Tom Johnson

[Tom Johnson @thomasj8656]

@JakeOrlando15 @FloridaManAF Tbf there are far more female drivers than drunk drivers. To get a good number you would need to base it on time behind the wheel. If women spend 60 million hours behind the wheel in an average year, and drunks are only 5 million, of course women are going to have more crashes

[Tom Johnson @thomasj8656]

@NapalmOceans @FloridaManAF Because when they did the studies to determine risk they just compared male accident rates to female. Men were involved in more accidents but I saw one a while back that took into account time behind the wheel. In that one women were far more dangerous.

[Tom Johnson @thomasj8656]

@CornfedGroyper @FloridaManAF @FishingGroper Men are also behind the wheel significantly more and when you account for time behind the wheel women are far more dangerous. Saw this a while back so dont remember the exact numbers

[Tom Johnson @thomasj8656]

@OfWonk @ChristianHeiens The whole point of the stupid cartoon is the culture war issues are a meaningless distraction which you described as a "correct observation". But clearly you dont believe that its a meaningless distraction so clearly thats not a "correct observation"

[Tom Johnson @thomasj8656]

@FBA_ing @andrewilliamsus No because "im going to kill everyone here" is a direct actionable threat and "you need to leave" is not

[Tom Johnson @thomasj8656]

@Gary84464527359 @andrewilliamsus Insults are not fighting words. Fighting words are something like "lets step outside and see what happens" and then claim self defense when you invited that person to fight you. Thats what "fighting words" is about

[Tom Johnson @thomasj8656]

@RascalRhett1 @RusGarbageHuman How is this a game with data? Its tracking reasons for abortion regardless of how far along it is.

[Tom Johnson @thomasj8656]

@digilicks @johnthenoticer The question is about before not after. If "stolen resources" from Kenya or wherever made Britain rich, why wasnt Kenya rich and developed from those resources before the British showed up?

[Tom Johnson @thomasj8656]

@PragmaticPrim8 @johnthenoticer The question is why werent the resource rich countries rich and developed before they were colonized. If Britain needed the "stolen resources" to develop and get rich why werent the places that had these resources already developed and rich from said resources.

[Tom Johnson @thomasj8656]

@OfWonk @ChristianHeiens If the culture war is just a distraction then why doesn't the left just concede everything. Dont contest the right on these things. Just agree and focus on "the real issues".

[Tom Johnson @thomasj8656]

@AreJayBro @TheBrancaShow You're leaving out a key detail here which drastically changes the circumstances

[Tom Johnson @thomasj8656]

@KOZOtheKID666 @Ilya_Elante @IMAO_ No you paid a third of a share

[Tom Johnson @thomasj8656]

@therealsunbunny @IMAO_ Life expectancy has gone up and number of kids has gone down. Both are true. Not having kids would absolutely be a contributing factor to a system that relys on future generations existing collapsing. Having more kids is a realistic solution. Lowering the life expectancy is not.

[Tom Johnson @thomasj8656]

@KOZOtheKID666 @Ilya_Elante @IMAO_ Which part do you think is untrue? Even at max contribution from 18-65 you wouldnt cover benefits from 65-80. The average ss tax contribution is 3900 (not including employer half). Average property tax contribution is 3300 and only about half of that is going to fund schools

[Tom Johnson @thomasj8656]

@zaccarlover @dosbottim @IMAO_ Even someone making the max contribution from 18-65 doesn't pay for their own 65-80 (average life expectancy)

[Tom Johnson @thomasj8656]

@Ilya_Elante @KOZOtheKID666 @IMAO_ Seriously doubt that because people already get back far more in social security than you payed in. You pay far less in taxes that fund schools than those that fund social security. Unless somehow you have well above average property taxes with well below average income

[Tom Johnson @thomasj8656]

@dosbottim @IMAO_ And you understand that pays for current recipients yes? And that it takes 3 people to pay for 1. Even if you had the max contribution every year from 18-65 it wouldnt cover your benefits from 65- 80

[Tom Johnson @thomasj8656]

@KOZOtheKID666 @IMAO_ The married couple with kids will be the reason you're receiving SS/Medicare. They are taking on extra expenses now to ensure the systems youre currently supporting will continue and support you when you need them

[Tom Johnson @thomasj8656]

@tullyfur @IMAO_ Then base it off of benefits recived instead of increasing taxes. Benefits based on # of kids. Since it takes 3 contributors to fund 1 recipient.
6 kids is full benefits
3 kids is half
No kids is minimal benefits and increased retirement age
Change is needed for SS to continue

[Tom Johnson @thomasj8656]

@otismahone @IMAO_ No they didn't spend it on anything else. They paid the current recipients which is how its always worked. They weren't setting it aside for you. It takes 3 contributors to fund 1 recipient. If people do not have kids (future contributors) then there is no Social Security