Social Security Explained – Equal In Poverty

SOCIAL SECURITY EXPLAINED:

 

Jane:   Why do we have Social Security?

Mary:   Because 80 years ago people didn’t save money so our president decided to mandate savings.

Jane:   You mean I ‘have’ to pay into this ‘savings account’?

Mary:   Yes!   Of course, Silly.   You pay and your employer pays too.

Jane: Why?   Can’t I just put money into my own savings?

Mary:   Yes and no. You can save as much as you want, but the government wants to make sure you do in case you don’t… it’s a law.

Jane:   So why don’t I just invest in the stock market?   Why can’t I save that way?

Mary:   Because 80 years ago the stock market crashed and everyone lost all their money.   Many people starved and many more died.

Jane:   So Social Security will keep me from starving?

Mary:   No.   Because what they pay you is based on the cost of living 80 years ago and so you will still starve.

Jane:   But doesn’t the government invest my savings?

Mary:   Yes, but they don’t tell you how or ask your permission, they put the money wherever they want.

Jane:   But it is my money, right?

Mary:   Kinda yes, kinda no.

Jane:   What does that mean?   Can’t I get it back?

Mary:   Sortof.   You get some of it back each year after you get old.

Jane:   But what if I die before I get old? Does all the money I put into savings go into my estate?

Mary:   Silly you!   No way!   The government confiscates the money.

Jane:   But it was my money!

Mary:   It was before you gave it away.   It is kindof like charity.   You give it to them and they use it however they want and you can only hope it is going to benefit the purpose for which you gave it to them…

Jane:   But the purpose of Social Security was to benefit me!   And I didn’t give it to them willingly!

Mary:   Well now, yes you did.

Jane:   WHAT?? That makes no sense!

Mary:   Of course it does.   The government takes your money, puts it into a witch’s brew of entitlement programs to support a bunch of illegals who are escaping poverty so that you can live in poverty when you refuse to work any longer. That way, everyone is equal in poverty.

Jane:   But isn’t that exactly what FDR said he was creating this mandated savings for?   To make sure no one ever lived in poverty again?

Mary:   Boo –

Jane:   Mary!   So is poverty reduced now?  I mean compared to 1930?

Mary:   HAHAHAHA!   We only started measuring poverty rates in 1959, not 1930, not 1920.   And the numbers are all estimates.   You know, like the numbers used by the CDC and WHO.   Everything is an algorithm.   And the algorithm is only so good as what concoctions the Masters choose to insert in the formula.   They make it all up and we are told to believe it.

Jane:   But I thought that was what China did – not the US?

Mary:   Oh Jane…   Haven’t you figured it out yet?   We are China.

Illegal Immigrants and Sanctuary Cities – The Hypocritical Oath

The proposal to release illegal immigrants from detention centers at the border into sanctuary cities is making the Democrats crazy!   Why?   Because they don’t want the immigrants in their cities, they just want everyone to think they do because it is political posturing. Whether Trump releases them in the cities or not was likely not the point, the reaction is likely the point.  All one need do is watch Sarah Sanders smile!  Every Democrat has vocally disputed the idea claiming such an action would put people at risk… And therein they have cremated their entire agenda that illegals present – no risk.

More often than not Trump has taken the position of taunting the media and Democrats into revealing their faces without makeup.  And the sight ain’t pretty.

There are currently 560 sanctuary cities across the US.   California is the only state that has legislation establishing statewide sanction. The concept of sanctuary is stating that all immigrants including undocumented and illegal – are welcome.   The caveat?  Unless they are imported by Trump.   Same people, different outcome.  These cities have also refused to cooperate with ICE for the purposes of detention and deportation.

Various studies have shown that sanctuary cities actually lower crime rate when taking in illegal immigrants. These studies were conducted by three journals: Urban Affairs Review, Justice Quarterly and Center For American Progress. Justice Quarterly has an ‘impact factor’ of 3 which means it has little to no relative value in the academic world.   For comparison, in 2014, an average rating was 41. Urban Affairs has an ‘impact factor’ of 1.8, is owned by Sage Publications which was embroiled in controversy for publishing a completely hoaxed article.   And the Center For American Progress? It is John Podesta’s ‘think tank’, run by a former aide to Obama and Hillary.  Say no more…

Of course if these studies are true, then Sanctuary cities would be desperate for more illegal immigrants so as to lower all crime throughout their city.   But the bluff was called and suddenly the wolves find themselves acting like sheep.

What are some of the actual statistics? San Francisco has a violent crime rate 59% higher than the California average, and 87% higher than the national average. Property crime is 147% higher than the state average and 161% higher than the national average.   The cities with the largest population of unauthorized migrants include: Seattle, Boston, LA, New York City, Atlanta, and Philadelphia.   All of which have relatively high crime rates.   Does this correspond to illegal status? There is no definable report that can say either yes or no.

Part of the statistical issue is that illegals are not convicted of a crime because they are deported. Therefore the statistics are skewed and can not accurately detail a comparison.

During Obama’s presidency, he deported 2.9 million illegal immigrants. Bush – 2 million.

The two largest gangs in Central America are MS-13 and Barrio-18.   They come from the Northern Triangle which includes Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador and are said to have the highest murder rate in the world!   It is estimated that upwards of 50,000 Barrio-18 members ‘relocated’ to the US, and about 10,000 MS-13 members. In 2007 it was estimated that there were roughly 800,000 gang members across the US. By 2011, that number had increased to 1.4 million.   Despite their relative statistical numbers, as of 2011 gangs accounted for 13% of all homicides and 50% of all shootings in NYC. In an effort to not profile, given the statistics showed race and ethnicity, many states have since purged all data related to gangs.  Hence today, getting actual information is impossible.  In addition, cities, including LA, have been cited for ‘under-reporting’ of crime in order to reflect a better statistic.  Despite the ‘under-reporting’, gang related crimes increased 63% and then 33% between 2014 and 2016.  Somewhat like – Germany.

It is estimated that 60% of all gang members are illegal immigrants – protected from ICE by Sanctuary cities.

LA, Orange County and Santa Clara County have the highest rate of releasing gang members from possible ICE detention. Five counties in California have the highest number of illegal immigrants, LA, San Jose (Santa Clara County), Riverside, San Diego and San Francisco. They account for roughly 25% of the entire illegal population in the US.

If you are a Sanctuary city, your agenda is to welcome all – therefore to suddenly state that ‘Trump’s proposal’ is fear mongering is stating that illegals are something to fear, not welcome, given the gang statistics and crime rates. Still, the hypocrisy is lost somewhere along the Porky Pig stutter.

The UK provides sanctuary to asylum seekers and per national policy disperses the immigrants to different towns and cities so as to not create a burden to a handful of cities. Essentially, this is the same proposal Trump has asserted.

Of course the obvious terminology that sanctuary cities don’t seem to recognize is ‘illegal’.   As in breaking the Law. By advocating breaking the law, it begs for a discussion as to what other laws are breakable without consequence?

And that’s when Porky Pig makes another entry.