Sorry Aroura, if you're going to use an article to make a point about wealthy getting SSI benefits, at least be accurate about it.

Sorry Joods, if you are going to make a point about how this type of comment isn't nasty, at least be accurate about it.

I'm just pointing out that perhaps you don't even realize how personal and passive aggressive this sort of comment appears.

Did it upset you when I phrased it back at you?
Any sentence that begins "sorry but" is already not sorry, it's sarcastic. And the phrase "at least be" implies all sorts of negatives about the person you aim it at. Saying you just pointed out an error is not true. You pointed out the error in a way that was hurtful.

I am perhaps overly sensitive right now, but I've started analyzing language a lot lately, because it really matters how you say something.

At any rate, you're smart. You don't need me or Mr. Brewer to Google things for you, so in the future I will refrain.

---

(September 18, 2018 at 8:02 am)Joods Wrote:

(September 18, 2018 at 7:57 am)Aroura Wrote: Also, a little googling shows that people of all incomes are still eligible for disability.

There is also a thing called SSDI, which is for those individuals who have worked and paid into the system. It pays out much more than SSI benefits and it is not considered a welfare based program.

SSI and SSDI are two completely different things and the claim brewer was making didn't involve SSDI at all. It strictly mentioned SSI benefits. 

Going directly to the Social Security Administration's website, as opposed to relying on secondhand or thirdhand information is where I went to get my information because it's the official government website for the SSA.

I know, I actually get SSDI. But I know my income does not effect it.

I simply just got the A and I confused.

My apologies for butting into the conversation.

(September 18, 2018 at 8:07 am)Aroura Wrote: Sorry Aroura, if you're going to use an article to make a point about wealthy getting SSI benefits, at least be accurate about it.

Sorry Joods, if you are going to make a point about how this type of comment isn't nasty, at least be accurate about it.

I'm just pointing out that perhaps you don't even realize how personal and passive aggressive this sort of comment appears.

I'm not going to engage with you further on this. Clearly, you are dealing with something IRL that causes you to lash out at a friend who merely pointed out a problem with an article that YOU linked to. I can't control how you research information nor will I be responsible for how you interpret it when someone provides information that is actually relevant to a claim being made. 

Tone and inflection are often not present in written word unless accompanied by a series of emoticons, which, if you are a person secure in your worth, you wouldn't need to rely upon to know that I wasn't being nasty about anything. 

Quote:Did it upset you when I phrased it back at you? 

Any sentence that begins "sorry but" is already not sorry, it's sarcastic. And the phrase "at least be" implies all sorts of negatives about the person you aim it at. Saying you just pointed out an error is not true. You pointed out the error in a way that was hurtful.

Nope it didn't upset me when you "phrased it back" at me. Why? Because I know how to take constructive criticism and am adult enough to admit when I have made a mistake. I don't feel like I did anything wrong in what I wrote in my post. I am only responsible for what I say, not what others choose to understand.  

Quote:I am perhaps overly sensitive right now, but I've started analyzing language a lot lately, because it really matters how you say something.

At any rate, you're smart. You don't need me or Mr. Brewer to Google things for you, so in the future I will refrain.

I have every right to ask for a source when a claim is being made about something I happen to have first hand knowledge of. You decided to inject yourself in a question directly asked to brewer because of a claim he made. Whether or not I need someone to google information for me is irrelevant. I merely wanted him to show me evidence of the claim he was making. 

If you want to talk about hurt feelings or being passive-aggressive, I could totally blow it out of proportion and say that some might say that in your rush to make a post, you didn't bother checking to make sure there was relevancy between my question and what you posted. Within minutes of my asking, you slapped an article up in a post in order to show me up. And you know what - I could have interpreted that way. But I didn't because I knew that it wasn't your intent to be that ignorant. Just like it wasn't mine. And I certainly don't appreciate the accusation and the continued belittling about it. I am not going to pick and choose certain phrases simply because they don't jive with your feelings. And again - I am only responsible for what I say, not what you choose to understand. If you can't handle someone correcting you or pointing out that your post wasn't even relevant to my question, then that's something you need to work on. I refuse to walk around on eggshells to spare the feelings of people who can't handle being told when they're wrong and who obviously twist someone else's words so that they come off as passive aggressive. That's not how I said it or meant it. 

Peace out. I think I'll step off this forum for awhile.

(September 18, 2018 at 7:49 am)Joods Wrote:

(September 18, 2018 at 7:15 am)Aroura Wrote: The rich can and do collect SSI


Oh, and here is how many/much in reality.
How much do the rich collect in SSI?

I specifically asked about SSI benefits, since that's the claim: 

mh.brewer Wrote:I'm fine with cutting of SSI and medicare to the wealthy. In 2010, 47 million collected benefits while making over 100K per year. I've seen another estimate of 1.4 billion per year in SSI benefits to millionaires.

The article you quoted, doesn't even address SSI benefits at all. 


The article was misquoted as when you quoted it, it left out the linked words "Social security retirement". The article is completely based on earnings and even goes into the fact that a wealthy person may not even qualify for SSA (Retirement benefits). SSI vs SSA are different monsters. And it's important to understand the difference. 

SSA is money based off of your income and how many years you worked. This is the money that comes directly from Social Security funds that you paid into. 

If you are disabled and cannot work and do not have enough work credit hours to qualify for SSDI, you may qualify for SSI benefits. There are several factors they take into consideration with that. 

Sorry Aroura, if you're going to use an article to make a point about wealthy getting SSI benefits, at least be accurate about it. 

Link directly from ssa.gov explaining SSI and the differences between it and retirement benefits.

Quote:SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY INCOME (SSI) OVERVIEW
WHAT IS SSI?

SSI stands for Supplemental Security Income. Social Security administers this program. We pay monthly benefits to people with limited income and resources who are disabled, blind, or age 65 or older. Blind or disabled children may also get SSI. 

HOW IS SSI DIFFERENT FROM SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS?
Many people who are eligible for SSI may also be entitled to Social Security benefits. In fact, the application for SSI is also an application for Social Security benefits. However, SSI and Social Security are different in many ways.

• Social Security benefits may be paid to you and certain members of your family if you are “insured” meaning you worked long enough and paid Social Security taxes. Unlike Social Security benefits, SSI benefits are not based on your prior work or a family member's prior work.
  
• SSI is financed by general funds of the U.S. Treasury--personal income taxes, corporate and other taxes. Social Security taxes collected under the Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) or the Self-Employment Contributions Act (SECA) do not fund the SSI program.
  
• In most States, SSI recipients also can get medical assistance (Medicaid)- to pay for hospital stays, doctor bills, prescription drugs, and other health costs.
  
• Many States also provide a supplemental payment to certain SSI recipients.
  
• SSI recipients may also be eligible for food assistance in every State except California. In some States, an application for SSI also serves as an application for food assistance.
  
• SSI benefits are paid on the first of the month.
  
• To get SSI, you must be disabled, blind, or at least 65 years old and have "limited" income and resources.
  

some bolding mine.

Who put a bug up your butt? So I miss typed.

Your attitude sucks lately.

Edit: And I now see that your attacking Aurora??? What the fuck?

(September 18, 2018 at 8:42 am)Joods Wrote:

(September 18, 2018 at 8:07 am)Aroura Wrote: Sorry Aroura, if you're going to use an article to make a point about wealthy getting SSI benefits, at least be accurate about it.

Sorry Joods, if you are going to make a point about how this type of comment isn't nasty, at least be accurate about it.

I'm just pointing out that perhaps you don't even realize how personal and passive aggressive this sort of comment appears.

I'm not going to engage with you further on this. Clearly, you are dealing with something IRL that causes you to lash out at a friend who merely pointed out a problem with an article that YOU linked to. I can't control how you research information nor will I be responsible for how you interpret it when someone provides information that is actually relevant to a claim being made. 

Tone and inflection are often not present in written word unless accompanied by a series of emoticons, which, if you are a person secure in your worth, you wouldn't need to rely upon to know that I wasn't being nasty about anything. 

Quote:Did it upset you when I phrased it back at you? 

Any sentence that begins "sorry but" is already not sorry, it's sarcastic. And the phrase "at least be" implies all sorts of negatives about the person you aim it at. Saying you just pointed out an error is not true. You pointed out the error in a way that was hurtful.

Nope it didn't upset me when you "phrased it back" at me. Why? Because I know how to take constructive criticism and am adult enough to admit when I have made a mistake. I don't feel like I did anything wrong in what I wrote in my post. I am only responsible for what I say, not what others choose to understand.  

Quote:I am perhaps overly sensitive right now, but I've started analyzing language a lot lately, because it really matters how you say something.

At any rate, you're smart. You don't need me or Mr. Brewer to Google things for you, so in the future I will refrain.

I have every right to ask for a source when a claim is being made about something I happen to have first hand knowledge of. You decided to inject yourself in a question directly asked to brewer because of a claim he made. Whether or not I need someone to google information for me is irrelevant. I merely wanted him to show me evidence of the claim he was making. 

If you want to talk about hurt feelings or being passive-aggressive, I could totally blow it out of proportion and say that some might say that in your rush to make a post, you didn't bother checking to make sure there was relevancy between my question and what you posted. Within minutes of my asking, you slapped an article up in a post in order to show me up. And you know what - I could have interpreted that way. But I didn't because I knew that it wasn't your intent to be that ignorant. Just like it wasn't mine. And I certainly don't appreciate the accusation and the continued belittling about it. I am not going to pick and choose certain phrases simply because they don't jive with your feelings. And again - I am only responsible for what I say, not what you choose to understand. If you can't handle someone correcting you or pointing out that your post wasn't even relevant to my question, then that's something you need to work on. I refuse to walk around on eggshells to spare the feelings of people who can't handle being told when they're wrong and who obviously twist someone else's words so that they come off as passive aggressive. That's not how I said it or meant it. 

Peace out. I think I'll step off this forum for awhile.

I wasn't trying to show you up...I was literally just trying to answer a question.  I did so incorrectly, and that's my own fault.  But nothing to insult people over.
I kind of feel like I actually wasn't the one overreacting in this case. For one thing, I twisted nothing. I explained pretty calmly, I thought.

If you aren't having hurt feelings, why are you leaving?

Really guys, I just feel like I'm losing my mind lately, lol.  I really can't tell if it's just me.  I mean, I KNOW I overreact sometimes.  I own that 100%.  I can flip my shit over dumb stuff.  I didn't think I did that in this case.

"Sorry Aroura, if you're going to use an article to make a point about wealthy getting SSI benefits, at least be accurate about it."

That definitely sounds like throwing shade to me in all honesty.

I have already explained myself. I did not attack Aroura yet it was perfectly okay for me to be called nasty because of a misinterpretation of my words. I defended myself and yet I AM the one getting attacked and my words are further getting twisted. What a bunch of fickle people you are. Guess this is what is feels like when you tell one of the popular kids they are wrong about something.

You all do you. I don't have to keep explaining myself to a bunch of people that want to jump in and be part of some stupid drama.

(September 18, 2018 at 11:53 am)Joods Wrote: I have already explained myself. I did not attack Aroura yet it was perfectly okay for me to be called nasty because of a misinterpretation of my words. I defended myself and yet I AM the one getting attacked and my words are further getting twisted. What a bunch of fickle people you are. Guess this is what is feels like when you tell one of the popular kids they are wrong about something.

You all do you. I don't have to keep explaining myself to a bunch of people that want to jump in and be part of some stupid drama.

FWIW I don't think there was right or wrong or whatever. White knights will exist on the internet so don't feel bad.

Now let's all try to get back on topic and be top economic advisors

(September 18, 2018 at 11:53 am)Joods Wrote: I have already explained myself. I did not attack Aroura yet it was perfectly okay for me to be called nasty because of a misinterpretation of my words. I defended myself and yet I AM the one getting attacked and my words are further getting twisted. What a bunch of fickle people you are. Guess this is what is feels like when you tell one of the popular kids they are wrong about something.

You all do you. I don't have to keep explaining myself to a bunch of people that want to jump in and be part of some stupid drama.

I'm really sorry, Joods.  I certainly didn't mean to offend you. I did not mean you as a person were nasty, just that the words you used were hurtful to me. I know how someone pointing out things like that can feel like an attack.

I am certainly not one of "the popular kids" I have no idea where you get that, though.  Have you looked at your rep number and my rep number?  And I've been here 4 years longer than you.  It's not like I rack up the likes. lol.
Getting kind of personal, but I understand sometimes hurting causes hurting back.

I did explain that I'm having a hard time staying rational lately. This week I'm something of a basket case.  If you could give me a tiny bit of leeway, I'd appreciate it.  If you can't, I also understand.  As you say, you gotta do you.

Pffff. US politics. 50% of the threads here these days are about that. Boring shit.

(September 18, 2018 at 12:17 pm)LastPoet Wrote: Pffff. US politics. 50% of the threads here these days are about that. Boring shit.

"When you're born you get a ticket to the freak show. When you're born in America, you get a front row seat."

-- George Carlin