Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Canada trying to ban Ruger #1 single shot rifles
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="WoodsCraft" data-source="post: 3915748" data-attributes="member: 51836"><p>We’re gonna have to agree to disagree . Go back and re read what the definition of socialism is. North Korea by the way is communism or the extreme version of socialism. Social Security is a socialist scheme by every definition. </p><p></p><p>I am 100% right in my statements when I said the ratio of payors vs beneficiaries is decreasing go look it up . In 1945 there were 41 workers to 4 retirees . As of 2013—the most recent year for which data are available—there were only 2.8 workers in the system for each retiree collecting from it.</p><p></p><p>The ratio of workers to retirees is projected to continue falling. By 2034, the best-case scenario is 2.3 workers paying for each retiree, and in the worst-case scenario that ratio is 2 workers per retiree.</p><p></p><p>You keep ignorantly referring to the amount paid which is symptom of a decreasing availability of funds due to an ever shrinking pool of payors. Yes there is some mismanagement but the bigger issue is the declining revenue stream. One last time Social Security is becoming insolvent and most economists agree that is the case and it will be totally insolvent by 2038z</p><p></p><p></p><p>I really encourage you to educate yourself more in political science and accounting and how finances work.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="WoodsCraft, post: 3915748, member: 51836"] We’re gonna have to agree to disagree . Go back and re read what the definition of socialism is. North Korea by the way is communism or the extreme version of socialism. Social Security is a socialist scheme by every definition. I am 100% right in my statements when I said the ratio of payors vs beneficiaries is decreasing go look it up . In 1945 there were 41 workers to 4 retirees . As of 2013—the most recent year for which data are available—there were only 2.8 workers in the system for each retiree collecting from it. The ratio of workers to retirees is projected to continue falling. By 2034, the best-case scenario is 2.3 workers paying for each retiree, and in the worst-case scenario that ratio is 2 workers per retiree. You keep ignorantly referring to the amount paid which is symptom of a decreasing availability of funds due to an ever shrinking pool of payors. Yes there is some mismanagement but the bigger issue is the declining revenue stream. One last time Social Security is becoming insolvent and most economists agree that is the case and it will be totally insolvent by 2038z I really encourage you to educate yourself more in political science and accounting and how finances work. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Canada trying to ban Ruger #1 single shot rifles
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom