Who us "Ned Staebler"?

[renard_ruse]

I'm working to get more information on her and will get back to the board.

It appears she may actually be a prominent academic and business owner in southeastern Michigan.

I am verifying she owns something called "Tech Town" and if verified a boycott will be organized against
the company.

Enough is enough of extremists like this threatening others and not having any personal cost.

I am not saying "Ned" is affiliated with that business but if so a boycott will be organized.

 

[renard_ruse]

She has locked her Facebook to comments by the way. Typical "tough talking" coward.

 

[HisArpy]

So, the cancel culture strikes again?

 

[BoyNextDoor]

Meet Ned Stabler. American Hero.

 

[bestone4ever]

retard_ruse has a problem with gender identification.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Ned Staebler called out the partisan Republican attempts to not certify the election results in Michigan yesterday.

Then he turned the spotlight on the Republican cockroaches when he showed the world their "compromise offer" (the Republicans wanted to certify all the ballots in counties where the majority of the population was white....majority black counties were, of course, "hopelessly corrupted"...because reasons).

 

[HisArpy]

Ned Staebler called out the partisan Republican attempts to not certify the election results in Michigan yesterday.

Then he turned the spotlight on the Republican cockroaches when he showed the world their "compromise offer" (the Republicans wanted to certify all the ballots in counties where the majority of the population was white....majority black counties were, of course, "hopelessly corrupted"...because reasons).

Boy are you hopelessly uninformed.

For what it's worth, the attempt yesterday to not certify ONE COUNTY was a stunt that I disapprove of most strongly.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Boy are you hopelessly uninformed.

For what it's worth, the attempt yesterday to not certify ONE COUNTY was a stunt that I disapprove of most strongly.

Yeah, one county, which just happened to be the largest county in Michigan (1,700,000 residents) which just happened to be majority non-white.

Take that "one county" out of the election results, where Biden had a net margin of 322,000 votes, and all of a sudden Biden's 144,000 vote victory in Michigan becomes a 174,000 loss to Trump.

One county. tee hee.

 

[HisArpy]

Yeah, one county, which just happened to be the largest county in Michigan (1,700,000 residents) which just happened to be majority non-white.

Take that "one county" out of the election results, where Biden had a net margin of 322,000 votes, and all of a sudden Biden's 144,000 vote victory in Michigan becomes a 174,000 loss to Trump.

One county. tee hee.

What happened to "counties"? You do a quickie google search and decide to cover up your blooper?

 

[nowisthetime]

This hick must have a hell of a time living in liberal southern Cali.

 

[jaF0]

In case you hadn't noticed, SoCal has a purplish tinge.

 

[PaxNurgle]

I'm working to get more information on her and will get back to the board.

It appears she may actually be a prominent academic and business owner in southeastern Michigan.

I am verifying she owns something called "Tech Town" and if verified a boycott will be organized against
the company.

Enough is enough of extremists like this threatening others and not having any personal cost.

I am not saying "Ned" is affiliated with that business but if so a boycott will be organized.

You talking about "Extremists" is the pot calling the kettle black, Vetteman. Just saying.

And for the record, if you are the one organizing a boycott of this Tech Town, whatever it is- Without even knowing any other facts, I would be inclined to organize a massive show of SUPPORT for that buisness.

 

[HisArpy]

In case you hadn't noticed, SoCal has a purplish tinge.

I'm a Republican.

I'm not a "Reagan Republican", just a Republican because we live in a Republic and I support it.

In my political view, some of the progressive ideas can work. Just not as the progressives promote them.

We need to remove the cap for Soc Sec. We need to increase the percentage of income paid in. And we need to stop calling it a "ponzi scheme" and call it what it is (or should be), an annuity. Which means that the Soc Sec Admin needs to start doing it's fiduciary duty instead of political mealy mouthing.


Free College tuition - we need to get the government OUT of the funding/subsidy game. College tuition, gas/oil/farm subsidies, mortgage subsidies, and so on need to be gone. The money saved by eliminating those administrative depts could be better used for the USDA to get our food supply back on track in the safe zone instead of the constant food recalls for fecal bacteria and other similar things.

Same deal with Health Care. If the government wants to run some kind of health care, then it needs to combine it with the VA system and Medicare and get the hell out of the free market other than mandating that insurance companies cannot "discriminate" between employees and non-employees for coverage OR costs. And get rid of the stupid and idiotic "income" test for coverage. Charging me more for the same health care coverage just because I earn more is a violation of equal protection.

There are other areas in which I disagree with the straight Republican agenda. But those are because I deal with them, have given them consideration, and realize that most of the talk is political posturing being done just to screw with Democrats and their agenda.

So yeah, it's easy for me to live here. I'm like my neighbors. Well, not the radical extreme neighbors who want to tear down, loot, and burn everything, but the rest of them.

 

[Tim2run]

You don't spend your annuity and fund it with IOUs in order to enjoy future payouts.
This is why it is referred to as a Ponzi scheme - the money is spent as soon as it comes in. Payouts are not from a fund, but from current tax revenues. Eventually, revenue will not cover expenses and the increases you call for will instead be mandatory decreases to prevent the collapse of the "annuity." Some who are paying in now are just kissing their money goodbye.

 

[RobDownSouth]

What happened to "counties"? You do a quickie google search and decide to cover up your blooper?

1,700,000 disenfranchised voters. "Tee hee".

 

[RobDownSouth]

You don't spend your annuity and fund it with IOUs in order to enjoy future payouts.
This is why it is referred to as a Ponzi scheme - the money is spent as soon as it comes in. Payouts are not from a fund, but from current tax revenues. Eventually, revenue will not cover expenses and the increases you call for will instead be mandatory decreases to prevent the collapse of the "annuity." Some who are paying in now are just kissing their money goodbye.

AJ is back with his yearly "but...but...Ponzi skeem! Hurr Durr!" yammering.

To refudiate him once again...

Refudiating teh "but...but...Social Security is a Ponzi scheme!" lie

A good list of beatdowns of conservatives swearin' to Jeebus that "Social Security is a Ponzi scheme"

Ezra Klein explains in simple terms why Social Security is NOT a Ponzi scheme

Emory professor refudiates Ted Cruz "but...but...Ponzi scheme!" lies

http://i1239.photobucket.com/albums/ff502/Soonyigump/dazzle1_zps40f6c30d.jpg

 

[YDB95]

We need to remove the cap for Soc Sec. We need to increase the percentage of income paid in. And we need to stop calling it a "ponzi scheme" and call it what it is (or should be), an annuity. Which means that the Soc Sec Admin needs to start doing it's fiduciary duty instead of political mealy mouthing.

The only people who call Social Security a "Ponzi scheme" are the people who want to destroy it.

 

[Tim2run]

Or replace it with something more sustainable.

Currently, your money is going to payouts, not some sort of trust fund. What happens when we cannot import enough workers to keep funding the boomers?

 

[RobDownSouth]

Or replace it with something more sustainable.

Currently, your money is going to payouts, not some sort of trust fund. What happens when we cannot import enough workers to keep funding the boomers?

The social security was pre-funded to accomodate the expected lifespan of the boomers since way back in the 1980s. The last boomer is expected to return to Skyfather around 2040.

The system will then revert back to self-funding again, i.e. inflow from current workers equals outflow to retired workers.

The only "X factor" is increase in longevity. In a worst-case scenario (i.e. retirees living into their 90s), the boomer bubble will end sooner than expected (possibly 2037).

If Congress does NOTHING (unlikely, given the retiree vote), SSN payments will be reduced to 75% of what they are now. Highly unlikely, but seeing as it fits your preconceived political bias, I expect you to focus on this.

In summary, fuck your snowflake feelings.

Hope this helps!