All you parasites who don't pay taxes love them for everyone else so you can get your freebies.
Can anyone make a cogent case for how birthright citizenship is good for America?
- Thread starter ULTRA MAGA
- Start date
Look dimwit I asked a simple fucking question and you went off somewhere else and didn't answer it.
See this is the problem with you people. Your brains just don't work quite right.
IBDaMann
Well-known member
The answer to your question is ... that it is of great benefit to America and to all Americans for the Federal government to secure all of our inalienable rights with which our creator has endowed us. US citizenship is the inalienable right of all persons who are born in the United States, and no State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.
You would have a much clearer understanding if you were to properly word your question, e.g. In what way is it beneficial to America and to Americans to have people who are born in the US be US citizens (noting that this is completely independent of parentage because the parents are other people, which is why there is no parentage qualifying clause in the 14th Amendment, and also noting that the child born in the US has not committed any crime and cannot have his inalienable rights violated over some infraction committed by others) ?
Don't be afraid to come to me with the hard stuff.
gibberish but thanks for playing
Low returns are not part of a Ponzi scheme so not a Ponzi scheme
US treasuries aren't listed with the SEC? US treasuries are clearly listed with the SEC so not a Ponzi scheme
Social Security releases an audited financial statement every year that lists exactly where they are invested so not a Ponzi scheme
Annual audited financial statement so it isn't a Ponzi scheme.
Social Security isn't an investment. It is a social insurance plan. Insurance isn't a Ponzi scheme if you can't take out all your payments.
It seems you might be a run of the mill nut case since you don't understand the basics of Social Security.
See my response to anonymoose.
Here is the annual audit that shows it doesn't meet the claims of a hidden investment strategy.
You are the one quibbling over terminology. Social Security is a tax that finances a social insurance program.
Tax cuts for the rich are robbing poor Peter to pay rich Paul so by your definition tax cuts for the rich are a Ponzi scheme. Denying tax cuts for the rich are a Ponzi scheme would be just quibbling over terminology to use your logic.
The US doesn't take most or nearly all of anyone's income. Making ridiculous and outlandish arguments only shows you are likely a nut case.
IBDaMann
Well-known member
If you didn't want to know, or if you don't value inalienable rights, you should not have asked.
My "gibberish" , by the way, comes from the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence ... but thanks for playing.
anonymoose
Classical Liberal
Already addressed.
Low yield US Treasuries are only used when there is a surplus. That is NOT how SS is funded. There is no surplus. SS is running a deficit. It is insolvent. That’s a Ponzi scheme.
Your link shows no investment.
Which shows SS is insolvent.
You just said they were invested. “Social Security releases an audited financial statement every year that lists exactly where they are invested so not a Ponzi scheme.”
Make up your mind.
It’s a Ponzi scheme if it relies on continuing contributions, which it does and will eventually be insolvent.
I understand that it’s basically a Ponzi scheme.
That's interesting because I can see this section-
5. Investments
The cash receipts collected from the public for the OASI and DI Trust Funds are invested in
interest-bearing securities backed by the full faith and credit of the Federal Government,
generally U.S. par-value Treasury special securities.
No. It doesn't show it is insolvent. It shows it currently has a surplus that will be depleted over time. Something is not insolvent when it's current assets exceed it's current outlays
LOL. Insurance companies invest and list their investments on their balance sheets. It doesn't mean that those that bought insurance are invested.
All businesses rely on continuing revenues or they would be insolvent. Having continuing revenues does not make it a ponzi scheme.
You said SS is insolvent and now you say they will be insolvent. Make up your mind.
So when do you receive statements telling you the value of your investment?
We need the workers. Immigrants have a lower crime rate than Americans already here. They expand the economy. They start more businesses than Americans. Our economic growth over time is due to immigration. They pay taxes, and cannot collect benefits from doing it. Trump is harming America and our economic future.
T. A. Gardner
Serial Thread Killer
No, it isn't. You are paying into the system just like with unemployment insurance. FICA, which in part is Social Security is NOT a tax because you cannot list it on your tax return nor can you use it to take deductions, etc.
They aren't a Ponzi scheme since taxes don't go to pay out other investors. Tax cuts for the rich don't deprive the poor of anything. On the other hand, if the upper limit on income for which social security were taken out, I wouldn't have major heartburn with that.
You, among others here, have suggested just that. The Progressive Left has suggested "wealth taxes" where even the material things owned by someone could be taxed away.
anonymoose
Classical Liberal
Correct. Surpluses are used to purchase low yield treasury bonds. But treasury bonds are both an asset to SS and a liability to the Treasury. Not really an investment. But at least that relatively minuscule amount is legal.
Which I define as insolvent. It can chug along for a while. Same as Ponzi schemes.
The assets were gained by theft. Even so SS is projected to be depleted without further theft
SSA is not an insurance company. Insurance companies are not Ponzi schemes.
Legitimate businesses produce goods and services and in return they receive revenue. Ponzi schemes produce nothing.
It’s projected to be depleted without increased theft. That sounds like insolvency to me .
I can look up my investments anytime I want. I have no idea when or even if I receive statements.
What do my investments have to do with SS?
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Forget the Constitution???? That's the most "ultra MAGAt" thing you've ever posted.
The United States is an immigrant nation. To grow and to continue to have new workers, we must allow immigration. Agricultural nations tend to be poorer and have larger families, usually to work the fields, but also to serve as "retirement plans" for the elder family members. Industrial nations tend to be both richer and have smaller families. Industrial nations have facilities to help care for the elderly.
Since the United States is a very industrialized nation, our birthrate has dropped. The nation is getting older with less young people to work. Ergo, immigration is necessary. Since immigrants are necessary, their children should automatically become citizens to bind their loyalties to the United States.
The United States is among the highest birthrates of industrialized nations. IMO, that's due to our relatively lenient immigration policies and birthright citizenship. Most Euro nations have a second-class citizenship status for immigrants.
Birth Rate by Country 2025
Discover population, economy, health, and more with the most comprehensive global statistics at your fingertips.
Where can you list federal income taxes on your personal tax return in order to get a deduction? You can list FICA on your tax returns. There is even a form dedicated to FICA TAX which allows for a deduction for some of your FICA taxes if you are self employed, form 1040SE.
I see you have decided to quibble over terminology.
Math must be really hard for you. If there is a 75% tax on incomes over $5 million and a 25% effective tax on income below $5 million, what income would a person have to have to lose nearly all their income on taxes? I'll give you a hint, even if they made $5 billion they wouldn't lose nearly all their income to taxes.
In reality we have billionaires that are paying lower tax rates than you are.
From 2013 to 2017 Betsy Devos had an average income of $112 million annually and paid a tax rate of 10%.
America’s Highest Earners And Their Taxes Revealed
Secret IRS files reveal the top US income-earners and how their tax rates vary more than their incomes. Tech titans, hedge fund managers and heirs dominate the list, while the likes of Taylor Swift and LeBron James didn’t even make the top 400.
projects.propublica.org
Since you don't have an investment in SS it can't be a Ponzi scheme.
anonymoose
Classical Liberal
What I invest in has nothing to do with what is or isn’t a Ponzi scheme.
E.g., I didn’t have an investment in Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC but it was still a Ponzi scheme.
This does not address the question of birth right citizenship. Immigration of adults to fill vital roles in our economy is an entirely different conversation. Why is this so hard to understand for most of you?
You didn't expect to get any money from Berni Madoff.
Do you expect to get money from Social Security?