And the sad part is that rightfully or wrongfully they ALL think they're ENTITLED to that "free" money whether it's early retirement (prior to age 62), mental/sacroiliac disabilities which are difficult to disprove, or substinance welfare in general.
The Greeks and French like most of Europe had GENERATIONS of deadbeats who inherited positions/pensions/government contracts. When they had that rescinded & had at least 50% taken away due to austerity measures, they picked up bricks. That's not going to help them this time however. The treasury has NOTHING and many are losing generations of family property which were previously tax free.

10-9-8-7-6-5... waiting for American squawking chickens to return to coops after free ranging all this time.[ram27bat]

bloody spaniard wrote:

I read the disability thread and it seems like the prevailing thought is if you can leverage the system to benefit the individual then to he'll with the good of the country or the manny.

Lou Sanis wrote:

Also those that retire young. That is simply quitting and allowing this country to fail. Send them all.

Lou Sanis wrote:

I'm with you to an extent. There are others that need to go too. People who still can work, yet don't, need to go to. I read the disability thread and it seems like the prevailing thought is if you can leverage the system to benefit the individual then to he'll with the good of the country or the manny. Also those that retire young. That is simply quitting and allowing this country to fail. Send them all.

Lou Sanis wrote:

[quote=Lou Sanis]I'm with you to an extent. There are others that need to go too. People who still can work, yet don't, need to go to. I read the disability thread and it seems like the prevailing thought is if you can leverage the system to benefit the individual then to he'll with the good of the country or the manny. Also those that retire young. That is simply quitting and allowing this country to fail. Send them all.[/quote]
=d> =d> =d> =d> =d> =d> =d> =d> =d>
Uncle Sugar's free ride is over 'cause he's broke and paying with fake credit.

Same thing applies to retired, golfing folks who have adequate reserves and still suck at Uncle Sam's wrinkled teats with concave cheeks for all its worth. Benefits should be more difficult to get AND should be prorated based on need. None of this pea/shell hiding of assets among family so that you can qualify either. If you're able and don't like working get your fat lazy ass the eff out. These will be among the first animals to panic and throw rocks when the checks stop as they have in other parts of the world.

Brew, everyone knows the stranglehold that the Goldman Sachs of the world have on this country.
Even the architect of the "trickle down" theory, David Stockman, realized it didn't really work. It merely empowered the loyal-less, parasitic corporate culture. As proud Reaganites we BOTH cried.

bloody spaniard wrote:

That's interesting. I happen to know first hand, millionaires who collect social security. They must be the exception to the "means testing" rule.
Just another lie. Guess it all depends on who does your books.

And the Goldman folks that I was referring to are the ones assigned to sensitive government finance posts that dictate policy.

bloody spaniard wrote:

Want some evidence? Well, it turns out that Social Security is already means tested: your benefit level is calculated as 90% of your first $749 in monthly pre-retirement earnings, 32% of earnings up to $4,517, and 15% of your earnings above that. This means that high-income earners get a smaller benefit as a percentage of their income than low earners do.

That's interesting. I happen to know first hand, millionaires who collect social security. They must be the exception to the "means testing" rule.
Just another lie. Guess it all depends on who does your books.

And the Goldman folks that I was referring to are the ones assigned to sensitive government finance posts that dictate policy.

bloody spaniard wrote: