The thread was started by a guy named Bob, who is pulling the tired canard that Social Security tax is unethical, but he puts a religious twist to it that I have never seen before.
Bob: hehe..uhh mildly..that's the problem. They *are* dipping into those funds at various times and taking out loans against it and stuff. And in the end one thing gets shifted from here to there and you have money for bombs etc.
Buck: Once again, there is the problem: the military industrial complex, not social security. The fix is to make it illegal to borrow from social security, not destroy it.
Bob: Anyway...I don't see the current posters dealing with the reasoning presented.
Buck: Because we all have dealt with this before and are tired of rewriting it. You are not the first one to post ideas from the Cato Institute and the Libertarian party.
Bob: What about those poorest people who on average die now before they ever get to receive benefits? By supporting this fascist rule you are denying them the choice. (not to mention if people were just wise and invested they'd have more than the few percent gain you get in the best case scenario on SSI :-) )
Buck: That is the way social security is set up, it has always been that way. Is it fair? No, but that is how it has always been. Is that fascsist? No more than dismantling social security only to force that money we own to be put into Wallstreet for fat cats to take. You should know better than this, or are you not aware of the put options on American Airlines two days before 9-11? Playing the stockmarket is like going to a casino. The odds are on the house.
Bob: And furthermore you have your history wrong. Most people didn't live in destitution before social security except for the several years preceeding it. WHy? Because a false economy was developed which resulted in a crash that left economic turmoil known as the 'great depression'.
Buck: You are referring to the Federal Reserve which was established in 1914. Check the thread archives, we are all quite aware of this. There was mass poverty before this and I am not talking about the Great Depression.
Bob: My folks went through that. Mom was born in Baker Oregon during a trip with her folks who wound up on Southern California eventually. But they had to face some hard times as they saught to find direction that would allow them to put food on the table like many.
Buck: My grandparents were sharecroppers, I know all about this.
Bob: The federal government WHICH IN COOPERATION WITH THE MONEY MAGNETS CAUSED THE THING IN THE FIRST PLACE....
Buck: True, like I said most of us here are aware of the Federal Reserve.
Bob: began trying to make itself the 'savior' and used the situation to worm it's way into every aspect of people's life.
Bob: We've moved towards a socialistic system ever since which many resisted. Socialistic systems demoralize and destroy the fabric of a society. Here's why.
1) Human beings are, for the most part, willing to take the easy road at someone elses expense when possible.
Buck: Which is why abolishing the Estate Tax was a stupid idea, yet it was pushed at the same time "Social Security Reform" was being pushed. Anyone with a basic understanding of economics can see that these reforms were pushed for the rich by the rich. This crony capitalist canard of "people are just lazy" will not work on me. If you want to talk about lazy let's talk about rich kids and the economic pressures they will never feel.
Bob: 2) Some people are willing to let them and get drug down in the process to where they can't keep a roof over their own head. I've been there and done that. I'll tell you the story some day if you like.
Buck: I can barely keep a roof over my head and it is not because of Social Security. It is because that assfuck George W. Bush has fucked the economy so bad that you have to have two jobs just to make ends meet. I did not have this problem during the Clinton Administration.
Bob: 3) Other people are very good at using the situation to just pack in more wealth for themself. "The rich get richer" as it were.
Buck: Uh huh, which is why the rich are the most outspoken against Social Security. I am not buying it.
Bob: 4) And yet a few others try to discern whether people really have a direction in life or whether they are just living to satisfy themselves. I personally don't feel compelled to offer security of any kind to those people. I don't want to be in the same boat with them. If I want to drive I should have to pay insurance and taxes through lisencing to help keep roads up...and my own gas :-).
Buck: And you do because driving a car is a private enterprise and not a social program.
Bob: I personally have no desire to be involved with the government in any other way. If I'm free..then leave me alone in other ways. Nobody has the right to tell me what I'm going to work for or I say forget it. Come and put me in jail and feed me if that's the way it has to be. Wouldn't it be nicer just to give me my freedom and let me serve other people at my own disgression?
Buck: All this outrage for a social program yet no more than a sentence regarding 50% of your taxes going to kill people. More of your money goes to needless wars than Social Security, complain about that.
Bob: Historically some of the most successful type 3) swine...are people who tell people the right things and become dictators. But another class entirely are people who ride behind the scenes. The install front people in governments and then pull strings from a distance. Often through advisors who are on payroll etc. Naturally.That's just the way filthy rich people are often.
Buck: The filthy rich you refer to would like social security abolished because they pay more into social security and more in taxes because they earn more, and when they retire they spend more. Their excuse for not wanting to pay for social security is exactly the same is yours: they don't need it so why should they pay for it. Why should they pay for lazy people (translation: everyone poorer than them.)
Bob: Anyway dont' be naive. THere are realities on this planet. Most people think of how they can use others for their own benefit. And I don't want anything to do with those people. I don't want to pay for their retirement and I SURE don't want to pay into a fund that they are going to use to leverage wars, etc.
Buck: I am not naive, and I would watch your tone if I were you. My grandfather had three pharmacies in downtown Los Angeles. He is hardly a lazy person who didn't contribute. He survives because of social security. Once again, make it illegal to borrow funding from social security, do not destroy it. Your idea of "reform" is akin to throwing the baby out with the bathwater, even my hardcore Republican father can see that.
Bob: And that's functionally what you are doing if you support SS. It's an illusion. It's all hype. The reason people suddenly suffered after decades of growing prosperity in the US...recall the 'roaring 20's when people had quite enough such that overindulgance tended to be a problem...
Buck: What?!? America as a whole wasn't overindulgant, it was the upper class that was. And that is not the reason for the Great Depression.
Bob: then we had a variety of situations abroad including WW1 but overall a robust economy leading out the industrial revolution, and before that we were a nation recovering from a civil war but where nobody was starving right?
Buck: No one was starving because we had a different kind of society, namely people knew how to farm then and there wasn't as many people in the world, nor were they solely dependent on a system to farm for them.
Bob: I mean unless they were derelicts who had burned every bridge pretty much. Any responsible person could find work or usually a kind soul....
Buck: Unless you were a minority, then you had a good chance you lived in poverty, were treated like shit, and had the wonderful possibility of being beaten to death. Sorry, I don't see the good old days as being as good to a person of color such as myself.
A perfect example of this: my two grandfathers. My grandfather who is still alive was put through six years of pharmacy school by his old boss Mr. Harding.
My other grandfather worked his ass off as a mechanic and was never offered a free chance to higher learning by his boss.
Do you want to guess which one was a minority?
Bob: Anyway that's what troubles my heart. People's attention has been turned away from their personal responsibility to show love to one another and a dependence on the government (and a damned corrupt one) has been exchanged. YOU DO NOT see the DANGER of this?? Hellloooo? :-)
Buck: This is not because of social security and it would be an extreme stretch to say that if social security were abolished that Americans would become wholesome and family orientated again. Sorry, I don't buy revisionist history and oversimplfications like that. If society is heartless it isn't because of a social program. There are several factors for that, but it starts with the family. If you want to blame something, blame our love of capitalism and the stress of materialism that flows from embracing such a system so wholeheartedly.
Bob: Have you ever heard the phrase "You've been had"? -Bob
Buck: No, I have been living in a cave. The very same cave that has sheltered me from knowing about the Federal Reserve, Social Security, and history before the Great Depression
Round Two, Fight!!!
Bob: It doesn't seem you read my first statement.
Buck: Actually, I did.
Bob: I'm not for 'dismantling' social security in particular. I mean if it happens so be it. But I'm not pushing that.
Buck: Sure you are not, and "Intelligent Design" is not creationism repakaged in a psuedoscientific wrapper.
Bob: I'm pushing a law which prevents the government from imposing fascist rule over people regarding how they choose to set up their security.
Buck: No, you a pushing a law that would cripple the social society program. The "its my money and it is against all liberty to make me pay into social security because I don't plan to use social security" argument is the same the rich pose. If they don't pay into it, a massive chunk of social security will be missing and it will not remain solvent.
Bob: As a Chrisitan I am commanded *not* to put my security in society.
Buck: No, you are told not to put your faith in mankind.I was with you in weakness and in fear and in much trembling, and my message and my preaching were not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, so that your faith would not rest on the wisdom of men, but on the power of God.
--1 Corinthians 2:3-5
Bob: So this comes down to nothing more than a violation of my constituional freedome of religion.
Buck: How is paying social security putting your faith in man? No one can put your faith in anything but you.
Bob: If my religion were hurting other people I can see outlawing my religion.
Buck: Did I say I advocated outlawing your religion? No? Then stop trying to set up strawmen.
Bob: However my religion hurts only myself because after all I'm the stupid one who has a 'fairy tale' god who isn't going to provide for me, right?
Buck: You said it, not me. But since we are on the subject, if your church is preaching politics then yes it is violating the seperation of church and state and therefore shoud lose its tax exempt status.
Bob: I'm the fool. Right? So who am I hurting by *not* casting my lot in with the rest of the people on this?
Buck: This isn't a religious matter, you are just trying to make it one because you don't want to pay your share to society. But since you are trying to make this a religious subject then I am sure you will appreciate this.And they *sent their disciples to Him, along with the Herodians, saying, "Teacher, we know that You are truthful and teach the way of God in truth, and defer to no one; for You are not partial to any.
"Tell us then, what do You think? Is it lawful to give a poll-tax to Caesar, or not?" But Jesus perceived their malice, and said, "Why are you testing Me, you hypocrites? "Show Me the coin used for the poll-tax." And they brought Him a denarius. And He *said to them, "Whose likeness and inscription is this?" They *said to Him, "Caesar's." Then He *said to them, "Then render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and to God the things that are God's."
--Matthew 22:16-20
Bob: MYSELF! Right? Not others. In fact I'm making it easier on others because after all I am a deficient ritard who chooses to worship an 'imaginary friend' right?
Buck: Cease and dissist with the strawman arguments please.
Bob: See...you can't have it both ways. Deal with the logic you are presented and stop skirting around it please those of you in particular who call me that. :-) Mildly, in your case simply deal with the fact that there is an ethical infringement against people who are for whatever reason consciensious objectors to involvement and it certainly is not constitutional to dictate how people choose to plan their retirement.
Buck: A consciencious objector is someone who refuses to go to war because they find it morally wrong kill people, not someone who stretches Bible verses to mean something entirely different because they don't want to pay their fair share of a social program.
Bob: American grants people the freedom to pursue happiness in whatever way they like so long as it doesn't violate someone elses rights basically. That's why I call this a 'nazi' law and it needs to be done away with. -Bob
Buck: I wonder where the forcing of my money towards "Faith-based" Initiatives falls under your diatribe?
*impersonating Bob* Oh shit I am losing the theological discussion, better change the subject...
Bob: PS and social security is an illegal tax as I said. It violates a contitutional right. If you are for trashing the contitution..then keep bickering instead of supporting the obvious. -bob
Buck: Since we have established there is no valid theological reason for the dismantling of Social Security you have moved on to the "Constitutionalist" argument that Republicans and Libertarians love to use.
To which I ask these questions:
The IRS is not in the Constitution, are you going to fight that?
The U.S. Army has no provision for itself in the Constitution, are you up in arms about that?
Their is no law granting corporations corporate welfare, are you going to challenge that?
Their is no limit to Presidential terms in the Constitution, are you going to challenge that?
There is nothing in the Constitution concerning abortions, are you going to challenge that?
There is no law defining marriage between a woman and a man, are you then for same sex marriages?
As you can see, just because it is not in the original Constitution doesn't mean that it doesn't or can't exist. What will be your next argument I wonder.
Now if you said I don't want to pay Social Security I could handle that because that is just your opinion, but when you try to twist scripture to support your political views or say something is illegal because it isn't in the original Constitution, my patience wears thin.
*Bob's internal monologue* Oh that didn't work, time to start acting like I am winning as opposed to actually winning. Maybe no one will notice.
Bob: I have a hard time relating to your whole direction here.
Buck: Really? I thought I made myself quite clear.
Bob: Basically I'm reverse slam dunking this whole line but you arn't catching it because you are programmed to look another direction it seems.
Buck: Programmed? I like that... tell you what, I'll keep giving you enough rope and you keep hanging yourself. Whaddaya say?
Bob: Listen....the first statement you post just makes no sense to me. Dismantling the SS system is no concern to me. It's ultimately not a 'right' program. But I can't explain that NOR is it my JOB to explain that to unbelievers. Follow me?
Buck: It is very simple, Social Security works because people have to pay into it. Some people do not make it to 65 which means their money stays in to give to others. Other people like the rich pay into it but don't need it because they are rich. Their money stays in there for the people who do use it. The way Social Security is designed rests upon less people taking out money than the overall that put in. This helps to guard against inflation and it will pretty much stay solvent with minor overhauls unless people start pulling money out of it. Your argument is no different from that of the Cato Institute's and both are designed to cause Social Security to crumble.
Bob: I'm talking about it from totally the other direction. I'm saying this country does supposedly have not only a process by which the people *are* the government...but a constitution which protects certain rights for citizens.
Buck: And which of the Bill of Rights is it that "protects" us from Social Security?
Bob: I am a citizen born in the US. Yet I'm being denied freedom of religion as I'm supposedly forced (though they'll have to put me in jail first..) to be part of the SS system. This system by it's very name violates a founding principle of my faith. That I'm to trust God solely to be my provider and to give glory ONLY to him in that.
Buck: I am not buying this horseshit for a minute. Social Security is not violating your religion a damn bit. They force you to pay, so? What part of Render unto Caesar what is his do you not understand? Second, you don't have to cash those Social Security checks do you? Third, how is paying Social Security glorifying the U.S. government as opposed to God?
Bob: Are you following me?
Buck: There is no theological argument against paying Social Security, are you following me?
Bob: So, if you support manditory social security, you support the violation of religious freedom.
Buck: Bullshit, and you know it.
Bob: I've seen bogus examples trying to equate this to car insurance. I post a logical rebuttal and nobody answers. How can they? It's an apple/orange comparison and they know it's not a valid one. Cars can just outright kill people! People other than the driver!!
Buck: That wasn't my argument and he wasn't saying Social Security is the same as auto insurance, he was trying to point out what a ludicrous thing to fight. hence might as well protest car insurance.
Bob: If I'm driving my own savings plan, it is not going to harm anyone else if it fails to provide for me at some point, then people have the right to deny me service (though in my case I've spent my life reaching out to people in need and sacrificing my own savings...oh well. )
Buck: Good for you.
Bob: So basically if this is the case I'll be content that my life is a testimony that people simply don't have love. Read Jesus story of the rich man and Lazarus.
Buck: I am quite familiar with the Bible, Lazarus, the rich man, and which one ends up in Abraham's bossom... thank you.
Bob: The federal government wishes to deny me this right. Who will speak up for me? That's all I'm asking. If you personally wish to be part of social security I have nothing to say against you on it. You are doing the best you know to do and that's your decision and I wouldn't want to spend my time trying to deny you that decision.
Buck: You cannot claim religious persicution on this one, that is why no one speaks up for you. You do not have a case.
Bob: However, others *have* spent their time trying to deny me my decision. Follow? -Bob
Buck: *sigh* Believe it or not I am not an idiot and am well versed in the Bible. You do not have a case for religious persicution.
Uh oh, Bob isn't looking too good, time to bring out the strawmen and bald faced lies of character defamation...
Bob: I'm not reading past 'your damned religion'.
Buck: I never said that, that is a lie, and I believe lying is a sin.
Bob: SOrry I don't feel very 'hung'.
Buck: Dude, I don't want to hear any self assessments of your package, keep that to yourself.
Bob: You are the one losing control of your tongue and hanging yourself. If you want to reason I'll reason. But the name calling non-sense isn't reasoning.
Buck: Now you are lying about me calling you names... tsk, tsk, tsk. "You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor." Does that ring a bell?
Bob: Before that I'm seeing that you claim it's not denying me freedom of religion to force me to be affiliated with a system called social security when
1) My God calls me specifically in the text of the bible to not put my trust in man/society.
Buck: Unless your God is Paul, God said no such thing. And it is "faith" not "trust." That doesn't matter though because I pay my taxes, social security, etc. and I sure as fuck don't don't trust my government so that argument wouldn't hold up anyway.
Bob: 2) To avoid the appearance of evil (such as being affiliated with systems which do exactly *that*...)
Buck: So I take it you completely avoid the monetary system of the United States then? I take it you barter for food with pelts and labor? I sure hope the food you eat isn't inspected by the FDA, because you would be eating food that was approved by a system (or an appearance of evil as you refer to them.)
Bob: 3) To *not* save up for tomorrow in Jesus' teaching in the beattitudes.
Buck: From you:If I'm driving my own savings plan, it is not going to harm anyone else if it fails to provide for me at some point, then people have the right to deny me service (though in my case I've spent my life reaching out to people in need and sacrificing my own savings...oh well. )
Oops, I guess that is another sin you have committed by having a savings in the first place. All joking aside, it is not a sin and God commanded no such thing. Jesus did tell his disciples not to worry about savings after a man in the crowd tried to use Jesus to settle a dispute between his him and his brother over an inheritance:Someone in the crowd said to Him, "Teacher, tell my brother to divide the family inheritance with me." But He said to him, "Man, who appointed Me a judge or arbitrator over you?" Then He said to them, "Beware, and be on your guard against every form of greed; for not even when one has an abundance does his life consist of his possessions." And He told them a parable, saying, "The land of a rich man was very productive. "And he began reasoning to himself, saying, `What shall I do, since I have no place to store my crops?' "Then he said, `This is what I will do: I will tear down my barns and build larger ones, and there I will store all my grain and my goods. `And I will say to my soul, "Soul, you have many goods laid up for many years to come; take your ease, eat, drink and be merry."' "But God said to him, `You fool! This very night your soul is required of you; and now who will own what you have prepared?' "So is the man who stores up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God." And He said to His disciples, "For this reason I say to you, do not worry about your life, as to what you will eat; nor for your body, as to what you will put on. "For life is more than food, and the body more than clothing. "Consider the ravens, for they neither sow nor reap; they have no storeroom nor barn, and yet God feeds them; how much more valuable you are than the birds! "And which of you by worrying can add a single hour to his life's span? "If then you cannot do even a very little thing, why do you worry about other matters? "Consider the lilies, how they grow: they neither toil nor spin; but I tell you, not even Solomon in all his glory clothed himself like one of these. "But if God so clothes the grass in the field, which is alive today and tomorrow is thrown into the furnace, how much more will He clothe you? You men of little faith! "And do not seek what you will eat and what you will drink, and do not keep worrying. "For all these things the nations of the world eagerly seek; but your Father knows that you need these things.
--Luke 12:13-30
He is telling them to have faith, to guard against over abundance, and not worry where their next meal will come from, he is not saying if you pay your Social Security taxes you will go to Hell. Besides, like I have already said, you can always give your Social Security checks away to the poor when you get them.
Bob: So yes..actually..forcing me not to do those things is an infringement of my religious rights. No different than forcing me to bow to idols actually. Since I'm commanded specifically to do neither.
Buck: No it isn't and your argument wouldn't hold up in a court of law because I am sure you use money, and own more than the sandals on your feet and the clothes on your back, which Jesus also advised against.
Bob: If you can't see that well I'm sorry. I thought I was talking to a reasonable person. Perhaps I was mistaken. -Bob
Buck: Very cute Bob, I am not the one taking Bible verse out of context, now am I? Your whole argument became null and void after I posted this:And they *sent their disciples to Him, along with the Herodians, saying, "Teacher, we know that You are truthful and teach the way of God in truth, and defer to no one; for You are not partial to any.
"Tell us then, what do You think? Is it lawful to give a poll-tax to Caesar, or not?" But Jesus perceived their malice, and said, "Why are you testing Me, you hypocrites? "Show Me the coin used for the poll-tax." And they brought Him a denarius. And He *said to them, "Whose likeness and inscription is this?" They *said to Him, "Caesar's." Then He *said to them, "Then render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and to God the things that are God's."
--Matthew 22:16-20
The Pharisees were trying to trick Jesus with the question of the poll tax yet he tells them to pay it because it is Caesar's money in the first place, just like when paying your Social Security tax it is the Federal Reserve's money in the first place. If you cannot grasp this simple concept then you are the one who "can't see that well."
You have no Constitutional or theological case for not paying Social Security, end of discussion.
The sad part is I am an Atheist and I know more about the Bible than Bob here. Bob's arguments are intellectually dishonest and he seems to ignore verses that disprove his world view. This of course, is not a new or unique experience for me.
No comments:
Post a Comment