People really love to harp on the fact that Chris is a welfare leech. Whether or not he is truly mentally capable of holding a job is hugely debatable and beyond the scope of what I want to comment on right now.
I've heard time and time again that Chris is living off of the collective monies invested into the system by all of the hard working decent citizens who have taken interest in his antics. It just occurred to me, though, that this logic might be broken.
Bob worked for over 40 years and during that time paid into Social Security. Barb, it seems, worked for a similar period of time before retiring. What are the odds that both of them collectively used up their contributions in their years of retirement? My stab-in-the-dark guess would be that they didn't come anywhere near canceling out their net contribution, but I'd love to hear someone else chime in and give some rough math to prove or disprove this.
Either way, the point is that Barb and Bob helped fund the system that Chris is now legally entitled to; it's not unreasonable for Chris to be utilizing a service that his parents paid for.
I've heard time and time again that Chris is living off of the collective monies invested into the system by all of the hard working decent citizens who have taken interest in his antics. It just occurred to me, though, that this logic might be broken.
Bob worked for over 40 years and during that time paid into Social Security. Barb, it seems, worked for a similar period of time before retiring. What are the odds that both of them collectively used up their contributions in their years of retirement? My stab-in-the-dark guess would be that they didn't come anywhere near canceling out their net contribution, but I'd love to hear someone else chime in and give some rough math to prove or disprove this.
Either way, the point is that Barb and Bob helped fund the system that Chris is now legally entitled to; it's not unreasonable for Chris to be utilizing a service that his parents paid for.