12-2010 by trailertrash because: (no reason given)

Don't know how old you are, so it's hard to gauge. But I'm in my 40's. I've put into social security for almost 3 decades. I'm not anticipating a dime. I won't allow my future to be held hostage by ANY political party. (the whole slave/puppet thing) I buy gold, I buy silver, and won't go anywhere NEAR the stock market. I am planning on supporting myself regardless of who is in power and despite what they want to give me. You are welcome to live off the pittance that the government wants to give you. I, on the other hand, will live how I choose, not how the government chooses.

Originally posted by trailertrash
Oh I also do not want to "privatize" my only retirement, social security. Why? Because it is secure the way it is now but if the private sector gets the money to play with it will all be lost in fiscal schemes that profit no one but fat cat ceo's.

Let's not forget that private schemes allow the administrators (read banks) to extract a pile of dough as 'fees'...as opposed to the public plans that they presently eye with lust. But hey...our collective lawmakers would never hand them the henhouse, would they?

Just noticed something interesting :

S.S. = Social security (as in this OP some people think is wanting to kill old people and the sick)

S.S. also = Schutzstaffel, the German SS that killed the old, the sick, the handicapped, and such for Hitler's Aryan solution...

Just a small, probably stupid observation that just came to mind...

Magnum

Progressives? Wow...

...Sarah Palin's assertion that the Obama administration plans to implement state-sponsored "death panels" to determine whether the elderly and infirm deserve life-saving medical treatment...

...Palin doubled down on her claims, saying that though "establishment voices" dismissed them, they nonetheless "rang true for many Americans."

So - we're back to this dribble again.

Of course, the U.S. government has no plans to "pull the plug on grandma"; the claims were false and the provision that sparked the rumors - a measure providing for free advice on how individuals can create living wills to inform their doctors and families what kind of end-of-life care they want — was removed from prospective legislation, just in case.

The Palin parrots are a dedicated bunch.

But let's look at some cases of states that have pursued such measures...

The details: In 1999, as governor of Texas, former U.S. President George W. Bush signed legislation giving medical professionals an unprecedented level of autonomous power and creating perhaps the country's only example of a "death panel" in action.

The Advance Directives Act, known also as the Texas Futile Care Law, mostly functions in the way Palin's so-called death panels would: It gives patients the right to dictate the kind of end-of-life care they would like to receive. But the law contains a provision allowing a hospital committee to arbitrate disputes between families and physicians. The boards can end life support for patients if the care is determined to be "futile." Under the current law, the hospital need only inform the patient's family two days before the committee meets to make its decision; the family has 10 days to transfer its loved one to another facility. The Texas legislature is currently considering legislation to extend the time frame.

Advance directives were encouraged by, among others, Palin herself. When still governor of Alaska, she issued a statement on Healthcare Decisions Day encouraging an "increase [in] the number of Alaska's citizens with advance directives."

Source for all above - NPR

Bush? Palin? Wait, they mean "Obama"... right? They have to mean Obama...

Bush and Palin? Them? Uh huh. Tried and true "progressives" I guess...

So, apparently thing have gotten so convoluted in these lies that we have now gone full on Orwellian. Make things up as you go and then blame the opposition for whatever it is that actually happened... Even if YOU yourself did it.

I just can't stop shaking my head at this. I truly can't.

~Heff

I am retired but too young to collect Social Security. Myself and employers have paid into it for some 40 years and I DO feel ENTITLED to get some of it back. I have myself taken care of but when the time comes that $1500 - $2000 a month or so, depending when I choose to draw, will be a nice little extra. So yeah, GIMME!