Comments by "whyamimrpink78" (@whyamimrpink78) on "Are Entitlements On The Republican Chopping Block?" video.

  1. Antonius Britannia You don't want people to work just for the sake of working. I can have people dig holes in the desert and they will be working.  You want wealth to be generated.  When the tractor was created there were less workers in the field but more food was being produced.  You never said per retiree.  Wage stagnation is a myth.  http://www.cnbc.com/2014/01/29/-wage-stagnationcommentary.html http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323468604578249723138161566 You have to consider a couple things. One, technology is much better.  Cars, for example, are safe, last longer, get better mileage, have more accessories, etc. Overall, cars are cheaper.  Smart phones have more computing power than what put a man on the moon.  People's lives are better overall.  You are simply looking at wages and not what you can buy with them. You also have to consider Skilled Bias Technological Change.  If people want higher wages the have to develop more skills.  We have a lot of work that can be done in scientific research, the medical field, engineering etc.  People just don't want to pursue those careers because it is a lot of work.  I get stressed out doing it myself. It is much easier for people to do what you are doing and simply say "wages have been stagnate" and "the government should provide me things".  This is why we have problems and a growing income inequality (which I admit is a problem).  You have people that actually work and people who don't.  SS needs changed.  That will be a great start.
    2
  2. SeanMcFarlinTRE Other countries have just as many problems, if not more than the US. 
    2
  3. Anyone ever thought of this, how the thought of changing SS is scaring people? Have people become that dependent on the federal government?
    2
  4. pete sampson Ok, remove the cap and a 100 years from now it is losing money again.  Now what?  Also, the point was that we have become that dependent on the federal government.  That is a scary thought.  You know those corporate dems are saying "vote for us and you SS will be saved, while we get rich off of our corporate donors".
    2
  5. I support this. This is just another list of things Trump and republicans are pushing that I know will succeed and make democrats took stupid. Remember how foolish you looked with Clinton lost? That was only the beginning.
    1
  6. I remembered the bailouts. Recessions happen, recovery is key. The bailouts hindered recovery. If the federal government would have done nothing then we would have recovered in around a year or so. Just like the crash of 1921. But instead the federal government tried to "fix" the economy by spending money like it did after the crash of 1929.
    1
  7. Antonius Britannia The bailouts was the federal government mismanaging money, just like SS was.  They are the same.
    1
  8. Antonius Britannia Nothing is being gambled. 
    1
  9. Antonius Britannia Who said anything about the stock market? Even at that what will happen is that the money will be allocated in some way.  No different than if one company fails another takes over it if left alone.  That is why despite numerous companies failing people can still get jobs. The reason why SS is running out of money is because it is literally money that is just sitting there.  It isn't being invested to grow anything, it is just sitting there.
    1
  10. Antonius Britannia So what?  With the stock market you invest it to grow wealth.  If the stock fails another company will take over.  That is how it works.  That is how wealth grows. 1. I agree, but that was expected.  Do you really think the federal government was going to tax you for your benefit? 2. I agree, but they are also working longer 3. Not really.  Plus, even if less people are working that is actually good.  We don't want people to work just to work 4. Wage stagnation is a myth As a whole, with SS, the money is just sitting there and not being invested.  Thus it doesn't grow.  It is no different than if you were to put $100,000 beneath your bed for 40 years.  It doesn't grow or create wealth.  40 years later you are no better off. That is why SS is losing money.
    1
  11. I see this as a great idea. Seriously, social programs are not working. It is time to get rid of them.
    1
  12. Social security is running out of money. Saying we need to increase some taxes is not the solution. When we start to run out of money again, then what? More tax increase? This is the perfect example of how socialism only works until you run out of other people's money.
    1
  13. C Wilson So that is your only rebuttal?  You are a perfect example of why Trump won.  People don't like ignorant individuals like you that can't even come up with an intelligent rebuttal.  How about you attack the content and not the grammar on a youtube comment I wrote in 5 minutes. But I know what will happen in the end.  You will just call me a racist, bigot, sexist, etc. 
    1
  14. C Wilson Your only argument is to attack grammar on a youtube comment that I wrote in a few minutes.  This is not my PhD dissertation, this is a youtube comment.  The fact that you can only attack grammar and not content shows you don't know anything.  No different than when others call their opponent a bigot or racist with zero justification.  What safe space?  I am here willing to take on any criticism you can give.  If all you have is to attack my grammar then fine, I will walk away the winner.  If you can attack the content than we can see who actually knows more.
    1
  15. C Wilson Sorry you are so perfect that you don't make mistakes.  I didn't whine at all.  I am simply saying that you have nothing relevant to say at all on this topic.  It is clear that you can't debate me because you refuse to. You are too scared to thus you rather distract rather than debate.  Also, you use of profanity shows you immaturity.  See, I can play that game as well. 
    1
  16. C Wilson Again, youtube comment written in a few minutes.  I just read a peer reviewed paper from the JPCL (that is the Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters) that had an axis mislabeled.  That was from a tenured professor.  I guess according to you that person is an idiot as well. 
    1
  17. C Wilson Doesn't matter.  I put more effort in my publications and PhD dissertation when I write them.  The simple fact you refuse to even debate me shows you are scared. So run away.  Run away. Game over. (notice the lack of profanity).
    1
  18. C Wilson I get it, you are scared.  I win.
    1
  19. C Wilson One, I am getting a PhD in physical chemistry.  Next, I see you are running away scared again.  You want to complain about education, an intelligent individual will be willing to take on the challenge of a debate and not just throw up distraction.  If I did that in any of my talks, or even my PhD defense, I would get laughed out of the room. . You just did that and I am laughing at you.  So run away.
    1
  20. C Wilson Yeah, you don't operate a nuclear power plant..  If you do here is a quiz, A point charge q is brought to a position a distance d away from an infinite plane conductor held at zero potential.  Using the method of images, find a: the surface charge density induced on teh plane, and plot it b: the force between the plane and the charge by using Coulomb's law for the force between  the charge and its image c: the total force acting on the plane by integrating sigma^2/2eplison over the whole plane That is a good start.  Sorry if your mind is blown. But you can harp all you want about my writing skills (again, on a youtube comment).  I have actual knowledge and skills.  That is why you are criticizing my grammar and not the content of the comment.  I am willing to take you on a debate on the content but you keep throwing up distraction.  I know you don't run a nuclear power plant because you attitude would never get you hired.
    1
  21. C Wilson Ah, and now you are calling me a "queer" .  This is quite fun.  You have no ability to debate the content so you just keep throwing up distraction.  I can communicate just fine.  You know exactly what I am trying to say.  Instead you feel the need to correct it instead of debating the content. 
    1
  22. C Wilson Plus, on that quiz I got that problem for Classical Electrodynamics from Jackson.  I want you to reference any equation, and give a full description on how those equations are derived and their physical interpretation.  If you worked at a nuclear power plant this should be cake for you since this is essentially an undergraduate problem. 
    1
  23. C Wilson Yep, keep throwing up distractions by pointing out a typo.  Seriously, is that all you have?  Attack the content.  You know what I am saying.  Also, stop with the profanity, what are you like 12?  Also, E&M is very applicable to nuclear power.  E&M is one of the basic courses in nuclear power as electromagnetic forces are one of the four forces that is fully understood.  That is how I know you don't work at a nuclear power plant because you don't understand basic E&M.  A lot of my friends study fusion for their research and E&M is the core of their research.  You refuse to debate the content because you simply can't.  All you have are distractions.  I messed up one time on one of my talks during my graduate seminar.  I still got an A- in the course and was able to debate a professor on the mistake to where I showed him I understood the content and I simply made a mistake.  That is what intelligent people do. Kids like you just throw up distractions. That is  why I am getting a PhD and you don't even have a job.
    1
  24. C Wilson "then how the hell could you ever hope to debate me?" You said that earlier.  You are willing to but instead keep throwing up distractions.  You have no ability to debate content, period.  I make a typo and you think I misspelled "the" when I clearly spelled it correctly in the rest of the comment.  You don't even understand that a typo is.  You feel a typo=misspelling. 
    1
  25. C Wilson Seriously, find a job and learn how to communicate like an adult. All the profanity will hinder you in actually going somewhere. And learn to debate.  Just pointing at grammar is not going to get you far. I know from experience.  One of the smartest individuals I know has very poor grammar but does amazing research.  In your mind he would be an idiot.  But in reality he is incredibly smart.  This is why I am getting a doctorate and you don't even have a job.
    1
  26. C Wilson Your example is the Navy....really?  That is a very poor example.  But whatever, keep throwing up distractions.  I see it now, you work a government job because you were too worthless to get a job in the private sector.  I was recruited by the military due to my experience in physics and chemistry but I am pursuing a job that actually pays well since I know I have the skills to get one.  In all of this all you have done is throw up distractions.  You refuse to debate the original topic at hand. "Seriously all of your crying will hinder you in actually going somewhere" Shouldn't you put a comma there?  Oh, wait, I won't go off of that because I actually know what I am talking about. Seriously, all of your profanity and dodging of questions and issues will get you nowhere.  That is why I am going to get a job that does not involve living off of the government.  I don't have to make fun of you because I am already superior.  If you weren't a "bitch" you would get a real job and not have to drop down to government work.  You could never compete in the private sector because they will look right past you in a heartbeat.
    1
  27. C Wilson With all of your profanity I know that you don't have to take on the challenge of actually having to communicate with people, having to deal with different personalities and be on your toes.  You don't have to deal with someone who is a jerk or in a bad mood and try to work with them or convince them that you way is the correct way.  You don't have to interact with someone in a way that could cost you money.  I do.  I know how to communicate very well with others which is why I am getting  PhD and will get a job in the private sector will you will be stuck on a sub.  I didn't have to take the easy way out because I actually challenged myself.  I take on new challenges everyday which is why I won't back down from a debate.  You take the easy way out, remember that.
    1
  28. C Wilson Face it, you dropped down to a government job because you lack communication and debating skills.  Admit your flaws.  I can admit that I am poor at writing, but with editing my papers and my PhD defense will be flawless.  In a youtube comment that takes a few minutes, at most, to write I don't mind mistakes because the content is there. I can write very eloquent youtube comments but I have a life.  I worry about content.  In my published papers I do edit them.   When someone attacks the grammar and typos on youtube comments I immediately discredit them like I did you.  You don't have a job, period.  If you did you won't use so much profanity and you would be willing to debate the content.  Enjoy college as soon as you graduate high school.  Your professors are going to eat you alive. 
    1
  29. C Wilson You are falling apart. Someone as unstable as you will never work on a nuclear sub. I am calm here.  I just love pointing out your flaws which are 1. your constant use of profanity which shows your lack of communication skills 2. your lack of ability to debate and thus you just throw up distractions I am all for having a civil debate here.  Instead you attacked my grammar as if it had something to do with my knowledge on the subject.  This shows you can't debate, period. 
    1
  30. C Wilson Nope, you are volatile and immature.  No one in the military is like that.  Like I said, you probably have family that is in the military and thus you have some experience based on what they said.  But you are not in the military at all.  "I don't make spelling errors like you do." Actually, I never made a spelling error, I made grammar errors and typos like you do.  A spelling error would be spelling grammar with an "e" like "grammer".  I never did that.  I made a few typos and grammar errors, but that is it.  You don't even know the difference between a spelling error, grammar error, and a typo.  Face it, you made grammar errors.  You made mistakes like I did when you bragged about how you don't.  You fell apart.  We didn't even have to debate the issue and I still made you look foolish.
    1
  31. C Wilson Again with the distraction.  Face it, you are a fool.  You refused to debate the content.  You criticized my grammar and claimed you don't make mistakes.  And when you make a mistake you backpedaled.  Sorry, you are fool.
    1
  32. C Wilson Wow, the fool keeps coming back for more.  Just admit it, you can't communicate, you can't debate, and I can add that you also have a big ego that got you in trouble. 
    1
  33. C Wilson I a still trying to figure you out .Why don't you just give up?  You are a fool.  You can't debate, you can't communicate, and your immature ego got you in trouble.  Move on while you still have a shred of dignity left.
    1
  34. C Wilson Hey, I have a job to go to tomorrow and have actual work to get done.  I am going to bed. You can do what you want, I don't care.  It is clear that you are a fool. Have fun in high school tomorrow, unless you got the week off of Thanksgiving which I know some school districts do.  
    1
  35. C Wilson So now you hate gay people?  I am not gay, but you are making a homophobic remark. Enjoy your days off from high school.
    1
  36. C Wilson You called me gay as if it was an insult.  You clearly hate gay people.
    1
  37. C Wilson Why do you hate gay people?
    1
  38. C Wilson You called me gay as if it was some sort of insult.  To you being gay is a bad thing.
    1
  39. C Wilson Don't you have a KKK rally to go to?  I mean, you must be in line to give a speech about how bad gay people are.
    1
  40. C Wilson I get it, you hate gay people.  Don't try to recruit me to your anti-gay crowd.
    1
  41. C Wilson Why are you anti-gay?  What's wrong with gay people? 
    1
  42. Yep, because in government everything is permanent.......
    1
  43. Hamzah, you need to study history more. Before 1929 our economy was great. The times of more government involvement were during the great depression and the recession of 2007. Our recovery was slow for a reason. Programs like SS don't create wealth since that money is just sitting there. Also, you talk about wealth inequality, there are two issues there. One, you shouldn't be taxing wealth because wealth is not income. Next, wealth inequality exist simply because beyond owning a home the average person has little to no wealth. Finally, the reason why we have growing income inequality is because of our tax rate and social programs. You are creating a system where those who work hard will pull away from the pack and those who don't remain poor while the middle class gets screwed.
    1
  44. I like it.
    1
  45. And after you remove the cap and we run out of money again, then what?
    1
  46. ShadyDawgWWCF And how do you know they won't rob you?  Also, it is running out of money because it doesn't generate any wealth.  It is no different than you putting $100,000 under your bed and then pulling it our 40 years later.  That money didn't generate anything.
    1
  47. ShadyDawgWWCF SS is a waste of money. 
    1
  48. ShadyDawgWWCF Military is constitutional and benefits all.  Seniors will be fine.
    1
  49. ShadyDawgWWCF Those college grads, what major did they get?  What is wrong with taking care of your grandparents?  Who cares what most Americans approve of?  We don't run on a mob rule. If so then set it up at the state level.
    1
  50. ShadyDawgWWCF Nothing at the federal level is ever determined by the majority.  Also, government is confined by the constitution. 
    1
  51. ShadyDawgWWCF It is not political suicide to get rid of a failing policy.  SS is unconstitutional.  Point to me where it is?  You can't.  Thus it defaults to the states via the 10th amendment. 
    1
  52. ShadyDawgWWCF I don't buy those numbers. Plus, there are several issues beyond SS.  Also, people wanted healthcare reform.  They got it with Obamacare.  The democrats lost the midterms.  So don't buy into those numbers.  "Taking money out of peoples checks and then saying,"sorry, no more," that is unconstitutional." I agree.  SS is an unconstitutional program. "Point to me where it is unconstitutional?" Point to me where it is constitutional?  You can't.  That is the point.  The constitution says what the fed can and cannot do.  If it doesn't exist in the constitution then it defaults to the states via the 10th amendment.  That is why it is unconstitutional because it doesn't say anywhere that the fed can run a program like SS.
    1
  53. ShadyDawgWWCF Where do you get the numbers?  Also, as I said, there are more than one issue people vote on. SS is like Obamacare, a failure and has led to problems.  What is really scary, if your numbers are correct, is how dependent we have become on the government. Why does the government have to take money out of my check for retirement? Does the government think I am stupid? FDR turned a recession into a depression.  There is plenty of evidence that he was terrible for the country and the economy.  He is not one of the top three presidents of all time.  Explain to me why the government has to take money out of my check for retirement?  Why can't I just invest it myself? It doesn't matter if people agree or not.  What matters is what is best.  While people may not agree, if they see the result they will change their mind.  That is the point. To me it seems people are brainwashed into thinking the government must help them in that way.  I find that to be scary.  Consider this.  Clinton and the democrats can say "vote for us and we will keep SS".  Meanwhile they are taking corporate donations and conspiring to go against Bernie Sanders.  But hey, you get to keep your SS while they make millions.    Romney lost for several reasons. 
    1
  54. ShadyDawgWWCF I never said more people are stupid. What you have to realize is that any poll you read can't be taken that seriously.  They are broad and people who are doing them usually don't fully understand the situation. What caused the recession is natural economic growth. What caused the depression was the federal government trying to spend to "fix" the economy.  First time it ever tried that and one of only two times that has ever been attempted.  The other time was the recession of 2007 and guess what, recovery was slow again.  It is also highly debated if FDR was that great of a president when it comes to the economy.  Coming from a family of economists where one teaches it at a university, and studying business myself, I understand that.  I am 29, working on my doctorate and have a very rare, and productive skill.  I won't have any problem earning a large salary and saving for retirement where I will retire early. I never said we should take seniors and disables off . We should ease the system away.  At this point we are so dependent on it we have to ease out of it.  But in the end we have to get rid of SS.  We elect representatives to run government within the limits of the constitution.  There are several things you and I don't know.  Several people felt George Zimmerman was an ass and I agree.  But the justice system said otherwise based off of the evidence that basically you and I don't know much about.  I will personally admit I don't know everything and neither do you.  We elect government officials to take care of certain things within the bounds of the constitution. That is how our country functions. The fact you voted for Bernie says a lot.  Remember, he is a socialist with three homes.
    1
  55. ShadyDawgWWCF You don't have anything to back up what you are saying.  People, in polls supported a lot of liberal policies but yet still voted republican The fact that FDR won four elections means nothing.  We had a depression under him.  He was terrible for the economy.  Reagan won two elections and if it weren't for the term limits he would have won three.  Walmart is a large employer, but still employs a small percent of people.  If the only job you can get is Walmart or McDonalds than I am sorry but you need to re-consider your life.  A job there is met for those just entering the workforce or retirees. I am willing to slowly remove SS.  You can't just rip it away because it will be shock to the system. It doesn't matter what most of the country likes, what matters is what is constitutional and what is best for the country.  Most people would like to own a home, do we just give it to people? No. That's the point.  It isn't what people like but what is best. Bernie owns three homes but then ran a campaign off of the idea that wealth inequality is bad and hurting this country.  he is a hypocrite.
    1
  56. ShadyDawgWWCF We did great under both Clinton and Reagan.  Under Clinton we had a republican congress. Under Reagan we had a democrat congress. So what caused that success?  Remember who controls the purse, congress does. FDR's policies, and threatening to stack the courts led to a depression.  Every recession took around 5 year or less to recover from except for two.  The two that didn't were the recession of 1929 and the one of 2007.  They are also the only times the federal government tried to "fix" the economy with massive spending . In 1921 we had a similar recession to that took a year to recover from where the federal government did nothing.  FDR turned a recession into a depression.  In rural areas the cost of living is low.  You can make a living working in a place like that.  I know, I lived in an area like that for years.  I don't see a problem. What degree did your friend get?  And how many references did they have?  I will never support a massive change to a system. Bernie was a radical and an economic illiterate.  That, or a career politician.  He ran off of appeal to emotion talking points.  There is no such thing as a "living wage" as it is subjective.  We can't provide universal healthcare without drastically changing the system.  I agree we have a healthcare issue in this country.  I blame it on the payroll tax.  Consider this, in the US 1. why do so many employers pay with healthcare benefits as opposed to a higher wage? 2. why does healthcare insurance equal healthcare?  Pushing for universal healthcare is not the answer as it has, at the very least, just as many problems as we have now.
    1
  57. ShadyDawgWWCF The economy boomed under Reagan as well. FDR is overrated if not terrible.  I agree, the federal reserve did a lot of bad.  But FDR hindered recovery. We have a lot of jobs for people.  People just refuse to get the skills to do them.  We lack researchers, doctors, professors, nurses, etc.  People just need to work. Employers are willing to pay a higher wage.  The reason why they pay with benefits is because of the payroll tax.  If they paid in a higher wage they will pay with higher taxes.  With benefits it is a way to pay employees that is 100% tax free. I agree, we have a problem.  More government is not the solution.
    1
  58. Like in the late 70s.....oh, wait, that was Jimmy Carter. I noticed something, every time a democrat is in office recovery is slow, as in under Obama and FDR.
    1
  59. ***** Nope, Carter did. 
    1
  60. Ever thought that people voted for him and the republicans to do just that?
    1
  61. pete sampson SS is running out of money because it doesn't generate any wealth.  That is the problem.  If you place $100,000 under your bed and 40 years later pulled it out you, at best, came out even.  You could have invested that money and develop wealth and became better off.  SS is running out of money because the money is not invested.  It is wasting resources like almost all social programs do.  Even at that, you even said that eventually we will run out of money still.  You can only raise taxes so high. Being that dependent on the government to where even minor changes causes outcry is a problem.  You are asking for more from the government which is the problem.  People are so dependent that they are asking for more. Sorry about your story.  How about you get friends and family to help?  The fact is that if you don't have friends or family to help you then you are not worth much in society. The same goes for me. Everyone is replaceable.
    1
  62. Chris M Why are you questioning my knowledge in economics?  I am proving a point.  Taking money from people who will invest and and grow it and giving it to those who won't, or just letting it sit there does not grow the economy. That is the whole point.  You take money from my check, which I can use to expand my education to work on getting a high skill/high paying job, and give it to grandma to play bingo does not generate new wealth. 
    1
  63. pete sampson SS is running out of money.  Even Kyle admits that. The reason why is that it doesn't turn a profit and we have become too dependent on it.  We need to change something.  At the very least raise the age of retirement.  But SS is losing money is a pure example of why social programs don't work well. When you take money from someone who can invest it and give it to those who can't, then you hinder economic growth. "Well? Most investments actually return less to the economy as a whole than direct entitlement payments do" Wrong.  You have something to lose in an actual investment thus you will spend your money wisely.  "Invested money doesn't generally go to the purchase of goods or services" I agree. It goes towards increase production of goods and services.  With me, I can use that money to buy a new textbook, learn a new skill, and expand my research.  "Wealth for the sake of wealth does not serve society." Not to be rude but that has is one of the most economic illiterate phrases I have ever read. "I assume you think taxes are bad" Not necessarily.  "our government spends money on; military, police and fire departments, schools, roads, parks, airports, and safety net programs" Military: federal level and constitutional Police: funded by the local governments and ran by them Fire departments: funded by the local government and ran by them, also, around 70% of fire fighters are volunteer Schools: ran and funded by the state and local governments Roads:  Around 3/4 of funded by roads comes from.....wait for it.....the state and local government Parks: most funding by state and local government Airport:  You know the trend You are making a poor comparison here  You are pushing for a failed program by comparing it to other programs ran at the state and local level.  I have no problem if a state were to run a program similar to SS.  But at the federal level it is clearly a failure.
    1
  64. pete sampson SS is running out of money, period.  That is a failure.  It shows that socialism works until you run out of other people's money.  Even if you eliminate the cap you will run out of money. Not all of those programs are subsidized by the fed.  Even at that the funding is a drop in the bucket.  Take education for example.  Most funding is for Title I schools.  Schools that are not Title I get nothing.  Fire departments get basically nothing, especially in rural areas.  What I showed is how you lack understanding of how government functions in the US.  I will have no problem with a SS like program at the state and local level.  But at the fed it is a mess and losing money. 
    1
  65. Public education is ran by the state and local government, so you can't be comparing it to SS and the VA. Even at that, don't you find it scaring how you depend that much on the government that you don't want to change any of those programs at all?
    1
  66. Deirdre Pearson The idea of leaving it to the states is that at the state level you have more control of the government.  You may see K-12 education as a benefit.  I see it as possible indoctrination.  If a state teaches their children poorly then they will fall apart economically.  There is no one right way to offer education either.  States try different things and some things work better in different states.  But the most important part is to prevent indoctrination. 
    1
  67. Deirdre Pearson The second you play the game of "maybe the fed. should do a little bit" is when you blur the line and create problems. I agree, allowing states to fully run education can lead to certain states spreading ignorance.  But they will just be hurting themselves.  People can move away from them, the state will be uneducated and will fall apart.  As is all 50 states set their own curriculum.  None of them are pushing for what you are saying. Also, it comes down to do you really need the government to educate you and your kids?
    1