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.