General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forumslame54
(35,321 posts)Grammy23
(5,813 posts)Some of us would rather hear nails on a blackboard than be subjected to their lies and distortions. Yes, there are some who listen to that crap and believe it. But as one of the Baby Boomers who recently joined the ranks of those receiving Social Security and is on Medicare, I just had to speak up for the rest who still have some brain cells to rub together and figure out that Faux Noose is not good for Seniors and other living things. Wait and see what happens when the Seniors in love with Fox get a load of what Paul Ryan is trying to sell! He just might lose....again.
marew
(1,588 posts)Among my friends in my age bracket I do not know a single conservative. But maybe I just hang out with the right kinds of people.
juajen
(8,515 posts)However, most of my seniorfriends are conservative; but, younger friends are almost all democrats, or libertarians.
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)Actually two of us over the age of 60 at my house who equate Fux News with toxic waste.
Stellar
(5,644 posts)Shrike47
(6,913 posts)proReality
(1,628 posts)and we all vote in every election. Faux News is not allowed to be viewed in this house, even by house guests.
classof56
(5,376 posts)I am one of those fortunate to be receiving both, and I never watch Faux Noose except for those clips occasionally featured by Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert and the MSNBC programs I watch. They never fail to make me cringe--thank goodness for those who speak truth to power, and as Jon and Stephen, include some much-needed humor in the mix. A neighbor of mine watches only Faux, but as I tell her with a loving smile, "You know if that's your source of news, you're never gonna know the truth." She just smiles back and keeps watching. I don't discuss politics with her, it would only upset me and we're too old for fisticuffs. I now await her take on what the Ryan budget would do to us. 'Twill be interesting!
Blessings,
Another Grammy
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)That way he hopes to prevent a baby boomer uprising. I could be wrong on this. I find Ryan so disgusting that I cannot even read his proposal.
femmocrat
(28,394 posts)My friends are older than me and are all liberals.
Never assume!
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)There are more of us than you might think.
alberg
(412 posts)Most folks I know in this age bracket understand what's going on - our country subverted by the neo-liberal confusatives.
Gosh, it seems to me that Elizabeth Warren would make a really great President. Wouldn't it be terrific if she decided to run?
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)onyourleft
(726 posts)...senior. What's more, I don't know any seniors who do watch Fox.
DrDan
(20,411 posts)pipoman
(16,038 posts)Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)any time, under any guise. The first reason is that it's despicable. In fact, one of his daily pronouncements should be, "Social security has never added one penny to the debt. It is probably the greatest program in the history of the nation. There will not be one single dollar cut while I am president". But that would make him a democrat, and he considers himself a republican.
Warpy
(111,339 posts)They're working part time, dead end jobs so they can manage to survive things like auto repairs, health care copays, leaky roofs, and dead appliances.
SS might keep them from starving but it won't pay for property taxes, any insurance at all, or any of the calamities listed above.
If older Boomers managed to hang on until 66--or even 62--they're in slightly better shape since they didn't have to run through their retirement savings waiting for SS to kick in after the job let them go in their 50s because the MBA's corporate actuarial tables said they were no longer cost effective and besides they were making the place look shabby.
Most of my friends are planning to work as long as their bodies hold up.
The last thing they want to do in their short periods of leisure time is watch liars on Pox telling them what parasites they are.
BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)It's just not right.
As for pox, the people i know of that are into that shit really vary as far as age goes.
lame54
(35,321 posts)not all seniors watch Fox News - but most Fox News viewers are seniors
BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)Yeah, I don't doubt that.....I'm just thinking of some young fundies who think pox spews is jaysus's station.
Elwood P Dowd
(11,443 posts)I am 66 and almost all of my friends in this age group watch that crap and believe every single lie they are told. They actually believe Obama destroyed Medicare with Obamacare and only repukes can save them from losing Social Security. They believe it was Obama, not Bush II, who started back the massive spending increases and deficits that Clinton had under control. The repukes have the messaging and propaganda down pat. Even Goebbels would envy that propaganda machine. All the mistakes and horrible policies of the Bush crowd have been forgotten, and its now all "Obama did it".
Those of you who say you don't know any seniors who watch Fox must live in dark blue areas.
RebelOne
(30,947 posts)Journeyman
(15,038 posts)taught_me_patience
(5,477 posts)Blue_In_AK
(46,436 posts)raven mad
(4,940 posts)I don't watch Faux at all. As a matter of fact, I don't have cable, at all. Your name says it all, lame.
lame54
(35,321 posts)I'll get off your lawn now
and
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022143660
and
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002741796
and
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021930132
and thanks for the personal attack
freebrew
(1,917 posts)it's all FAKE news from our M$M. I only get broadcast here, but national news is ALL bad. Local news is worse.
I usually only get real news from the interwebs.
SS is my only source of income. No one will hire older folks in this area. So I cashed in at 62 after getting fired at 57.
Only job I had was hefting 50# sacks at minimum wage. I lasted a year or so.
hollysmom
(5,946 posts)I knew I would get old and prepared, what I didn't know is that so many of my friends could not afford to do anything with me. I wanted to travel when I was older, but there is no one to travel with, I don't enjoy being a tourist alone, I love to share what I see.
Curmudgeoness
(18,219 posts)and I will gladly join you in travelling. I look forward to freedom.
doc03
(35,364 posts)myself with Caravan Tours and enjoyed them. Try it you meet people along the way
you may even meet someone else traveling alone and hit it off. Same as curmugen
I would join you too at least we could laugh at the Rethugs in the group.
hollysmom
(5,946 posts)raccoon
(31,119 posts)with it and sign up anyway.
Good to know some other people in the same boat!
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)And I will never forgive President Obama for his appointments to the Catfood Commission® or his Chained CPI proposal.
ballyhoo
(2,060 posts)mistake by a Democrat President and feel certain it will lead to a cut in Social Security either in this next term or the one after that. Once the Republicans take over Congress, their troops will marshal using the new voting donation laws and they will corner the voting market. Once their ducks are in a row, they will begin the stealing in earnest. The seniors will fight back--many have guns. But they will lose and with no one to back them in a real fight--not one with emails and garish signs--the ones that might save them are the independents, who won't like the seniors being robbed will step in with their votes. But the damage will be done and it will take a Trotsky-like revolution to bring back sanity. You may or may not agree with me. That's okay. You may have missed the post this morning about the"emotional disconnect" of the Democrats. There is that, and also the lack of what I call verve. Also, they need to get behind that which affects all the people not just pockets of special groups. I love Elizabeth Warren too. I think she is the real thing. Alas, I have said that before though.
Samantha
(9,314 posts)not the least bit interested in Social Security or Medicare, I have known that that was Wall Street's biggest goal -- to get its hands on the Social Security funds. It has been an open secret for decades.
It is that reliable, steady steam of income it so covets. So it is going to be a real fight to keep the Republican party from privatizing Social Security.
Sam
ballyhoo
(2,060 posts)I hope the NSA sees this and sends the message upstream to the drone master. We are in a war, and it is just starting. When the enemy takes over in November, the war will get more vicious as the contemplative smile on the President's face turns first regretful and then mocking. And, hopefully, the real public starts to act emulating angry teamsters locked out of the workplace rather than teenagers having a camp-out. We have to win--defeat is not an option. Defeat means your parents die in disgrace while your children starve to death. Time to get real.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)Last edited Mon Apr 7, 2014, 11:37 AM - Edit history (1)
The cornerstone of the modern Democratic Party and previously inviolate 3rd Rail of Politics (touch it and you DIE) will forever more be just another Chip-On-the-Table,
and fair game in every future Budget negotiation until it is gone.
ONLY a Democratic President could cut the power to The 3rd Rail.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)I could elaborate on that answer but I don't wish to alienate even more DUers than I already have.
I voted for BO 2X, but he's a moderate republican -No doubt about it. I know I may get flamed. But who cares. The truth is the truth. What democratic president puts SS on the table for cuts? -Chained CPI. What democrat does that? I wish we had a real democrat like Elizabeth Warren to vote for as President. Both parties seem to be controlled by corporate wishes. The dems just feel more palatable. They at least "pretend" to care about the little people.
fleabiscuit
(4,542 posts)"...he's a moderate republican..." is something he essentially said himself. Although he qualified it by saying republicans of a few years ago, I'd say not that many years ago. He was absolutely correct.
OKNancy
(41,832 posts)It's not in this year's budget proposal by Obama and I doubt it ever will be.
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)or so close as to be nearly indistinguishable.
Other than that she is dead on.
pragmatic_dem
(410 posts)jtuck004
(15,882 posts)llmart
(15,552 posts)and most of my friends and family the same. Not one of us is a Republican.
RebelOne
(30,947 posts)DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)K&R
BlueJac
(7,838 posts)Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)Asks the latest generation of workers conditioned to respect their employers greed over their own ability to make a living.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)In truth I am a little surprised a couple cities don't burn to the ground when these corrupt mayors and governors stole the money from the workers
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)JEFF9K
(1,935 posts)... they should be INCREASES!!
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)If so she should not be making these libtard/pony/ideologue/unrealism/racist statements. And she doesn't understand how government works.
Curmudgeoness
(18,219 posts)on DU. That is the take-away from this.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)The blue links told me so!
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)A billion dollars ain't loose "change". (Yeah, I said it.)
doc03
(35,364 posts)don't vote for Republicans or make a habit of watching Fox News.
Swede Atlanta
(3,596 posts)we discard seniors, hope to push them from our lives.....
Other societies, such as those in Asia, value seniors, their lives, their wisdom, their life experience.
While I consider it irresponsible not to plan and save for retirement it is a fact. People live for the present...family, etc.....
So what do we as a society value? Do we leave our seniors choosing between eating pet food, paying their heating bills or buying their medications? That is heartless but that is the Ryan budget.
And now the Supremes say that money = speech with virtually no limits. That is a perversion.
If the idea is one man/woman, one vote then how is $1B in donations = $5 for the poor?
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)What is more disturbing is pensions is not part of our younger generations so many will be totally dependent on SSin the coming years. It needs to be enhanced not lowered. The pension amount is based on 35 years of income whether or not a person worked 35 years. If you work past 35 years the pension is based on the highesT 35 years. BTW, if you work for 30 years your amount will still be divided by 35 years. I am retired and working a minimal wage job, the money helps me to get by. On average SS is on average of $1200 a month, we sure are not getting rich. Watch some FOX mostly to be prepared for my RW friends lies, check out the information in order to correct their lies.
merrily
(45,251 posts)middle class.
When did being disabled or retirement age and poor become an unmentionable?
pnwmom
(108,994 posts)geretogo
(1,281 posts)happyslug
(14,779 posts)In 1967 Congress set the Standard of Need, the amount one needs to survive. It is the bare minimum needed to survive. It has been adjusted to inflation every year since 1967. Conservative Economists claim the indexing has increased the amount to much, for index ignores technological changes, such as Computers replacing typewriters. On the other hand, these same conservative economist refuse to address the more the inflation raise in housing and medical costs since 1967 (And cited the drop in fuel prices till 2002 when it started its current upward spirl, you heard in 1997 that Gasoline was the lowest in real terms it had ever been when it hit bottom that year, matching the 25 cents a gallon Gasoline had been in the 1950s and early and middle 1960s, but nothing since 2002 and nothing that when gasoline prices hit today's prices it was the highest price for oil since the US Civil War).
Supplemental Security Income (SSI) is a program run by the Social Security Administration (SSA) to pay those people who can NOT work, but who is NOT entitled to Social Security (if if entailed to Social Security it is less then the SSI amount). SSI has always been set at the Standard of Need, which in 2014 is $721 a month. Many states supplement it, but any SSI one receives is reduced by any other income one gets. If the income is "Unearned" (i.e. NOT from employment, for example if someone gets a small amount of Social Security, then the $721 is reduced by that amount of money). If the money is "Earned" then the amount one receives from working is reduced by 1/3, then reduced the SSI amount dollar for dollar.
I bring up SSI, to show that your Social Security is barely over the SSI amount and as such barely enough to survive on. Since the 1960s, Welfare for Children. could also be that high, if a state was willing to pay 50% of the cost of such welfare payments. No state has ever taken up the Federal Government to pay 50% of Standard of Need ($721 per month in 2014) one could get on welfare if the State agreed to pay 50% of THE Standard of Need. My State welfare is set at $174 a month for one person (Which $87.50 from the State Government, which is match by $87.50 by the Federal Government) and is considered one of the more generous states when it comes to welfare.
My point is your income is LOW and everyone knows it. $750 is only $39 dollars over the Standard of Need. If you own your home and not making any payments except taxes, you are better then most people at that level of Income. I should note I suspect you are paying rent or a house payment, which means at least $225 is going for rent (if you are in public housing, such housing rent is restricted to 30% of your income or $225 per month). On the other hand if you are paying rent AND not in public housing, I live in a declining income area with declining population and as such you can get a "Decent" not great house for $350-400 a month. In areas of higher rents, I do not know how you can pay the rent. That is how little $750 is in reality, and I wish you luck for the numbers are NOT in your favor.
I wrote the above, more for other people on this thread then for your. $750 sounds like a lot to some people, tell you understand the cost of living. When I have clients talk to me about bankruptcy, one of the questions I asked them is how much do they spend on food each month. Most give me low guesses, and I have to point out, the Government has the policy that people spend $2 for Breakfast, $3 for Lunch and $5 for Supper, total $10 a day. Can people do cheaper? Yes, but it means buying and eating the cheapest food available. Thus $10 a day is about what it takes to eat per day. Add $225 for rent to $300 a month, that comes to $525 per month for Housing and food (if you are in public housing), that leave people on SSI less then $200 for anything else, including going to the Doctor, visiting friends, buying clothes etc. If you are NOT in public housing, there goes that $200 "surplus" for things like clothes and similar needed items. As I said above, I wish you luck, for at $750 a month you will need it.
Victor_c3
(3,557 posts)I'm 34 and I support a wife and two kids off of my income. There is no way I can afford to start saving for my retirement at any point in the near future. I pretty much know that social security and the disability payment I receive from the vA are the only things I'm going to have by then.
My plan is to at least have a house bought and paid off so I don't have to worry about that part and then subsist on the rest. Sadly, I know I'm probably going to be better off than most in part because I'm a disabled veteran.
Now that's a plan for the youth of today. Go fight a bullshit war, get fucked up in the head, and then be set for the rest of your life just like me!
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)our economy - and how f'd up it is. Pensions are a thing of the past
lillypaddle
(9,581 posts)And rely on SS for ALL of my income. I have very little in savings.
madville
(7,412 posts)Nobody is talking about the SSDI trust fund being exhausted in 2016. If it runs dry there is a mechanism which kicks in enabling SSDI to dip into the larger OASDI trust fund which is already projected to be exhausted in 2032.
If SSDI starts drawing from the OASDI fund all funds will be exhausted by 2027, that's the most recent number I recall from the last SSA trustee report I read.
They are going to have to increase revenue some how or make cuts. They need to raise/eliminate the contribution cap on the wealthy for starters.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)that would include the middle, no? I think the semantics are correct. It's like when the Limbeciles claim that FDR was "far more liberal than the electorate when he got elected". Er, no, 60% of the Americans voted for him, so he did by definition appeal to the center.
Smarmie Doofus
(14,498 posts)and buying vacation property.
It's classic projection. They think that since that's what THEY'D do.... that's what average people would do.... and are doing.