80 retired NY Cops & Firefighters charged with disability fraud

[One_Tycoon]

Can't abolish SS.. not right.

.

Well...unfortunately they're not going to abolish it. The politicians are too scared of their constituency to do something like that. The AARP is a powerful lobby.

But I look forward to the SS going bust after all the Baby Boomers start retiring at once and all the Millennials' are either too unemployed or underemployed to keep supporting all the retired Baby Boomers who are out golfing and enjoying retirement. You should read the novel 'Boomsday' as it covers some of what I said in a hilarious way. Here is a synopsis:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boomsday_(novel)

[MBE]

Well...SS disability is going broke in 2016 anyway. A record number of people are on it, gaming teh system. They're not 'scum' per se. The system is there to be abused, thus why it needs to be abolished.

http://www.politifact.com/ohio/state...disability-fu/

Why didn't you answer the question? What about people with legitimate disabilities?

(Money will be found to keep it running after 2016 anyway)

[One_Tycoon]

Why didn't you answer the question? What about people with legitimate disabilities?

(Money will be found to keep it running after 2016 anyway)

Yes...I'm sure they will find a 'way' to keep it going past it's due date. As long as the U.S. can borrow...something will be patched up to preserve it partially.

As far as the truly disabled question. Me and you have danced before. If I really thought that you wanted my answer...I might give it [You see, I need a non-UK person in order to truly lend their ear in conversations like this]. In short...obviously it would involve a lot more repealing than just SS, in order to get the Free Market forces going in the healthcare area... without the govt's rationing getting in the way in terms of prices and a host of other things. But we would have a better chance of using Michael J. Fox's time traveling car to achieve all that...then to do it in real time.

[MBE]

Yes...I'm sure they will find a 'way' to keep it going past it's due date. As long as the U.S. can borrow...something will be patched up to preserve it partially.

As far as the truly disabled question. Me and you have danced before. If I really thought that you wanted my answer...I might give it [You see, I need a non-UK person in order to truly lend their ear in conversations like this]. In short...obviously it would involve a lot more repealing than just SS, in order to get the Free Market forces going in the healthcare area... without the govt's rationing getting in the way in terms of prices and a host of other things. But we would have a better chance of using Michael J. Fox's time traveling car to achieve all that...then to do it in real time.

Honestly I'm open to hearing what you have to say because I'm curious if there's an alternative out there but I highly doubt you can strip everything off and still look out for those that are defenseless like the legitimately disabled. I don't see them being able to offer enough in return for their needs in an unregulated capitalist society.

[One_Tycoon]

Honestly I'm open to hearing what you have to say because I'm curious if there's an alternative out there but I highly doubt you can strip everything off and still look out for those that are defenseless like the legitimately disabled. I don't see them being able to offer enough in return for their needs in an unregulated capitalist society.

But sure you could. One simple laboratory experiment would be a private, non-profit organization where everyone can pool together money for the disabled. The parents or relatives of the disabled or really anybody can give on a voluntary basis . It would naturally start off through competition between several organizations but eventually since there is no real profit here....different organizations dealing in the same area would have to merge together to make the pool of money/resources bigger. Between the CEO/Director of one organization.... and the CEO of another org,. one would have to be eliminated and lose his/her job with only one guy remaining. This all would get resolved through the merging process. Cuts in staffing between merged Org's to make it more lean efficient. All without the bureaucracy of govt involvement. The only regulators needed would be the private citizens involved in this. This would require people to not be complacent as they are with Govt's spending on their behalf on wasteful social programs [and they would be if the knew that the govt wasn't there to help] Obviously this wouldn't happen overnight as the process of elimination would have to take it's course.

Lets keep in mind that I'm saying all this within the context that general govt spending has been cut to levels we haven't seen for more than half a century. Then prices would also be lower on medical devices and general treatment. Surely the above wouldn't work with the current environment of hyperinflated medical costs....all due to Govt.

[One_Tycoon]

Then there is the other side of the coin. Just individuals in general taking care of the elderly and disabled. Sometimes it's not about money but relative time. Surely if people are so generous and the govt spending on disabled reflects their generosity...they could cut out the middle man in many instances. Disabled is subjective. Not every disabled person = paralyzed from the neck down or mentally ******ed. NO?

I also believe in a voluntarist, individualist stance of self-termination. Not necessarily irrational suicide or assisted suicide but a well thought out decision to cut on other peoples costs of keeping you alive...by killing yourself. A personal self-belief system with a survival of the fittest component to it... even though you yourself are weak/disabled/terminally ill. A principled stand on self-terminating instead of being a burden to society or your family.

[rorymac]

This is pretty embarrassing.. and these individuals were supposed to be 'heroes'...

Why were they supposed to be heroes?

[I Love Jesus!]

But sure you could. One simple laboratory experiment would be a private, non-profit organization where everyone can pool together money for the disabled. The parents or relatives of the disabled or really anybody can give on a voluntary basis . It would naturally start off through competition between several organizations but eventually since there is no real profit here....different organizations dealing in the same area would have to merge together to make the pool of money/resources bigger. Between the CEO/Director of one organization.... and the CEO of another org,. one would have to be eliminated and lose his/her job with only one guy remaining. This all would get resolved through the merging process. Cuts in staffing between merged Org's to make it more lean efficient. All without the bureaucracy of govt involvement. The only regulators needed would be the private citizens involved in this. This would require people to not be complacent as they are with Govt's spending on their behalf on wasteful social programs [and they would be if the knew that the govt wasn't there to help] Obviously this wouldn't happen overnight as the process of elimination would have to take it's course.

Lets keep in mind that I'm saying all this within the context that general govt spending has been cut to levels we haven't seen for more than half a century. Then prices would also be lower on medical devices and general treatment. Surely the above wouldn't work with the current environment of hyperinflated medical costs....all due to Govt.

would this involve ending wars, leaving occupied countries and cutting the defense budget?

[MBE]

I also believe in a voluntarist, individualist stance of self-termination.

it's honorable you wouldn't wish to burden others but when push comes to shove I imagine it would be very difficult to do. Even if you were able to I doubt the majority of others could who take that stance, we also have to consider that many won't and shouldn't have to.

It would naturally start off through competition between several organizations but eventually since there is no real profit here....different organizations dealing in the same area would have to merge together to make the pool of money/resources bigger. Between the CEO/Director of one organization.... and the CEO of another org,. one would have to be eliminated and lose his/her job with only one guy remaining. This all would get resolved through the merging process.

I'm not sure on the idea of every SS having to compete against each other for the sympathetic publics money.

Firstly, whilst many would volunteer, a lot of unconcerning people wouldn't. I'd rather see them obligated to pay through taxation to ensure that enough money is there for all those in need.

Secondly organizations would be in direct competition for money from other areas, this would mean the organization with the better resources would secure the most money. this could result in a HIV research charity eliminating a cancer patient support charity. It would be a tragedy if one essential service is eliminated because of market forces, and the wider publics ignorance of its need, and because the organization couldn't raise the money in a capitalist system.

Even if different charities merged, they would naturally channel their resources that generate the most donations, not those with the most needs.

That's why government distribution here is essential to ensure the money goes to those that truly need it, not those with the best resources to extract the most from the public.

[Bushbaby]

I find that ironic. So the government brought down the towers, fooling/lying committing fraud against the entire nation, but they want to punish the police and firefighters for fraud concerning the same $h!t?