|
OT entitlements (was lighthouses)
|
OT entitlements (was lighthouses)
On 11/06/2010 10:49 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message ... On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 20:00:37 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: The problem is not entitlements per se, it is unfunded entitlements and that includes SS and Medicare as of this year. We have done exactly what Tyler predicted. We voted benefits in excess of the taxes we are willing to pay. That is also what happened in Greece and most of western Europe. It is an unsustainable system. 40 cents of every dollar in my SS check is borrowed from my kids. You can't even prorate that by the amount taken in by the FICA tax since LBJ put SS in budget but even if you did, the check still includes some borrowed money since FICA does not cover the outlay. Well, if you're not willing to address even one of the major entitlements, then there's no way to fix it. I agree, we're over-extended, but some would lay that at the door of the current administration, when previous went wild with spending and deregulation, then said, oh by the way, we're about to have a financial meltdown, and tried to put the toothpaste back in the tube. The current admin. has been attempting to do that since it got in power, and it actually seems to be working. The next step will be to do something like paygo, but what we can't do is tighten spending. That would result in the same thing happening again. I will lay that on every administration since Eisenhower. He was the last one who actually wanted the government to live within it's budget. Goldwater predicted this Social Security problem in 1964, when we might have actually been able to do something about it. .By 1970 the die was cast and anyone who actually looked at the demographics knew SS was going to go broke. The only arguments was when. In spite of that nobody was willing to propose the fixes that would actually save the system (later retirement ages, stopping the unrealistic growth in benefits and means testing the benefit). They nibble around the edges of this but they will not take the steps necessary to fix it. Greece is looking the same basic problem in the face, with a EU gun at their back and they will have to make the changes. Let's see how that works out. We are in no way comparable to the Greek economy. SS is solvent now and can be fixed. The sky isn't falling. Sort of like the debtor in denial the night before the home is reposessed. It will not happen overnight. Numbers sure look like Obamanomics isn't working one bit. In fact, sending the economy to new depths. -- Taxation, modern day slavery. The loss of economic freedom. |
OT entitlements (was lighthouses)
|
Time to trash the Conservatives
On 11/06/2010 10:50 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
"Larry" wrote in message ... nom=de=plume wrote: "YukonBound" wrote in message ... "Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 11/06/2010 11:56 AM, nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 09:12:26 -0400, BAR wrote: Cut "entitlements." Helen Thomas wouldn't even have the nerve to say that. ;-) I feel sorry for her. She could have left the scene as a class act. Instead... Funny how everyone slams "entitlements" right up until it affects their social security, medicare, police/fire/infrastructure in their neighborhood, EMT availability, library access, etc. Then, it's don't touch. If people don't want entitlements, then they should vote against them and vote out any politician that promotes funding them. So far, that hasn't happened, and there doesn't appear to be any strong movement to do so. Actually, what the produicers shoudl do, and many are is to move. Why live in a country where the 2/3rds not paying for it can outvote the 1/3 that does? To me, it feels like taxation without representation when the begars, liberal losers and pocket pickers out vote the tax paying worker. Also known as slavery. Uh...did you say you weren't working at this time? He's unemployable. And you know that to be a fact because...Harry said so? It's so obvious... he can't really speak English. He rants like a crazy man. Actually, he might be employed, but I doubt it's more than in a day-laborer capacity. Jeez, said the unemployable envious slug.... -- Taxation, modern day slavery. The loss of economic freedom. |
Time to trash the Conservatives
On 11/06/2010 9:03 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
"Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 11/06/2010 11:56 AM, nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 09:12:26 -0400, BAR wrote: Cut "entitlements." Helen Thomas wouldn't even have the nerve to say that. ;-) I feel sorry for her. She could have left the scene as a class act. Instead... Funny how everyone slams "entitlements" right up until it affects their social security, medicare, police/fire/infrastructure in their neighborhood, EMT availability, library access, etc. Then, it's don't touch. If people don't want entitlements, then they should vote against them and vote out any politician that promotes funding them. So far, that hasn't happened, and there doesn't appear to be any strong movement to do so. Actually, what the produicers shoudl do, and many are is to move. Why live in a country where the 2/3rds not paying for it can outvote the 1/3 that does? To me, it feels like taxation without representation when the begars, liberal losers and pocket pickers out vote the tax paying worker. Also known as slavery. -- Liberalism - a disease of envy, greed, entitlement and KAOS. What are you ranting about. Your first sentence is not coherent and the rest is just a mindless rant. Who cares how it feels to you??? You're not a citizen. Go complain to the Canadian gov't. I doubt they'll listen to you either. You had better care, who is going to pay for your welfare check? It will not be me for much longer. Me, I plan on retiring early and most of my assets are tax paid, so You are right about Canada, they are much further down the road than the US is. You will figure it out in 10 years. In Canada many move out of Canada on retirement. I might yet do so. -- Taxation, modern day slavery. The loss of economic freedom. |
OT entitlements (was lighthouses)
wrote in message ... On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 21:48:16 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 18:23:42 -0600, Canuck57 wrote: Actually, stuff like SS was wel funded. But skimed by the government. And often invested in losers because of politics. If all the 30+ years a working types has SS (employer and employee) in their 401k they would retire early. The problem is the government has no vehicle to actually save money since we got off the gold standard. SS was always pay as you go and the trust fund was just a scam to collect more taxes for other things. mostly wars. Originally it was WWII (lend lease)when the trust fund was established (1939-40) and it was put on budget to hide the cost of the Vietnam war (1968-69). The concept of 401ks is flawed too looking forward because 83 million boomers pulling their money out of the stock market and spending it will crash the market. The real problem is you can't have a third of the adult population living off the work of the other two thirds without a revolt. The gov't doesn't need to "save" money as much as it needs to have money available. The gold standard was highly flawed and died an appropriate death. The point was, with a metal standard they could have extra money in reserve. With the federal reserve model it is just what you have in tax revenue and what you print or borrow. There is no reserve. The "trust fund" is a huge lie. It is just a promise to raise taxes that the population will not tolerate. Boomers will not be pulling money out en masse. In fact, some of the boomer generation has already hit retirement age. It's a spread of about 15 years... something like that. Most with substantial 401K-like savings will likely pull it out in drips and drabs. Only someone foolish would pull it out at once, esp. given the tax consequences. That is yet to be seen isn't it? If a person is in debt and sees that pile of money, they will cash it in. The only boomers who are retired are the ones who are not in debt. It's not needed. The "money in reserve is in the form of treasury notes, which are invested in the general economy. Storing a lot of metal doesn't really do much and it's certainly not readily usable. Not really... there are always foolish people, but there are lots of people already in debt who don't pull out their money. As I said, the tax consequences alone usually give people pause. Many boomers are in debt in one form or another... mortgages are a good example. Most people think of their home as an asset, but if you owe money, it's really a liability... certainly one kind of liability that's easy to live with, even in retirement. |
OT entitlements (was lighthouses)
|
OT entitlements (was lighthouses)
"Moose" wrote in message ... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 18:23:42 -0600, Canuck57 wrote: Actually, stuff like SS was wel funded. But skimed by the government. And often invested in losers because of politics. If all the 30+ years a working types has SS (employer and employee) in their 401k they would retire early. The problem is the government has no vehicle to actually save money since we got off the gold standard. SS was always pay as you go and the trust fund was just a scam to collect more taxes for other things. mostly wars. Originally it was WWII (lend lease)when the trust fund was established (1939-40) and it was put on budget to hide the cost of the Vietnam war (1968-69). The concept of 401ks is flawed too looking forward because 83 million boomers pulling their money out of the stock market and spending it will crash the market. The real problem is you can't have a third of the adult population living off the work of the other two thirds without a revolt. The gov't doesn't need to "save" money as much as it needs to have money available. The gold standard was highly flawed and died an appropriate death. Boomers will not be pulling money out en masse. In fact, some of the boomer generation has already hit retirement age. It's a spread of about 15 years... something like that. Most with substantial 401K-like savings will likely pull it out in drips and drabs. Only someone foolish would pull it out at once, esp. given the tax consequences. Obie's lickin his chops waiting to get at our 401k money. If we don't start spending it he'll find another way to grab it. Rest assured on that, little lady. You're stupid. Bush was the one who wanted to privatize social security. Thank GOD that didn't go through. He's the one who went on a spending and tax give-away for 7 years. |
OT entitlements (was lighthouses)
wrote in message ... On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 09:37:25 -0600, Canuck57 wrote: On deduction that should be phased out is mortgage tax deductability as you get older. Say at 20 you get the full benefit, but as you get older say to 50 it disappears. Encouraging people to have their homes 100% paid for in due time. That is, reduce mortgage deductabiltiy encouraging equity in the home. So when the economy tiffs, they are less likely to toss the keys to the repo man. And be in a hell of a lot better position for retirement. But this would be progressive and will not happen as the US economy is now built on debt that is going delinquent. The other deduction that should go is the "2d home" mortgage deduction. That is what fueled the "want house" market at the expense of the taxpayer. The first is just politically impossible. The second isn't a bad idea, but it is also highly unlikely. It goes right back to if someone has it, they don't want to give it up. How do you plan on forcing people to give up these deductions? |
OT entitlements (was lighthouses)
wrote in message ... On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 21:49:15 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: I will lay that on every administration since Eisenhower. He was the last one who actually wanted the government to live within it's budget. Goldwater predicted this Social Security problem in 1964, when we might have actually been able to do something about it. .By 1970 the die was cast and anyone who actually looked at the demographics knew SS was going to go broke. The only arguments was when. In spite of that nobody was willing to propose the fixes that would actually save the system (later retirement ages, stopping the unrealistic growth in benefits and means testing the benefit). They nibble around the edges of this but they will not take the steps necessary to fix it. Greece is looking the same basic problem in the face, with a EU gun at their back and they will have to make the changes. Let's see how that works out. We are in no way comparable to the Greek economy. SS is solvent now and can be fixed. The sky isn't falling. The sky isn't falling yet but SS is clearly living beyond it's means. We are borrowing money to make up the difference. The same is true of Medicare. Lots of things are in that category. As I said, it's fixable, both are. |
OT entitlements (was lighthouses)
|
OT entitlements (was lighthouses)
"Moose" wrote in message ... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 20:00:37 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: The problem is not entitlements per se, it is unfunded entitlements and that includes SS and Medicare as of this year. We have done exactly what Tyler predicted. We voted benefits in excess of the taxes we are willing to pay. That is also what happened in Greece and most of western Europe. It is an unsustainable system. 40 cents of every dollar in my SS check is borrowed from my kids. You can't even prorate that by the amount taken in by the FICA tax since LBJ put SS in budget but even if you did, the check still includes some borrowed money since FICA does not cover the outlay. Well, if you're not willing to address even one of the major entitlements, then there's no way to fix it. I agree, we're over-extended, but some would lay that at the door of the current administration, when previous went wild with spending and deregulation, then said, oh by the way, we're about to have a financial meltdown, and tried to put the toothpaste back in the tube. The current admin. has been attempting to do that since it got in power, and it actually seems to be working. The next step will be to do something like paygo, but what we can't do is tighten spending. That would result in the same thing happening again. I will lay that on every administration since Eisenhower. He was the last one who actually wanted the government to live within it's budget. Goldwater predicted this Social Security problem in 1964, when we might have actually been able to do something about it. .By 1970 the die was cast and anyone who actually looked at the demographics knew SS was going to go broke. The only arguments was when. In spite of that nobody was willing to propose the fixes that would actually save the system (later retirement ages, stopping the unrealistic growth in benefits and means testing the benefit). They nibble around the edges of this but they will not take the steps necessary to fix it. Greece is looking the same basic problem in the face, with a EU gun at their back and they will have to make the changes. Let's see how that works out. We are in no way comparable to the Greek economy. SS is solvent now and can be fixed. The sky isn't falling. You'll never see a SS check. Ill bet that frosts your ass. Sure. You and Nucknuck should be hiding under the bed together. We'll tell you when to come out. |
OT entitlements (was lighthouses)
"Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 11/06/2010 10:49 PM, nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 20:00:37 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: The problem is not entitlements per se, it is unfunded entitlements and that includes SS and Medicare as of this year. We have done exactly what Tyler predicted. We voted benefits in excess of the taxes we are willing to pay. That is also what happened in Greece and most of western Europe. It is an unsustainable system. 40 cents of every dollar in my SS check is borrowed from my kids. You can't even prorate that by the amount taken in by the FICA tax since LBJ put SS in budget but even if you did, the check still includes some borrowed money since FICA does not cover the outlay. Well, if you're not willing to address even one of the major entitlements, then there's no way to fix it. I agree, we're over-extended, but some would lay that at the door of the current administration, when previous went wild with spending and deregulation, then said, oh by the way, we're about to have a financial meltdown, and tried to put the toothpaste back in the tube. The current admin. has been attempting to do that since it got in power, and it actually seems to be working. The next step will be to do something like paygo, but what we can't do is tighten spending. That would result in the same thing happening again. I will lay that on every administration since Eisenhower. He was the last one who actually wanted the government to live within it's budget. Goldwater predicted this Social Security problem in 1964, when we might have actually been able to do something about it. .By 1970 the die was cast and anyone who actually looked at the demographics knew SS was going to go broke. The only arguments was when. In spite of that nobody was willing to propose the fixes that would actually save the system (later retirement ages, stopping the unrealistic growth in benefits and means testing the benefit). They nibble around the edges of this but they will not take the steps necessary to fix it. Greece is looking the same basic problem in the face, with a EU gun at their back and they will have to make the changes. Let's see how that works out. We are in no way comparable to the Greek economy. SS is solvent now and can be fixed. The sky isn't falling. Sort of like the debtor in denial the night before the home is reposessed. It will not happen overnight. Numbers sure look like Obamanomics isn't working one bit. In fact, sending the economy to new depths. -- Taxation, modern day slavery. The loss of economic freedom. No. You're just an idiot. |
OT entitlements (was lighthouses)
|
OT entitlements (was lighthouses)
"Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 11/06/2010 9:00 PM, nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 12:53:22 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 10:56:15 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: Funny how everyone slams "entitlements" right up until it affects their social security, medicare, police/fire/infrastructure in their neighborhood, EMT availability, library access, etc. Then, it's don't touch. If people don't want entitlements, then they should vote against them and vote out any politician that promotes funding them. So far, that hasn't happened, and there doesn't appear to be any strong movement to do so. We can look at Greece to get an idea about what can happen to "entitlements" when they are unrealistic. My Alexander Tyler quote still seems right "A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government." Sorry, but I disagree with Tyler. Firstly, democracy by definition isn't a fixed object. It's an idea and it has endured in one form or another for several 1000 years. Ancient Greece is a great example. That particular culture failed, but not because of democracy. Our culture may fail, but not because of democracy. Name the democracy that survived more than 200 years. You can't say the US because we are a representative republic that is only becoming democratic in the last 100 years. For most of our history only rich white men could vote. Women didn't have the vote until the 1920s and blacks didn't get the universal vote until the 60s. "A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury." "From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship." "The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years" "During those 200 years, those nations always progressed through the following sequence: 1. from bondage to spiritual faith; 2. from spiritual faith to great courage; 3. from courage to liberty; 4. from liberty to abundance; 5. from abundance to complacency; 6. from complacency to apathy; 7. from apathy to dependence; 8. from dependence back into bondage" We are at about #6 right now. BP would say we were closer to #8 Which entitlements don't you think are appropriate? I'm sure there are lots of example of things that make no sense, but there are many more that make perfect sense and are appropriate and necessary. BP isn't a democracy. It's a for-profit corporation. It (and similar) need to be regulated, since corporations don't give a fig about democracy or the public good. They're only concerned with the corporate good. Capitalism, in its purest form, is unworkable and must be tempered with social consciousness. The problem is not entitlements per se, it is unfunded entitlements and that includes SS and Medicare as of this year. We have done exactly what Tyler predicted. We voted benefits in excess of the taxes we are willing to pay. That is also what happened in Greece and most of western Europe. It is an unsustainable system. 40 cents of every dollar in my SS check is borrowed from my kids. You can't even prorate that by the amount taken in by the FICA tax since LBJ put SS in budget but even if you did, the check still includes some borrowed money since FICA does not cover the outlay. Well, if you're not willing to address even one of the major entitlements, then there's no way to fix it. I agree, we're over-extended, but some would lay that at the door of the current administration, when previous went wild with spending and deregulation, then said, oh by the way, we're about to have a financial meltdown, and tried to put the toothpaste back in the tube. The current admin. has been attempting to do that since it got in power, and it actually seems to be working. The next step will be to do something like paygo, but what we can't do is tighten spending. That would result in the same thing happening again. And Obama is still making the same mistakes as the predicessors except he is doing it faster and larger than anyone else. Record debt accumulation, spending and corruption gone mad. Going to really screw with standard of living in due time. Sending USA down the economic sewer. You should watch a program called "Til Debt Do Us Part". Governemnt is behaving the same way as a delinquent debtor the day before the repo man shows up. Total denialism of reality. -- Taxation, modern day slavery. The loss of economic freedom. No. You're just stupid. I know it's repetitious, but it's worth repeating. |
OT entitlements (was lighthouses)
"Wayne.B" wrote in message ... On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 12:53:22 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: Which entitlements don't you think are appropriate? Every entitlement can be justified in some way and appear reasonable on the surface. That's part of the problem. Taken as a whole however they eventually become too expensive to be self sustaining. The real mistake is to assume that all issues can be corrected by some sort of government program. What ever happened to social responsibility and community action? So, a couple of points. I agree with you, but the trick is to figure out a way to get regular people to make good decisions about entitlements. I'm open to suggestions. Second, no one is suggesting that the gov't can solve all the problems. Gov't can solve some of the problems, however. Third, social responsibility and community action are alive and well. Perhaps we need to encourage them more.. no argument there. |
Time to trash the Conservatives
"Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 11/06/2010 10:50 PM, nom=de=plume wrote: "Larry" wrote in message ... nom=de=plume wrote: "YukonBound" wrote in message ... "Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 11/06/2010 11:56 AM, nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 09:12:26 -0400, BAR wrote: Cut "entitlements." Helen Thomas wouldn't even have the nerve to say that. ;-) I feel sorry for her. She could have left the scene as a class act. Instead... Funny how everyone slams "entitlements" right up until it affects their social security, medicare, police/fire/infrastructure in their neighborhood, EMT availability, library access, etc. Then, it's don't touch. If people don't want entitlements, then they should vote against them and vote out any politician that promotes funding them. So far, that hasn't happened, and there doesn't appear to be any strong movement to do so. Actually, what the produicers shoudl do, and many are is to move. Why live in a country where the 2/3rds not paying for it can outvote the 1/3 that does? To me, it feels like taxation without representation when the begars, liberal losers and pocket pickers out vote the tax paying worker. Also known as slavery. Uh...did you say you weren't working at this time? He's unemployable. And you know that to be a fact because...Harry said so? It's so obvious... he can't really speak English. He rants like a crazy man. Actually, he might be employed, but I doubt it's more than in a day-laborer capacity. Jeez, said the unemployable envious slug.... -- Taxation, modern day slavery. The loss of economic freedom. You're the one who's always ranting about the sky fall numnuts. |
Time to trash the Conservatives
"Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 11/06/2010 9:03 PM, nom=de=plume wrote: "Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 11/06/2010 11:56 AM, nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 09:12:26 -0400, BAR wrote: Cut "entitlements." Helen Thomas wouldn't even have the nerve to say that. ;-) I feel sorry for her. She could have left the scene as a class act. Instead... Funny how everyone slams "entitlements" right up until it affects their social security, medicare, police/fire/infrastructure in their neighborhood, EMT availability, library access, etc. Then, it's don't touch. If people don't want entitlements, then they should vote against them and vote out any politician that promotes funding them. So far, that hasn't happened, and there doesn't appear to be any strong movement to do so. Actually, what the produicers shoudl do, and many are is to move. Why live in a country where the 2/3rds not paying for it can outvote the 1/3 that does? To me, it feels like taxation without representation when the begars, liberal losers and pocket pickers out vote the tax paying worker. Also known as slavery. -- Liberalism - a disease of envy, greed, entitlement and KAOS. What are you ranting about. Your first sentence is not coherent and the rest is just a mindless rant. Who cares how it feels to you??? You're not a citizen. Go complain to the Canadian gov't. I doubt they'll listen to you either. You had better care, who is going to pay for your welfare check? It will not be me for much longer. Me, I plan on retiring early and most of my assets are tax paid, so You are right about Canada, they are much further down the road than the US is. You will figure it out in 10 years. In Canada many move out of Canada on retirement. I might yet do so. -- Taxation, modern day slavery. The loss of economic freedom. You?? YOU???? hahaha... you can barely pay for your beer money. |
OT entitlements (was lighthouses)
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Moose" wrote in message ... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 18:23:42 -0600, Canuck57 wrote: Actually, stuff like SS was wel funded. But skimed by the government. And often invested in losers because of politics. If all the 30+ years a working types has SS (employer and employee) in their 401k they would retire early. The problem is the government has no vehicle to actually save money since we got off the gold standard. SS was always pay as you go and the trust fund was just a scam to collect more taxes for other things. mostly wars. Originally it was WWII (lend lease)when the trust fund was established (1939-40) and it was put on budget to hide the cost of the Vietnam war (1968-69). The concept of 401ks is flawed too looking forward because 83 million boomers pulling their money out of the stock market and spending it will crash the market. The real problem is you can't have a third of the adult population living off the work of the other two thirds without a revolt. The gov't doesn't need to "save" money as much as it needs to have money available. The gold standard was highly flawed and died an appropriate death. Boomers will not be pulling money out en masse. In fact, some of the boomer generation has already hit retirement age. It's a spread of about 15 years... something like that. Most with substantial 401K-like savings will likely pull it out in drips and drabs. Only someone foolish would pull it out at once, esp. given the tax consequences. Obie's lickin his chops waiting to get at our 401k money. If we don't start spending it he'll find another way to grab it. Rest assured on that, little lady. You're stupid. Bush was the one who wanted to privatize social security. Thank GOD that didn't go through. He's the one who went on a spending and tax give-away for 7 years. You sound like Obie. Blame everything on the "previous administration". Obie doesn't have the balls to say W's name. Got any job prospects Emily? |
OT entitlements (was lighthouses)
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 11/06/2010 11:53 PM, wrote: On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 21:49:15 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: I will lay that on every administration since Eisenhower. He was the last one who actually wanted the government to live within it's budget. Goldwater predicted this Social Security problem in 1964, when we might have actually been able to do something about it. .By 1970 the die was cast and anyone who actually looked at the demographics knew SS was going to go broke. The only arguments was when. In spite of that nobody was willing to propose the fixes that would actually save the system (later retirement ages, stopping the unrealistic growth in benefits and means testing the benefit). They nibble around the edges of this but they will not take the steps necessary to fix it. Greece is looking the same basic problem in the face, with a EU gun at their back and they will have to make the changes. Let's see how that works out. We are in no way comparable to the Greek economy. SS is solvent now and can be fixed. The sky isn't falling. The sky isn't falling yet but SS is clearly living beyond it's means. We are borrowing money to make up the difference. The same is true of Medicare. But collapse is inevitable at this point. Politicians don't have the balls to do what is needed. It is almost assured to be some kind of collapse. People have yet to ask why everyone is taking cutbacks but the government is fater, lardier, and more elitest at every turn. Certainly not sustainable, but I now submit economic collapse to new lows is a mater of time, and not if. -- Taxation, modern day slavery. The loss of economic freedom. No. You're just a frightened little boy. Go hide under the bed. We'll tell you when to come out. I see that we've brought yoy down to our level. |
OT entitlements (was lighthouses)
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Moose" wrote in message ... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 20:00:37 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: The problem is not entitlements per se, it is unfunded entitlements and that includes SS and Medicare as of this year. We have done exactly what Tyler predicted. We voted benefits in excess of the taxes we are willing to pay. That is also what happened in Greece and most of western Europe. It is an unsustainable system. 40 cents of every dollar in my SS check is borrowed from my kids. You can't even prorate that by the amount taken in by the FICA tax since LBJ put SS in budget but even if you did, the check still includes some borrowed money since FICA does not cover the outlay. Well, if you're not willing to address even one of the major entitlements, then there's no way to fix it. I agree, we're over-extended, but some would lay that at the door of the current administration, when previous went wild with spending and deregulation, then said, oh by the way, we're about to have a financial meltdown, and tried to put the toothpaste back in the tube. The current admin. has been attempting to do that since it got in power, and it actually seems to be working. The next step will be to do something like paygo, but what we can't do is tighten spending. That would result in the same thing happening again. I will lay that on every administration since Eisenhower. He was the last one who actually wanted the government to live within it's budget. Goldwater predicted this Social Security problem in 1964, when we might have actually been able to do something about it. .By 1970 the die was cast and anyone who actually looked at the demographics knew SS was going to go broke. The only arguments was when. In spite of that nobody was willing to propose the fixes that would actually save the system (later retirement ages, stopping the unrealistic growth in benefits and means testing the benefit). They nibble around the edges of this but they will not take the steps necessary to fix it. Greece is looking the same basic problem in the face, with a EU gun at their back and they will have to make the changes. Let's see how that works out. We are in no way comparable to the Greek economy. SS is solvent now and can be fixed. The sky isn't falling. You'll never see a SS check. Ill bet that frosts your ass. Sure. You and Nucknuck should be hiding under the bed together. We'll tell you when to come out. How do you respond to a girl who has nothing to say? Were you named after Emmet Kelly? |
OT entitlements (was lighthouses)
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 11/06/2010 9:00 PM, nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 12:53:22 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 10:56:15 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: Funny how everyone slams "entitlements" right up until it affects their social security, medicare, police/fire/infrastructure in their neighborhood, EMT availability, library access, etc. Then, it's don't touch. If people don't want entitlements, then they should vote against them and vote out any politician that promotes funding them. So far, that hasn't happened, and there doesn't appear to be any strong movement to do so. We can look at Greece to get an idea about what can happen to "entitlements" when they are unrealistic. My Alexander Tyler quote still seems right "A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government." Sorry, but I disagree with Tyler. Firstly, democracy by definition isn't a fixed object. It's an idea and it has endured in one form or another for several 1000 years. Ancient Greece is a great example. That particular culture failed, but not because of democracy. Our culture may fail, but not because of democracy. Name the democracy that survived more than 200 years. You can't say the US because we are a representative republic that is only becoming democratic in the last 100 years. For most of our history only rich white men could vote. Women didn't have the vote until the 1920s and blacks didn't get the universal vote until the 60s. "A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury." "From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship." "The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years" "During those 200 years, those nations always progressed through the following sequence: 1. from bondage to spiritual faith; 2. from spiritual faith to great courage; 3. from courage to liberty; 4. from liberty to abundance; 5. from abundance to complacency; 6. from complacency to apathy; 7. from apathy to dependence; 8. from dependence back into bondage" We are at about #6 right now. BP would say we were closer to #8 Which entitlements don't you think are appropriate? I'm sure there are lots of example of things that make no sense, but there are many more that make perfect sense and are appropriate and necessary. BP isn't a democracy. It's a for-profit corporation. It (and similar) need to be regulated, since corporations don't give a fig about democracy or the public good. They're only concerned with the corporate good. Capitalism, in its purest form, is unworkable and must be tempered with social consciousness. The problem is not entitlements per se, it is unfunded entitlements and that includes SS and Medicare as of this year. We have done exactly what Tyler predicted. We voted benefits in excess of the taxes we are willing to pay. That is also what happened in Greece and most of western Europe. It is an unsustainable system. 40 cents of every dollar in my SS check is borrowed from my kids. You can't even prorate that by the amount taken in by the FICA tax since LBJ put SS in budget but even if you did, the check still includes some borrowed money since FICA does not cover the outlay. Well, if you're not willing to address even one of the major entitlements, then there's no way to fix it. I agree, we're over-extended, but some would lay that at the door of the current administration, when previous went wild with spending and deregulation, then said, oh by the way, we're about to have a financial meltdown, and tried to put the toothpaste back in the tube. The current admin. has been attempting to do that since it got in power, and it actually seems to be working. The next step will be to do something like paygo, but what we can't do is tighten spending. That would result in the same thing happening again. And Obama is still making the same mistakes as the predicessors except he is doing it faster and larger than anyone else. Record debt accumulation, spending and corruption gone mad. Going to really screw with standard of living in due time. Sending USA down the economic sewer. You should watch a program called "Til Debt Do Us Part". Governemnt is behaving the same way as a delinquent debtor the day before the repo man shows up. Total denialism of reality. -- Taxation, modern day slavery. The loss of economic freedom. No. You're just stupid. I know it's repetitious, but it's worth repeating. Hate to break it to you. Nothing you say is worth repeating. Eh, Emilia |
Time to trash the Conservatives
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 11/06/2010 10:50 PM, nom=de=plume wrote: "Larry" wrote in message ... nom=de=plume wrote: "YukonBound" wrote in message ... "Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 11/06/2010 11:56 AM, nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 09:12:26 -0400, BAR wrote: Cut "entitlements." Helen Thomas wouldn't even have the nerve to say that. ;-) I feel sorry for her. She could have left the scene as a class act. Instead... Funny how everyone slams "entitlements" right up until it affects their social security, medicare, police/fire/infrastructure in their neighborhood, EMT availability, library access, etc. Then, it's don't touch. If people don't want entitlements, then they should vote against them and vote out any politician that promotes funding them. So far, that hasn't happened, and there doesn't appear to be any strong movement to do so. Actually, what the produicers shoudl do, and many are is to move. Why live in a country where the 2/3rds not paying for it can outvote the 1/3 that does? To me, it feels like taxation without representation when the begars, liberal losers and pocket pickers out vote the tax paying worker. Also known as slavery. Uh...did you say you weren't working at this time? He's unemployable. And you know that to be a fact because...Harry said so? It's so obvious... he can't really speak English. He rants like a crazy man. Actually, he might be employed, but I doubt it's more than in a day-laborer capacity. Jeez, said the unemployable envious slug.... -- Taxation, modern day slavery. The loss of economic freedom. You're the one who's always ranting about the sky fall numnuts. How would you like it if we started talking about your privates. Try to show a modicom of decency around here, Emanuela. |
OT entitlements (was lighthouses)
On 12/06/2010 12:04 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
"Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 11/06/2010 9:01 PM, nom=de=plume wrote: "Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 11/06/2010 5:47 PM, wrote: On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 12:53:22 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 10:56:15 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: Funny how everyone slams "entitlements" right up until it affects their social security, medicare, police/fire/infrastructure in their neighborhood, EMT availability, library access, etc. Then, it's don't touch. If people don't want entitlements, then they should vote against them and vote out any politician that promotes funding them. So far, that hasn't happened, and there doesn't appear to be any strong movement to do so. We can look at Greece to get an idea about what can happen to "entitlements" when they are unrealistic. My Alexander Tyler quote still seems right "A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government." Sorry, but I disagree with Tyler. Firstly, democracy by definition isn't a fixed object. It's an idea and it has endured in one form or another for several 1000 years. Ancient Greece is a great example. That particular culture failed, but not because of democracy. Our culture may fail, but not because of democracy. Name the democracy that survived more than 200 years. You can't say the US because we are a representative republic that is only becoming democratic in the last 100 years. For most of our history only rich white men could vote. Women didn't have the vote until the 1920s and blacks didn't get the universal vote until the 60s. "A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury." "From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship." "The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years" "During those 200 years, those nations always progressed through the following sequence: 1. from bondage to spiritual faith; 2. from spiritual faith to great courage; 3. from courage to liberty; 4. from liberty to abundance; 5. from abundance to complacency; 6. from complacency to apathy; 7. from apathy to dependence; 8. from dependence back into bondage" We are at about #6 right now. BP would say we were closer to #8 Which entitlements don't you think are appropriate? I'm sure there are lots of example of things that make no sense, but there are many more that make perfect sense and are appropriate and necessary. BP isn't a democracy. It's a for-profit corporation. It (and similar) need to be regulated, since corporations don't give a fig about democracy or the public good. They're only concerned with the corporate good. Capitalism, in its purest form, is unworkable and must be tempered with social consciousness. The problem is not entitlements per se, it is unfunded entitlements and that includes SS and Medicare as of this year. We have done exactly what Tyler predicted. We voted benefits in excess of the taxes we are willing to pay. That is also what happened in Greece and most of western Europe. It is an unsustainable system. 40 cents of every dollar in my SS check is borrowed from my kids. You can't even prorate that by the amount taken in by the FICA tax since LBJ put SS in budget but even if you did, the check still includes some borrowed money since FICA does not cover the outlay. Actually, stuff like SS was wel funded. But skimed by the government. And often invested in losers because of politics. If all the 30+ years a working types has SS (employer and employee) in their 401k they would retire early. And SS is one of the very few things government does for everyone. So they hold it over your heads like a bat. What people should ask is for their corrupt politicians to spend less on pork and fund SS like it should have been in the first place. That is, less pork. -- Liberalism - a disease of envy, greed, entitlement and KAOS. Actually, I agree, but some people's pork is other people's needed benefits. Do you have a suggestion about which is pork and should be cut? I don't know what the clinical description would be, but people om the lamb getting their personal bailouts, and those debt worshipers seem to have a disease of sorts. They get quite entitled, rude and dysfunctional over time. The only way to get them off is like herion, cut them off. Pretty simple which pork to cut, if you didn't pay you don't get. -- Taxation, modern day slavery. The loss of economic freedom. Basically, you don't know. But, you have no problem condemning the benefits... just as long as nobody touches your benefits. So, even an idiot can occasionally say something that makes sense, apparently. I think the best way is to make sure you leftist maggots can't get to my nest eggs. I didn't count on government for my sorry ass. Unlike you grubs. -- Taxation, modern day slavery. The loss of economic freedom. |
OT entitlements (was lighthouses)
On 12/06/2010 12:09 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
"Moose" wrote in message ... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 18:23:42 -0600, Canuck57 wrote: Actually, stuff like SS was wel funded. But skimed by the government. And often invested in losers because of politics. If all the 30+ years a working types has SS (employer and employee) in their 401k they would retire early. The problem is the government has no vehicle to actually save money since we got off the gold standard. SS was always pay as you go and the trust fund was just a scam to collect more taxes for other things. mostly wars. Originally it was WWII (lend lease)when the trust fund was established (1939-40) and it was put on budget to hide the cost of the Vietnam war (1968-69). The concept of 401ks is flawed too looking forward because 83 million boomers pulling their money out of the stock market and spending it will crash the market. The real problem is you can't have a third of the adult population living off the work of the other two thirds without a revolt. The gov't doesn't need to "save" money as much as it needs to have money available. The gold standard was highly flawed and died an appropriate death. Boomers will not be pulling money out en masse. In fact, some of the boomer generation has already hit retirement age. It's a spread of about 15 years... something like that. Most with substantial 401K-like savings will likely pull it out in drips and drabs. Only someone foolish would pull it out at once, esp. given the tax consequences. Obie's lickin his chops waiting to get at our 401k money. If we don't start spending it he'll find another way to grab it. Rest assured on that, little lady. You're stupid. Bush was the one who wanted to privatize social security. Thank GOD that didn't go through. He's the one who went on a spending and tax give-away for 7 years. Ah, delerious denialism... Just a paracite. So how does it feel to be a paracite? -- Taxation, modern day slavery. The loss of economic freedom. |
OT entitlements (was lighthouses)
|
OT entitlements (was lighthouses)
On 12/06/2010 12:11 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message ... On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 09:37:25 -0600, Canuck57 wrote: On deduction that should be phased out is mortgage tax deductability as you get older. Say at 20 you get the full benefit, but as you get older say to 50 it disappears. Encouraging people to have their homes 100% paid for in due time. That is, reduce mortgage deductabiltiy encouraging equity in the home. So when the economy tiffs, they are less likely to toss the keys to the repo man. And be in a hell of a lot better position for retirement. But this would be progressive and will not happen as the US economy is now built on debt that is going delinquent. The other deduction that should go is the "2d home" mortgage deduction. That is what fueled the "want house" market at the expense of the taxpayer. The first is just politically impossible. The second isn't a bad idea, but it is also highly unlikely. It goes right back to if someone has it, they don't want to give it up. How do you plan on forcing people to give up these deductions? Pretty easy actually. You being a massive debtor and all, you are exposed. -- Taxation, modern day slavery. The loss of economic freedom. |
OT entitlements (was lighthouses)
"Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 12/06/2010 12:04 PM, nom=de=plume wrote: "Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 11/06/2010 9:01 PM, nom=de=plume wrote: "Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 11/06/2010 5:47 PM, wrote: On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 12:53:22 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 10:56:15 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: Funny how everyone slams "entitlements" right up until it affects their social security, medicare, police/fire/infrastructure in their neighborhood, EMT availability, library access, etc. Then, it's don't touch. If people don't want entitlements, then they should vote against them and vote out any politician that promotes funding them. So far, that hasn't happened, and there doesn't appear to be any strong movement to do so. We can look at Greece to get an idea about what can happen to "entitlements" when they are unrealistic. My Alexander Tyler quote still seems right "A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government." Sorry, but I disagree with Tyler. Firstly, democracy by definition isn't a fixed object. It's an idea and it has endured in one form or another for several 1000 years. Ancient Greece is a great example. That particular culture failed, but not because of democracy. Our culture may fail, but not because of democracy. Name the democracy that survived more than 200 years. You can't say the US because we are a representative republic that is only becoming democratic in the last 100 years. For most of our history only rich white men could vote. Women didn't have the vote until the 1920s and blacks didn't get the universal vote until the 60s. "A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury." "From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship." "The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years" "During those 200 years, those nations always progressed through the following sequence: 1. from bondage to spiritual faith; 2. from spiritual faith to great courage; 3. from courage to liberty; 4. from liberty to abundance; 5. from abundance to complacency; 6. from complacency to apathy; 7. from apathy to dependence; 8. from dependence back into bondage" We are at about #6 right now. BP would say we were closer to #8 Which entitlements don't you think are appropriate? I'm sure there are lots of example of things that make no sense, but there are many more that make perfect sense and are appropriate and necessary. BP isn't a democracy. It's a for-profit corporation. It (and similar) need to be regulated, since corporations don't give a fig about democracy or the public good. They're only concerned with the corporate good. Capitalism, in its purest form, is unworkable and must be tempered with social consciousness. The problem is not entitlements per se, it is unfunded entitlements and that includes SS and Medicare as of this year. We have done exactly what Tyler predicted. We voted benefits in excess of the taxes we are willing to pay. That is also what happened in Greece and most of western Europe. It is an unsustainable system. 40 cents of every dollar in my SS check is borrowed from my kids. You can't even prorate that by the amount taken in by the FICA tax since LBJ put SS in budget but even if you did, the check still includes some borrowed money since FICA does not cover the outlay. Actually, stuff like SS was wel funded. But skimed by the government. And often invested in losers because of politics. If all the 30+ years a working types has SS (employer and employee) in their 401k they would retire early. And SS is one of the very few things government does for everyone. So they hold it over your heads like a bat. What people should ask is for their corrupt politicians to spend less on pork and fund SS like it should have been in the first place. That is, less pork. -- Liberalism - a disease of envy, greed, entitlement and KAOS. Actually, I agree, but some people's pork is other people's needed benefits. Do you have a suggestion about which is pork and should be cut? I don't know what the clinical description would be, but people om the lamb getting their personal bailouts, and those debt worshipers seem to have a disease of sorts. They get quite entitled, rude and dysfunctional over time. The only way to get them off is like herion, cut them off. Pretty simple which pork to cut, if you didn't pay you don't get. -- Taxation, modern day slavery. The loss of economic freedom. Basically, you don't know. But, you have no problem condemning the benefits... just as long as nobody touches your benefits. So, even an idiot can occasionally say something that makes sense, apparently. I think the best way is to make sure you leftist maggots can't get to my nest eggs. I didn't count on government for my sorry ass. Unlike you grubs. -- Taxation, modern day slavery. The loss of economic freedom. And how, pray tell, are you going to stop me? You count on the charity of others. That's obvious. |
Time to trash the Conservatives
On 12/06/2010 1:05 PM, Moose wrote:
wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On 11/06/2010 10:50 PM, nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On 11/06/2010 11:56 AM, nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 09:12:26 -0400, wrote: Cut "entitlements." Helen Thomas wouldn't even have the nerve to say that. ;-) I feel sorry for her. She could have left the scene as a class act. Instead... Funny how everyone slams "entitlements" right up until it affects their social security, medicare, police/fire/infrastructure in their neighborhood, EMT availability, library access, etc. Then, it's don't touch. If people don't want entitlements, then they should vote against them and vote out any politician that promotes funding them. So far, that hasn't happened, and there doesn't appear to be any strong movement to do so. Actually, what the produicers shoudl do, and many are is to move. Why live in a country where the 2/3rds not paying for it can outvote the 1/3 that does? To me, it feels like taxation without representation when the begars, liberal losers and pocket pickers out vote the tax paying worker. Also known as slavery. Uh...did you say you weren't working at this time? He's unemployable. And you know that to be a fact because...Harry said so? It's so obvious... he can't really speak English. He rants like a crazy man. Actually, he might be employed, but I doubt it's more than in a day-laborer capacity. Jeez, said the unemployable envious slug.... -- Taxation, modern day slavery. The loss of economic freedom. You're the one who's always ranting about the sky fall numnuts. How would you like it if we started talking about your privates. Try to show a modicom of decency around here, Emanuela. Don't worry, if de-fumer came after my nuts, I would run like hell. She-it must be a real ball breaker. -- Taxation, modern day slavery. The loss of economic freedom. |
OT entitlements (was lighthouses)
"Moose" wrote in message ... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Moose" wrote in message ... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 18:23:42 -0600, Canuck57 wrote: Actually, stuff like SS was wel funded. But skimed by the government. And often invested in losers because of politics. If all the 30+ years a working types has SS (employer and employee) in their 401k they would retire early. The problem is the government has no vehicle to actually save money since we got off the gold standard. SS was always pay as you go and the trust fund was just a scam to collect more taxes for other things. mostly wars. Originally it was WWII (lend lease)when the trust fund was established (1939-40) and it was put on budget to hide the cost of the Vietnam war (1968-69). The concept of 401ks is flawed too looking forward because 83 million boomers pulling their money out of the stock market and spending it will crash the market. The real problem is you can't have a third of the adult population living off the work of the other two thirds without a revolt. The gov't doesn't need to "save" money as much as it needs to have money available. The gold standard was highly flawed and died an appropriate death. Boomers will not be pulling money out en masse. In fact, some of the boomer generation has already hit retirement age. It's a spread of about 15 years... something like that. Most with substantial 401K-like savings will likely pull it out in drips and drabs. Only someone foolish would pull it out at once, esp. given the tax consequences. Obie's lickin his chops waiting to get at our 401k money. If we don't start spending it he'll find another way to grab it. Rest assured on that, little lady. You're stupid. Bush was the one who wanted to privatize social security. Thank GOD that didn't go through. He's the one who went on a spending and tax give-away for 7 years. You sound like Obie. Blame everything on the "previous administration". Obie doesn't have the balls to say W's name. Got any job prospects Emily? Yeah, Bush was so wonderful... just about ruined the economy, the environment, a war for no reason. What a great guy! The name is Em, not Emily. No. No job prospects. I own my own company. How about your job prospects? Sorry, we're not hiring. |
OT entitlements (was lighthouses)
"Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 12/06/2010 12:09 PM, nom=de=plume wrote: "Moose" wrote in message ... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 18:23:42 -0600, Canuck57 wrote: Actually, stuff like SS was wel funded. But skimed by the government. And often invested in losers because of politics. If all the 30+ years a working types has SS (employer and employee) in their 401k they would retire early. The problem is the government has no vehicle to actually save money since we got off the gold standard. SS was always pay as you go and the trust fund was just a scam to collect more taxes for other things. mostly wars. Originally it was WWII (lend lease)when the trust fund was established (1939-40) and it was put on budget to hide the cost of the Vietnam war (1968-69). The concept of 401ks is flawed too looking forward because 83 million boomers pulling their money out of the stock market and spending it will crash the market. The real problem is you can't have a third of the adult population living off the work of the other two thirds without a revolt. The gov't doesn't need to "save" money as much as it needs to have money available. The gold standard was highly flawed and died an appropriate death. Boomers will not be pulling money out en masse. In fact, some of the boomer generation has already hit retirement age. It's a spread of about 15 years... something like that. Most with substantial 401K-like savings will likely pull it out in drips and drabs. Only someone foolish would pull it out at once, esp. given the tax consequences. Obie's lickin his chops waiting to get at our 401k money. If we don't start spending it he'll find another way to grab it. Rest assured on that, little lady. You're stupid. Bush was the one who wanted to privatize social security. Thank GOD that didn't go through. He's the one who went on a spending and tax give-away for 7 years. Ah, delerious denialism... Just a paracite. So how does it feel to be a paracite? -- Taxation, modern day slavery. The loss of economic freedom. So, Bush did a good job? You're really an idiot! It's spelled parasite not paracite. IDIOT |
OT entitlements (was lighthouses)
"Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 12/06/2010 12:11 PM, nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 09:37:25 -0600, Canuck57 wrote: On deduction that should be phased out is mortgage tax deductability as you get older. Say at 20 you get the full benefit, but as you get older say to 50 it disappears. Encouraging people to have their homes 100% paid for in due time. That is, reduce mortgage deductabiltiy encouraging equity in the home. So when the economy tiffs, they are less likely to toss the keys to the repo man. And be in a hell of a lot better position for retirement. But this would be progressive and will not happen as the US economy is now built on debt that is going delinquent. The other deduction that should go is the "2d home" mortgage deduction. That is what fueled the "want house" market at the expense of the taxpayer. The first is just politically impossible. The second isn't a bad idea, but it is also highly unlikely. It goes right back to if someone has it, they don't want to give it up. How do you plan on forcing people to give up these deductions? Pretty easy actually. You being a massive debtor and all, you are exposed. -- Taxation, modern day slavery. The loss of economic freedom. You're an idiot. You being an idiot doesn't help your situation. |
OT entitlements (was lighthouses)
"Moose" wrote in message ... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 11/06/2010 11:53 PM, wrote: On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 21:49:15 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: I will lay that on every administration since Eisenhower. He was the last one who actually wanted the government to live within it's budget. Goldwater predicted this Social Security problem in 1964, when we might have actually been able to do something about it. .By 1970 the die was cast and anyone who actually looked at the demographics knew SS was going to go broke. The only arguments was when. In spite of that nobody was willing to propose the fixes that would actually save the system (later retirement ages, stopping the unrealistic growth in benefits and means testing the benefit). They nibble around the edges of this but they will not take the steps necessary to fix it. Greece is looking the same basic problem in the face, with a EU gun at their back and they will have to make the changes. Let's see how that works out. We are in no way comparable to the Greek economy. SS is solvent now and can be fixed. The sky isn't falling. The sky isn't falling yet but SS is clearly living beyond it's means. We are borrowing money to make up the difference. The same is true of Medicare. But collapse is inevitable at this point. Politicians don't have the balls to do what is needed. It is almost assured to be some kind of collapse. People have yet to ask why everyone is taking cutbacks but the government is fater, lardier, and more elitest at every turn. Certainly not sustainable, but I now submit economic collapse to new lows is a mater of time, and not if. -- Taxation, modern day slavery. The loss of economic freedom. No. You're just a frightened little boy. Go hide under the bed. We'll tell you when to come out. I see that we've brought yoy down to our level. I like to remain above ground. You're the groundhog. |
OT entitlements (was lighthouses)
"Moose" wrote in message ... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Moose" wrote in message ... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 20:00:37 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: The problem is not entitlements per se, it is unfunded entitlements and that includes SS and Medicare as of this year. We have done exactly what Tyler predicted. We voted benefits in excess of the taxes we are willing to pay. That is also what happened in Greece and most of western Europe. It is an unsustainable system. 40 cents of every dollar in my SS check is borrowed from my kids. You can't even prorate that by the amount taken in by the FICA tax since LBJ put SS in budget but even if you did, the check still includes some borrowed money since FICA does not cover the outlay. Well, if you're not willing to address even one of the major entitlements, then there's no way to fix it. I agree, we're over-extended, but some would lay that at the door of the current administration, when previous went wild with spending and deregulation, then said, oh by the way, we're about to have a financial meltdown, and tried to put the toothpaste back in the tube. The current admin. has been attempting to do that since it got in power, and it actually seems to be working. The next step will be to do something like paygo, but what we can't do is tighten spending. That would result in the same thing happening again. I will lay that on every administration since Eisenhower. He was the last one who actually wanted the government to live within it's budget. Goldwater predicted this Social Security problem in 1964, when we might have actually been able to do something about it. .By 1970 the die was cast and anyone who actually looked at the demographics knew SS was going to go broke. The only arguments was when. In spite of that nobody was willing to propose the fixes that would actually save the system (later retirement ages, stopping the unrealistic growth in benefits and means testing the benefit). They nibble around the edges of this but they will not take the steps necessary to fix it. Greece is looking the same basic problem in the face, with a EU gun at their back and they will have to make the changes. Let's see how that works out. We are in no way comparable to the Greek economy. SS is solvent now and can be fixed. The sky isn't falling. You'll never see a SS check. Ill bet that frosts your ass. Sure. You and Nucknuck should be hiding under the bed together. We'll tell you when to come out. How do you respond to a girl who has nothing to say? Were you named after Emmet Kelly? Feel free not to respond if you're able. Were you named after a dope? |
OT entitlements (was lighthouses)
"Moose" wrote in message ... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 11/06/2010 9:00 PM, nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 12:53:22 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 10:56:15 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: Funny how everyone slams "entitlements" right up until it affects their social security, medicare, police/fire/infrastructure in their neighborhood, EMT availability, library access, etc. Then, it's don't touch. If people don't want entitlements, then they should vote against them and vote out any politician that promotes funding them. So far, that hasn't happened, and there doesn't appear to be any strong movement to do so. We can look at Greece to get an idea about what can happen to "entitlements" when they are unrealistic. My Alexander Tyler quote still seems right "A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government." Sorry, but I disagree with Tyler. Firstly, democracy by definition isn't a fixed object. It's an idea and it has endured in one form or another for several 1000 years. Ancient Greece is a great example. That particular culture failed, but not because of democracy. Our culture may fail, but not because of democracy. Name the democracy that survived more than 200 years. You can't say the US because we are a representative republic that is only becoming democratic in the last 100 years. For most of our history only rich white men could vote. Women didn't have the vote until the 1920s and blacks didn't get the universal vote until the 60s. "A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury." "From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship." "The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years" "During those 200 years, those nations always progressed through the following sequence: 1. from bondage to spiritual faith; 2. from spiritual faith to great courage; 3. from courage to liberty; 4. from liberty to abundance; 5. from abundance to complacency; 6. from complacency to apathy; 7. from apathy to dependence; 8. from dependence back into bondage" We are at about #6 right now. BP would say we were closer to #8 Which entitlements don't you think are appropriate? I'm sure there are lots of example of things that make no sense, but there are many more that make perfect sense and are appropriate and necessary. BP isn't a democracy. It's a for-profit corporation. It (and similar) need to be regulated, since corporations don't give a fig about democracy or the public good. They're only concerned with the corporate good. Capitalism, in its purest form, is unworkable and must be tempered with social consciousness. The problem is not entitlements per se, it is unfunded entitlements and that includes SS and Medicare as of this year. We have done exactly what Tyler predicted. We voted benefits in excess of the taxes we are willing to pay. That is also what happened in Greece and most of western Europe. It is an unsustainable system. 40 cents of every dollar in my SS check is borrowed from my kids. You can't even prorate that by the amount taken in by the FICA tax since LBJ put SS in budget but even if you did, the check still includes some borrowed money since FICA does not cover the outlay. Well, if you're not willing to address even one of the major entitlements, then there's no way to fix it. I agree, we're over-extended, but some would lay that at the door of the current administration, when previous went wild with spending and deregulation, then said, oh by the way, we're about to have a financial meltdown, and tried to put the toothpaste back in the tube. The current admin. has been attempting to do that since it got in power, and it actually seems to be working. The next step will be to do something like paygo, but what we can't do is tighten spending. That would result in the same thing happening again. And Obama is still making the same mistakes as the predicessors except he is doing it faster and larger than anyone else. Record debt accumulation, spending and corruption gone mad. Going to really screw with standard of living in due time. Sending USA down the economic sewer. You should watch a program called "Til Debt Do Us Part". Governemnt is behaving the same way as a delinquent debtor the day before the repo man shows up. Total denialism of reality. -- Taxation, modern day slavery. The loss of economic freedom. No. You're just stupid. I know it's repetitious, but it's worth repeating. Hate to break it to you. Nothing you say is worth repeating. Eh, Emilia Hate to brake it to you, but you just did. The name is Em not Emilia, but keep trying! |
Time to trash the Conservatives
"Moose" wrote in message ... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 11/06/2010 10:50 PM, nom=de=plume wrote: "Larry" wrote in message ... nom=de=plume wrote: "YukonBound" wrote in message ... "Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 11/06/2010 11:56 AM, nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 09:12:26 -0400, BAR wrote: Cut "entitlements." Helen Thomas wouldn't even have the nerve to say that. ;-) I feel sorry for her. She could have left the scene as a class act. Instead... Funny how everyone slams "entitlements" right up until it affects their social security, medicare, police/fire/infrastructure in their neighborhood, EMT availability, library access, etc. Then, it's don't touch. If people don't want entitlements, then they should vote against them and vote out any politician that promotes funding them. So far, that hasn't happened, and there doesn't appear to be any strong movement to do so. Actually, what the produicers shoudl do, and many are is to move. Why live in a country where the 2/3rds not paying for it can outvote the 1/3 that does? To me, it feels like taxation without representation when the begars, liberal losers and pocket pickers out vote the tax paying worker. Also known as slavery. Uh...did you say you weren't working at this time? He's unemployable. And you know that to be a fact because...Harry said so? It's so obvious... he can't really speak English. He rants like a crazy man. Actually, he might be employed, but I doubt it's more than in a day-laborer capacity. Jeez, said the unemployable envious slug.... -- Taxation, modern day slavery. The loss of economic freedom. You're the one who's always ranting about the sky fall numnuts. How would you like it if we started talking about your privates. Try to show a modicom of decency around here, Emanuela. Like that hasn't happened already? You're an idiot/liar. Em.. just Em dummy. |
OT entitlements (was lighthouses)
On 12/06/2010 1:25 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
"Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 12/06/2010 12:09 PM, nom=de=plume wrote: "Moose" wrote in message ... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 18:23:42 -0600, Canuck57 wrote: Actually, stuff like SS was wel funded. But skimed by the government. And often invested in losers because of politics. If all the 30+ years a working types has SS (employer and employee) in their 401k they would retire early. The problem is the government has no vehicle to actually save money since we got off the gold standard. SS was always pay as you go and the trust fund was just a scam to collect more taxes for other things. mostly wars. Originally it was WWII (lend lease)when the trust fund was established (1939-40) and it was put on budget to hide the cost of the Vietnam war (1968-69). The concept of 401ks is flawed too looking forward because 83 million boomers pulling their money out of the stock market and spending it will crash the market. The real problem is you can't have a third of the adult population living off the work of the other two thirds without a revolt. The gov't doesn't need to "save" money as much as it needs to have money available. The gold standard was highly flawed and died an appropriate death. Boomers will not be pulling money out en masse. In fact, some of the boomer generation has already hit retirement age. It's a spread of about 15 years... something like that. Most with substantial 401K-like savings will likely pull it out in drips and drabs. Only someone foolish would pull it out at once, esp. given the tax consequences. Obie's lickin his chops waiting to get at our 401k money. If we don't start spending it he'll find another way to grab it. Rest assured on that, little lady. You're stupid. Bush was the one who wanted to privatize social security. Thank GOD that didn't go through. He's the one who went on a spending and tax give-away for 7 years. Ah, delerious denialism... Just a paracite. So how does it feel to be a paracite? -- Taxation, modern day slavery. The loss of economic freedom. So, Bush did a good job? You're really an idiot! It's spelled parasite not paracite. IDIOT See, progress. You did something useful today besides whale away like a stuck constipated pig. -- Taxation, modern day slavery. The loss of economic freedom. |
Time to trash the Conservatives
On 12/06/2010 1:29 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
"Moose" wrote in message ... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 11/06/2010 10:50 PM, nom=de=plume wrote: "Larry" wrote in message ... nom=de=plume wrote: "YukonBound" wrote in message ... "Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 11/06/2010 11:56 AM, nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 09:12:26 -0400, BAR wrote: Cut "entitlements." Helen Thomas wouldn't even have the nerve to say that. ;-) I feel sorry for her. She could have left the scene as a class act. Instead... Funny how everyone slams "entitlements" right up until it affects their social security, medicare, police/fire/infrastructure in their neighborhood, EMT availability, library access, etc. Then, it's don't touch. If people don't want entitlements, then they should vote against them and vote out any politician that promotes funding them. So far, that hasn't happened, and there doesn't appear to be any strong movement to do so. Actually, what the produicers shoudl do, and many are is to move. Why live in a country where the 2/3rds not paying for it can outvote the 1/3 that does? To me, it feels like taxation without representation when the begars, liberal losers and pocket pickers out vote the tax paying worker. Also known as slavery. Uh...did you say you weren't working at this time? He's unemployable. And you know that to be a fact because...Harry said so? It's so obvious... he can't really speak English. He rants like a crazy man. Actually, he might be employed, but I doubt it's more than in a day-laborer capacity. Jeez, said the unemployable envious slug.... -- Taxation, modern day slavery. The loss of economic freedom. You're the one who's always ranting about the sky fall numnuts. How would you like it if we started talking about your privates. Try to show a modicom of decency around here, Emanuela. Like that hasn't happened already? You're an idiot/liar. Em.. just Em dummy. BM Dummy, that is your name? Wow, didn't know what made you so warped. Did your parents hate you? -- Taxation, modern day slavery. The loss of economic freedom. |
OT entitlements (was lighthouses)
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Moose" wrote in message ... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 11/06/2010 11:53 PM, wrote: On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 21:49:15 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: I will lay that on every administration since Eisenhower. He was the last one who actually wanted the government to live within it's budget. Goldwater predicted this Social Security problem in 1964, when we might have actually been able to do something about it. .By 1970 the die was cast and anyone who actually looked at the demographics knew SS was going to go broke. The only arguments was when. In spite of that nobody was willing to propose the fixes that would actually save the system (later retirement ages, stopping the unrealistic growth in benefits and means testing the benefit). They nibble around the edges of this but they will not take the steps necessary to fix it. Greece is looking the same basic problem in the face, with a EU gun at their back and they will have to make the changes. Let's see how that works out. We are in no way comparable to the Greek economy. SS is solvent now and can be fixed. The sky isn't falling. The sky isn't falling yet but SS is clearly living beyond it's means. We are borrowing money to make up the difference. The same is true of Medicare. But collapse is inevitable at this point. Politicians don't have the balls to do what is needed. It is almost assured to be some kind of collapse. People have yet to ask why everyone is taking cutbacks but the government is fater, lardier, and more elitest at every turn. Certainly not sustainable, but I now submit economic collapse to new lows is a mater of time, and not if. -- Taxation, modern day slavery. The loss of economic freedom. No. You're just a frightened little boy. Go hide under the bed. We'll tell you when to come out. I see that we've brought yoy down to our level. I like to remain above ground. You're the groundhog. Tell us about the exciting weekend you have planned for yourself. Another weekend with the boys of rec.boats and your cat? How exciting. It must really suck to be you. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:17 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com