IridentDefender

3.3K posts

IridentDefender

IridentDefender

@IridentDefender

Soon to be dead

Inscrit le Ekim 2023
154 Abonnements89 Abonnés
IridentDefender
IridentDefender@IridentDefender·
@Diacritic @jdcmedlock Again, it's quite literally a cap. Your definition of that word seems to be different than reality but that shouldn't be surprising coming from someone who is against progressive policy - they don't tend to be very thoughtful people
English
1
0
1
14
Nick Simmonds
Nick Simmonds@Diacritic·
@IridentDefender @jdcmedlock Honey, you either didn't know you were being lied to or you were lying, but your proposal was never to apply a cap to social security.
English
1
0
0
7
IridentDefender
IridentDefender@IridentDefender·
@Diacritic @jdcmedlock It seems like you’re more interested in getting annoyed than actual substantive policy at this point so just remember next time to be a little less arrogant when discussing something you’re unfamiliar with. Have a good evening!
English
1
0
1
20
IridentDefender
IridentDefender@IridentDefender·
@Diacritic @jdcmedlock Yes it’s a hard cap at $100k indexed to inflation which is exactly what I’ve been saying and not what we currently do. It leaves no one in poverty and only affects the wealthy with essentially no administrative overhead
English
1
0
1
14
IridentDefender
IridentDefender@IridentDefender·
@Diacritic @jdcmedlock How is this a “fake” proposal? It’s literally capping how much can be received in benefits for married couple at $100k (adjusting for age and inflation). That is *literally* the mechanism. The current cap would otherwise soon and quickly exceed that level.
English
1
0
1
14
Nick Simmonds
Nick Simmonds@Diacritic·
@IridentDefender @jdcmedlock Yes, it's a well known fake proposal. They aren't "applying a cap", a cap has always exists. They're trying to switch to a less generous benefits formula and using the "cap" language to try to sell it.
English
1
0
0
10
IridentDefender
IridentDefender@IridentDefender·
@Diacritic @jdcmedlock Sigh I wish people like you actually understood what you were talking about. You can keep advocating for rich retirees to get maximum government payouts funded by higher taxes on everyone else but I'll keep pushing for something actually progressive.
English
1
0
1
15
IridentDefender
IridentDefender@IridentDefender·
@Diacritic @jdcmedlock There are no costs associated with capping the payouts and there is not a single "deserving" person cut out of social security payments by capping it at the current max payout. It requires *many* years of high earning to get to that point and they would still not be in poverty
English
1
0
1
30
IridentDefender
IridentDefender@IridentDefender·
@Diacritic @jdcmedlock It doesn't have to be means-tested, just cap the payout. If you cap the payout at $100k for a couple, there will be no seniors living in poverty, the vast majority will unaffected and only very wealthy earners over many years will see reduced benefits. No overhead necessary
English
1
0
1
17
IridentDefender
IridentDefender@IridentDefender·
@Birdyword Would you say you’re monitoring the collapse of US hegemony and relevance?
English
0
0
5
867
Mike Bird
Mike Bird@Birdyword·
Whenever young people ask me about going into journalism, I try to sell them on financial journalism. Their eyes usually glaze over, but there are very, very few jobs on earth where your job description is closer to "monitor the situation"
English
17
41
729
44.3K
IridentDefender
IridentDefender@IridentDefender·
@cremieuxrecueil That's because America is a decaying country that is incapable of producing much of anything of value at this point
English
2
0
12
924
Crémieux
Crémieux@cremieuxrecueil·
Get this: It costs about $300m to get to phase I for a vaccine in America. It takes $20m to get to the same vaccine in India. A company that's realized this is about to start trials in Australia. And they might be able to make vaccines for EBV!
Crémieux tweet media
English
17
32
556
25.3K
IridentDefender
IridentDefender@IridentDefender·
@jdcmedlock I think capping social security payouts makes more sense. Seems more progressive to reduce govt spending on just the wealthy retirees instead of upping taxes on middle class earners, especially when their costs of living (housing, child care) are so much higher
English
0
0
2
57
James Medlock
James Medlock@jdcmedlock·
A flat payroll tax increase is most popular with low income people
James Medlock tweet media
English
5
2
83
5.5K
IridentDefender
IridentDefender@IridentDefender·
@howardlindzon Not sure how anyone can see the American people actively choose to put these people in charge and come to the conclusion America is good. Can you name a single country that causes more suffering and evil in the world?
English
1
0
1
26
Howard Lindzon
Howard Lindzon@howardlindzon·
It’s a perfect storm of deglobalization, degeneracy, debt, int rate direction , unserious people, negligence, fraud and bad leadership
English
17
46
349
22.6K
IridentDefender
IridentDefender@IridentDefender·
@acemoney21 @WarrenPies The world is realizing the US is the most destructive country on this planet and is run and populated by incompetent and evil individuals. You cannot see what is happening right now and come to a different conclusion
English
0
0
4
268
Ghost Enigma
Ghost Enigma@GhostEnigma69·
@NickWoolos I would love a violent 3% gap down on Monday to put in a low
English
1
0
2
27
IridentDefender
IridentDefender@IridentDefender·
@TheStalwart It's showcasing the fact that American is a doomed country at this point and becoming permanently uninvestable. China is the only country with a meaningful future now
English
0
0
1
86

Découvrir

@Diacritic @jdcmedlock @Birdyword @elonmusk @BarackObama @taylorswift13 @cristiano @BillGates