Libertarian Thread #2: We Shall Never Die!

The T wrote: James wrote: I believe there should be an age cut off for candidates, yes. Why only for candidates? Let's put an age cap for every profession. And while we're at it, let's also dliminate risks or some stupid youngster ruining us. Let's make it so that only male between the ages of 50 and 55 can be president. Yes and they better be religious. And have a family. And have a dog (well I kind of agree with this one...)

I was going to agree with you until you decided to be stupid.

There's already limits on the working age.  That's why there's pensions.  Of course, you can still work above that age but many people do retire.

Over in the UK it's 65.  I don't know what it is over there.

I'm not saying he's not fully functioning but at 76, there's a much bigger risk of him not making a full-term.  Of course, a younger President can die too, as we all know and that's unfortunate.

His brain my go (oh hold on...) too.

JJLehto wrote: It's also 65 here though

Padraic wrote: JJLehto wrote: It's also 65 here though Not for us.

Well it does depend I know. Also it's 65 on paper but I've also heard the new standard is pretty much 67.
So they might as well up retirement age since everyone works to that already
Or get a job with the post office (along with being good with money) and my uncle managed retirement sometime in his mid 50s


Edited by JJLehto - January 04 2012 at 20:27

Padraic wrote: JJLehto wrote: Padraic wrote: JJLehto wrote: It's also 65 here though Not for us. Well it does depend I know. Also it's 65 on paper but I've also heard the new standard is pretty much 67. For people born after 1960, it's 67.  On paper.

Really? Recent change? I've always heard 65. Whatever, by my time it'll up to 70 anyway.

Although, I take that back.  In the grand scheme of things, SS is an easier "fix" than Medicare.  But this is the Libertarian thread, so ABOLISH THEM ALL

 

James wrote: There's already limits on the working age.  That's why there's pensions.  Of course, you can still work above that age but many people do retire.

Pensions kicking in at 65 is not even remotely a limit on working age. 

Dudemanguy wrote:   James wrote: There's already limits on the working age.  That's why there's pensions.  Of course, you can still work above that age but many people do retire. What? I wouldn't call that a limit just a general area of when people tend to retire.

That's what I meant.

Many people do retire when their state pension comes through though.  Although with the financial climate as it is, more and more are having to working later than they want to.

stonebeard wrote: JJLehto wrote: Nah you are right...at least you may may see the final results man! I'll be paying into it the system just to have it nixed. I'm gunna seriously start keeping track of all my paychecks, and ones I had I can still find, and if SS gets nixed....gunna write angry letters to the guvment demanding my $$ back just for lulz SS is indeed an easy fix. Paul Krugman (don't stone me) more or less said ending our foreign policy would be enough to easily keep it sustained. Not that anyone in here wants it at all Now we just need to enumerate all the the things that have a higher chance of happening than the U.S. ending its foreign policy. I'll start: 1. All of the dinosaurs spontaneously resurrecting and getting degrees in physics.

Whoa there, did I say it would actually happen!?
This is the libertarian thread! We talk about what ifs and what shoulds and wouldn't that be nice?
When you put the hope aside and think about it...is Ron Paul really gunna get the nomination? Pat is an anarchist, this is whole thread is lunacy. Must be why I love it.

James wrote: JJLehto wrote: Nah you are right...at least you may may see the final results man! I'll be paying into it the system just to have it nixed. I'm gunna seriously start keeping track of all my paychecks, and ones I had I can still find, and if SS gets nixed....gunna write angry letters to the guvment demanding my $$ back just for lulz SS is indeed an easy fix. Paul Krugman (don't stone me) more or less said ending our foreign policy would be enough to easily keep it sustained. Not that anyone in here wants it at all I somehow ended up reading an article by Krugman the other day.  Some of what he said made sense.  Although I don't know his background.

He's pretty much just a liberal economist (lolwut) needless to say: I like him.
Although he's spoken on a lot more than just economics. Reading something by him is what helped me to solidly believe in Universal Healthcare.

James wrote: I'm a socialist and shouldn't even be here.  I'd probably be called a Commie if I lived in 'merka.

Probs....Bush 2 and the Republican Lites (my b Obama and the Democrats) are "socialists" god forbid an actual leftist was ever around!
Related: While this was kind of known, I have more or less abandoned my belief in Social Democracy. Well, honestly no in my heart it's still there but I've accepted it's just ridiculous and unrealistic for America and the future. So I've turned to less governmental solutions, moderately less, nothing too radical.


Edited by JJLehto - January 04 2012 at 21:32

nah
Obama spoke of Universal Healthcare in the campaign but during his Presidency, at best a "public option" was presented and that got killed. The bill passed is not even close to the NHS. It's universal coverage (as in by private insurance) and a whole mess of subsidies and bullsh*t.

Oh I believe in it. I am 110% sure that it would be cheaper, fairer and easier than what he have now.
Also I have a small sample size, but when I've asked people about the infamous "wait times" they say it's not bad, usually hours. Here, for our family doctor it's like 3 days. If it's more urgent either go out of network (more money) or the hospital.