Lurker123 said:

Except you, who wants to argue whether what is going on fits the definition of fraud or deception.

But obviously, you just want to argue.

If you can't draw someone into arguing over semantics, you'll pivot and argue over the use of the word itself.

Just as long as you can keep arguing.

I'd reiterate that I'm not interested, but now you've got me curious how many pages you'll argue about what topic you're really arguing about.

Click to expand...

There are honestly times I can’t even comprehend how you’ve talked yourself into the circles you’ve talked yourself into.

They’re so nonsensical my brain can’t even begin to understand what you think you’re saying.

Ward Jr said:

Watson - How many times are you going to use the same words over and over again?

Posters will use like "semantics" in their position and then you proceed to parrot the term until the end of time.

It's rather embarrassing for you.

Click to expand...

Ward Jr said:

Watson - How many times are you going to use the same words over and over again?

Posters will use like "semantics" in their position and then you proceed to parrot the term until the end of time.

It's rather embarrassing for you.

Click to expand...

Now this is quality trolling.

Ward Jr said:

You might give DeeDave a run for his money on TDS.

You do understand Trump has already been President for 4 Years right?

Somehow you managed to survive.

The country was better off in almost every metric under Trump than it is today.

Relax.

Click to expand...

I survived but my brother along with one million other Americans did not. Trump has blood on his hands because he intentionally down played the pandemic claiming he didn't want to alarm the nation. You know that's true as you've heard his interview. You can't deny that our economy is currently the strongest in the world. Our unemployment is lower than anytime during Trump's administration. Our employment figures are far better than during Trump's term. It's amazing that we have more job openings than people to fill them. We are better off in terms of renewable energy. Since the first of January Windmills have produced more energy for two consecutive months than coal. We may soon become energy independent. Sure prices are up but so are wages. People are buying more and borrowing more which economist say is a sign of a heathy economy. Inflation has dropped and is projected to continue. Financially I'm much better off than during the Trump years thanks to our growing economy, investments, and interests rates.

We could lose it all if we elect an unhinged candidate with a diagnosed personality disorder. In my years at DMH I've worked with them and know the dangers. He's regressed in his behavior since 2020 and his mental state is not close to what it was in 2016. God forbid if elected they give him the nuclear launch codes.

uscwatson21 said:

No one is arguing semantics. That’s why you’re embarrassing yourself to keep repeating it.

Click to expand...

Except you, who wants to argue whether what is going on fits the definition of fraud or deception.

But obviously, you just want to argue.

If you can't draw someone into arguing over semantics, you'll pivot and argue over the use of the word itself.

Just as long as you can keep arguing.

I'd reiterate that I'm not interested, but now you've got me curious how many pages you'll argue about what topic you're really arguing about.

uscwatson21 said:

No one is arguing semantics. That’s why you’re embarrassing yourself to keep repeating it.

Click to expand...

Watson - How many times are you going to use the same words over and over again?

Posters will use like "semantics" in their position and then you proceed to parrot the term until the end of time.

It's rather embarrassing for you.

Forever Fowl said:

What other POTUS has stated they would be a dictator from day one?
What other POTUS has said I don't care about you, I just want your vote?
What other POTUS has called soldiers losers and suckers?
What other POTUS has said they want to have their own constitution.
What other POTUS has made fun of people with disabilities?
What other POTUS wanted to withdraw from NATO?
What other POTUS has said Putin's invasion of Ukraine was brilliant?
What other POTUS worshiped strong men dictators?
What other POTUS raped and defamed women?
What other POTUS has been convicted of felonies?
What other POTUS has stated they've never asked God for forgiveness because they've never done anything that required forgiveness?

If we love this country we need to speak out now before it's too late.

Click to expand...

You might give DeeDave a run for his money on TDS.

You do understand Trump has already been President for 4 Years right?

Somehow you managed to survive.

The country was better off in almost every metric under Trump than it is today.

Relax.

Lurker123 said:

Like how I told you exactly how you'd argue this one, and then you did?

Okay.

Click to expand...

No one is arguing semantics. That’s why you’re embarrassing yourself to keep repeating it.

Forever Fowl said:

What other POTUS has stated they would be a dictator from day one?
What other POTUS has said I don't care about you, I just want your vote?
What other POTUS has called soldiers losers and suckers?
What other POTUS has said they want to have their own constitution.
What other POTUS has made fun of people with disabilities?
What other POTUS wanted to withdraw from NATO?
What other POTUS has said Putin's invasion of Ukraine was brilliant?
What other POTUS worshiped strong men dictators?
What other POTUS raped and defamed women?
What other POTUS has been convicted of felonies?
What other POTUS has stated they've never asked God for forgiveness because they've never done anything that required forgiveness?

If we love this country we need to speak out now before it's too late.

Click to expand...

This is exactly what i meant about ratcheting up the rhetoric.

We have to stop escalating the frenzy to dictator/Hitler levels all the time. Pretty soon some nutjob will think an assassination is warranted.

uscwatson21 said:

You’re supposed to find something you’re slightly right about and stress that.

Click to expand...

Like how I told you exactly how you'd argue this one, and then you did?

Okay.

Lurker123 said:

This could be said of any president, and had been said about all of them in recent memory.

I think the "he plans to stay in power" is unwarranted hysteria. Talk of being a dictator was rampant when Obama said something about ruling with a pen (executive order).

I get disagreeing with his policies, and I understand not liking him as a person, but I don't think it helps anyone to ratchet the rhetoric like that.

Click to expand...

What other POTUS has stated they would be a dictator from day one?
What other POTUS has said I don't care about you, I just want your vote?
What other POTUS has called soldiers losers and suckers?
What other POTUS has said they want to have their own constitution.
What other POTUS has made fun of people with disabilities?
What other POTUS wanted to withdraw from NATO?
What other POTUS has said Putin's invasion of Ukraine was brilliant?
What other POTUS worshiped strong men dictators?
What other POTUS raped and defamed women?
What other POTUS has been convicted of felonies?
What other POTUS has stated they've never asked God for forgiveness because they've never done anything that required forgiveness?

If we love this country we need to speak out now before it's too late.

Lurker123 said:

So we're going to argue over the semantics of fraud or intent to deceive.

Okay. Not interested.

Click to expand...

Literally the worst way to just avoid admitting you’re wrong. You’re just emphasizing you got something wrong.

You’re supposed to find something you’re slightly right about and stress that.

Forever Fowl said:

Trump could do a great deal of damage by executive order and sadly the only checks would be through the courts. He also has immunity in the performance of any activity construed as job related. When he says "you won't have to vote for me again" he means he plans to stay in power. I don't understand how anyone can vote for a person who wants to throw out the constitution and states he will be a dictator from day one.

Click to expand...

This could be said of any president, and had been said about all of them in recent memory.

I think the "he plans to stay in power" is unwarranted hysteria. Talk of being a dictator was rampant when Obama said something about ruling with a pen (executive order).

I get disagreeing with his policies, and I understand not liking him as a person, but I don't think it helps anyone to ratchet the rhetoric like that.

DeeDave said:

IF Trump were to win, he's immediately a lame duck. That would embolden Republicans like Susan Collins to go against him as well as some others that don't like Trump except when they are on tv and have to play the game and play nice.

I don't think Trump would be able to get a lot of things through the Senate without significant compromise, not because of Democrats, but because of Republicans.

Folks like Mitch McConnell, who personally can't stand Trump because of the racist things Trump said about his wife, will go along with some things, but won't go along with others, probably just to be a thorn in his side. McConnell won't be in leadership, but he will have a vote on the Republican side of the aisle and in the Senate, every vote will still be a big deal.

Click to expand...

Trump could do a great deal of damage by executive order and sadly the only checks would be through the courts. He also has immunity in the performance of any activity construed as job related. When he says "you won't have to vote for me again" he means he plans to stay in power. I don't understand how anyone can vote for a person who wants to throw out the constitution and states he will be a dictator from day one. When I entered the army I took an oath to support and defend the constitution. It's similar to the President's Oath of Office but it means nothing to him. He disrespects military service by calling us losers and suckers. He only cares for himself and said as much during one of his rallies. "I don't care about you, I only want your vote". I truly believe Trump is the greatest threat to our democracy since WWII.

uscwatson21 said:

No, I want you to understand that Social Security is not fraud.

Click to expand...

So we're going to argue over the semantics of fraud or intent to deceive.

Okay. Not interested.

Lurker123 said:

So, just to be clear.

You don't want to argue the semantics of what is fraud or deception. But you want to argue whether fraud or deception are the right words to be used to describe SS.

Lile I said, not interested.

Click to expand...

No, I want you to understand that Social Security is not fraud.

Forever Fowl said:

Everything is a lie that you don't want to accept. Call Rep. Brendon F. Boyle or the Committee at this address and ask if they're legit.


U.S. House of Representatives
507 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 226-7200

Click to expand...

This mentality is how you end up still voting for these criminals.

Sure DeeDave - I'll call the same people who are perpetuating the fraud and ask them if it's true.

This level of thinking is how you end up taking 5 toxic boosters before a "conspiracy theorist" saves your life by outing the entire operation of deception and fraud.

uscwatson21 said:

No one is arguing semantics. Your comment, "It's a Ponzi scheme" is a very typical low brow republican trope. It's meant to argue that SS is a fraudulent or unsustainable program. It's neither.

Click to expand...

So, just to be clear.

You don't want to argue the semantics of what is fraud or deception. But you want to argue whether fraud or deception are the right words to be used to describe SS.

Lile I said, not interested.

DeeDave said:

It isn't. That's silly. His postage stamp scheme was based on fraud and deception to pad his pocket.

I do hope that those who believe it's fraud are consistent and not hypocrites and refuse to accept social security. That's the least they can do.

Click to expand...

Spot on.

Ward Jr said:

Yeah - I saw that via your quote. It's a lie. Just like everything they've said. Just this morning, I've posted their lies for the day.

The biggest threat to your SS is government overspending and debt service.

Click to expand...

Everything is a lie that you don't want to accept. Call Rep. Brendon F. Boyle or the Committee at this address and ask if they're legit.


U.S. House of Representatives
507 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 226-7200

Lurker123 said:

Never said fraud didn't have a bearing. I said you'd argue over the semantics of fraud or intent to deceive. And surprise, I was right.

These threads would be much cleaner if you'd bother to read and respond to what I actually said.

Click to expand...

No one is arguing semantics. Your comment, "It's a Ponzi scheme" is a very typical low brow republican trope. It's meant to argue that SS is a fraudulent or unsustainable program. It's neither.

It ignores the reality, that funding SS through current workers' wages was the only way to adequately fund the system. As DeeDave has already explained it's no different than insurance programs.

To make SS fully self-funded, you would have needed to take the payroll taxes for 40-50 years before ever paying out benefits.

uscwatson21 said:

Another brilliant post by Lurker.

The definition of a ponzi scheme:

a form of fraud in which belief in the success of a nonexistent enterprise is fostered by the payment of quick returns to the first investors from money invested by later investors.

Of course, fraud has no bearing on discussion of a ponzi scheme... Bravo.

Click to expand...

That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet. — William Shakespeare —

Social Security is a Ponzi scheme. One only needs to review the mechanism behind Charles Ponzi’s postage stamp scheme.

DeeDave said:

Do you consider your auto insurance a ponzi scheme? What about disability insurance? I don't. But it's built on people paying into the system so that people who need it can use it.

Is a mortgage a ponzi scheme? A car loan? Lenders provide money to X that is available because other people are paying into the system.

No, intent is important. You can't just leave it out of the equation.

Most people understand a Ponzi scheme to be a type of fraud that is built on artificially high returns with little or no risk.

Click to expand...

Geez. Don't you sell insurance for a living?

Insurance companies must adhere to strict financial disclosures/regulations, maintain transparency, and be subject to audits and oversight by regulatory bodies.

Our government does just the opposite. They are insolvent and are currently robbing Peter to pay Paul.

Why don't Democrats understand anything about math, economics, and finance!! It's insane.

Gomer, we worry about you.

uscwatson21 said:

Another brilliant post by Lurker.

The definition of a ponzi scheme:

a form of fraud in which belief in the success of a nonexistent enterprise is fostered by the payment of quick returns to the first investors from money invested by later investors.

Of course, fraud has no bearing on discussion of a ponzi scheme... Bravo.

Click to expand...

Never said fraud didn't have a bearing. I said you'd argue over the semantics of fraud or intent to deceive. And surprise, I was right.

These threads would be much cleaner if you'd bother to read and respond to what I actually said.