| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#2
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
No blood for oil
On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 15:43:12 -0400, wrote:
On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 10:23:35 -0700, wrote: On Mon, 21 Mar 2011 23:48:04 -0400, wrote: On Mon, 21 Mar 2011 18:43:50 -0700, wrote: On Mon, 21 Mar 2011 21:27:47 -0400, wrote: On Mon, 21 Mar 2011 17:02:41 -0700, wrote: On Mon, 21 Mar 2011 17:43:19 -0400, wrote: On Mon, 21 Mar 2011 11:40:55 -0700, wrote: If paygo doesn't apply to the entitlements and the DoD budget it is about as significant as cutting the NPR budget. "Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan and former Congressional Budget Office (CBO) director Dan L. Crippen have pointed to PAYGO as instrumental in establishing the fiscal discipline that gradually decreased the deficit during the 1990s and ultimately led to large surpluses." That was when SS and Medicare were paying their own way. Both are in deficit now. They are not in deficit in any way that affects the upcoming budget. It's nonsense, right-wing fear-mongering. You are not that stupid. How can you possibly say a program that spends moire than it takes in is not in deficit? Medicare has been upside down for several years and SS went upside down 2 years ago. And, it is not contributing one penny to the current deficit problem. It "may" at some point if it isn't fixed. WHAT? We are borrowing 40 cents of every dollar of the short fall and Obama chopping 2% off of the FICA tax rate only makes it worse. WHAT? Not because of SS/MC. I don't agree with any tax cut for the wealthy. Before that, they were trying to say a recovery would put SS back into the black for a year, maybe two. Now they can't even make that claim. Medicare is just spiraling down the black hole of debt with no end in sight. Go hide under your blankey. |
|
#3
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
No blood for oil
On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 22:43:18 -0400, wrote:
On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 13:40:28 -0700, wrote: On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 15:43:12 -0400, wrote: You are not that stupid. How can you possibly say a program that spends moire than it takes in is not in deficit? Medicare has been upside down for several years and SS went upside down 2 years ago. And, it is not contributing one penny to the current deficit problem. It "may" at some point if it isn't fixed. WHAT? We are borrowing 40 cents of every dollar of the short fall and Obama chopping 2% off of the FICA tax rate only makes it worse. WHAT? Not because of SS/MC. I don't agree with any tax cut for the wealthy. The income taxes have nothing to do with the short fall in FICA. Were do you get the notion that I think FICA and income tax are the same things? As I said the wealthy need to be taxed more not less. Before that, they were trying to say a recovery would put SS back into the black for a year, maybe two. Now they can't even make that claim. Medicare is just spiraling down the black hole of debt with no end in sight. Go hide under your blankey. Denial is not the answer. Ok, so don't hide and face the facts. One fact is that there is no short-term crisis for either program. Another is that lowering taxes on wealthy people will do little or nothing to help job creation. |
|
#4
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
No blood for oil
On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 14:11:10 -0400, wrote:
On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 23:23:21 -0700, wrote: On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 22:43:18 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 13:40:28 -0700, wrote: On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 15:43:12 -0400, wrote: You are not that stupid. How can you possibly say a program that spends moire than it takes in is not in deficit? Medicare has been upside down for several years and SS went upside down 2 years ago. And, it is not contributing one penny to the current deficit problem. It "may" at some point if it isn't fixed. WHAT? We are borrowing 40 cents of every dollar of the short fall and Obama chopping 2% off of the FICA tax rate only makes it worse. WHAT? Not because of SS/MC. I don't agree with any tax cut for the wealthy. The income taxes have nothing to do with the short fall in FICA. Were do you get the notion that I think FICA and income tax are the same things? ... because you linked the shortfall in SS/MC with the Obama tax cut (It stopped being the Bush tax cut when Obama renewed the bill) I did no such thing. As I said the wealthy need to be taxed more not less. OK, it still won't fix this problem. Which problem is "this"? You keep changing the subject, so it's hard to tell what you're talking about. Before that, they were trying to say a recovery would put SS back into the black for a year, maybe two. Now they can't even make that claim. Medicare is just spiraling down the black hole of debt with no end in sight. Go hide under your blankey. Denial is not the answer. Ok, so don't hide and face the facts. One fact is that there is no short-term crisis for either program. Another is that lowering taxes on wealthy people will do little or nothing to help job creation. The plane has already hit the mountain. We are borrowing money to pay out SS/.MC benefits now and the big outlays are still ahead of us. When do you think this will be a problem? When the bonds demand 3% or 5% to sell? At around 7% and our current rate of borrowing, the interest alone will be bigger that the whole budget is now, within a decade. According to you, Mr. Expert. In fact, it's just a fear-based rant that is getting old and worn out. Why don't you go back to the birth certificate rant, at least that's entertaining on some level. |
|
#5
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
No blood for oil
On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 11:31:38 -0400, wrote:
On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 14:43:43 -0700, wrote: On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 14:11:10 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 23:23:21 -0700, wrote: On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 22:43:18 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 13:40:28 -0700, wrote: On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 15:43:12 -0400, wrote: You are not that stupid. How can you possibly say a program that spends moire than it takes in is not in deficit? Medicare has been upside down for several years and SS went upside down 2 years ago. And, it is not contributing one penny to the current deficit problem. It "may" at some point if it isn't fixed. WHAT? We are borrowing 40 cents of every dollar of the short fall and Obama chopping 2% off of the FICA tax rate only makes it worse. WHAT? Not because of SS/MC. I don't agree with any tax cut for the wealthy. The income taxes have nothing to do with the short fall in FICA. Were do you get the notion that I think FICA and income tax are the same things? ... because you linked the shortfall in SS/MC with the Obama tax cut (It stopped being the Bush tax cut when Obama renewed the bill) I did no such thing. Didn't you just say "WHAT? Not because of SS/MC. I don't agree with any tax cut for the wealthy." There was no FICA tax cut "for the wealthy", it was an income tax cut. The FICA tax cut was for the people who make less than $101k As I said the wealthy need to be taxed more not less. OK, it still won't fix this problem. Which problem is "this"? You keep changing the subject, so it's hard to tell what you're talking about. "This" is the SS/MC short fall. Before that, they were trying to say a recovery would put SS back into the black for a year, maybe two. Now they can't even make that claim. Medicare is just spiraling down the black hole of debt with no end in sight. Go hide under your blankey. Denial is not the answer. Ok, so don't hide and face the facts. One fact is that there is no short-term crisis for either program. Another is that lowering taxes on wealthy people will do little or nothing to help job creation. The plane has already hit the mountain. We are borrowing money to pay out SS/.MC benefits now and the big outlays are still ahead of us. When do you think this will be a problem? When the bonds demand 3% or 5% to sell? At around 7% and our current rate of borrowing, the interest alone will be bigger that the whole budget is now, within a decade. According to you, Mr. Expert. In fact, it's just a fear-based rant that is getting old and worn out. Why don't you go back to the birth certificate rant, at least that's entertaining on some level. I suppose you should read a bit more dear. No credible economist right now thinks our entitlements are sustainable. It is particularly true when Obama signed on to the formerly "bush tax cuts" and then cut an additional 2% from the payroll taxes. Reagan would be proud ... except he actually raised the payroll taxes along with Tip O'neil to prop up social security. Obama hastened it's failure. Don't call me dear. It's demeaning and you're not qualified. Just because something is unsustainable doesn't mean it's an imminent problem. Nobody disputes that both need to be fixed. If your google is broken, I suppose I can find you the projections of what the debt will cost us at various increasing interest rates but I am sure you saw those projections and rejected them as fear mongering. It is just the math that makes me worry. Math shouldn't make you worry. It's just math. |
|
#6
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
No blood for oil
|
|
#7
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
No blood for oil
On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 17:01:02 -0400, wrote:
On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 10:47:35 -0700, wrote: According to you, Mr. Expert. In fact, it's just a fear-based rant that is getting old and worn out. Why don't you go back to the birth certificate rant, at least that's entertaining on some level. I suppose you should read a bit more dear. No credible economist right now thinks our entitlements are sustainable. It is particularly true when Obama signed on to the formerly "bush tax cuts" and then cut an additional 2% from the payroll taxes. Reagan would be proud ... except he actually raised the payroll taxes along with Tip O'neil to prop up social security. Obama hastened it's failure. Don't call me dear. It's demeaning and you're not qualified. You started the name calling By calling you Mr. Expert? Well, ok. Just because something is unsustainable doesn't mean it's an imminent problem. Nobody disputes that both need to be fixed. When are they going to start? Obama just made the problem worse by lowering taxes when they really should be going up. The only real fix will be adjusting eligibility age to reflect life expectancy and nobody will even talk about that. "They" already have. Changes are being discussed (rationally) on both sides of the isle. Even the lunatics who want to gut the safety net have a voice, albeit a hysterical one. Sometimes, and I know this is non-intuitive, but it's a long term problem not a short term problem. If your google is broken, I suppose I can find you the projections of what the debt will cost us at various increasing interest rates but I am sure you saw those projections and rejected them as fear mongering. It is just the math that makes me worry. Math shouldn't make you worry. It's just math. When the math shows us bankrupting the government and devaluing the dollar, it is a reason to worry. This is not a long term problem anymore. We are already upside down, borrowing money to cover the short fall. Nope. It's a long term problem. A short term problem is something like the nuclear plants in Japan. A middle term problem is something like job growth. A long term problem is something like SS/MC. |
|
#8
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
No blood for oil
On 24/03/2011 4:04 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 17:01:02 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 10:47:35 -0700, wrote: According to you, Mr. Expert. In fact, it's just a fear-based rant that is getting old and worn out. Why don't you go back to the birth certificate rant, at least that's entertaining on some level. I suppose you should read a bit more dear. No credible economist right now thinks our entitlements are sustainable. It is particularly true when Obama signed on to the formerly "bush tax cuts" and then cut an additional 2% from the payroll taxes. Reagan would be proud ... except he actually raised the payroll taxes along with Tip O'neil to prop up social security. Obama hastened it's failure. Don't call me dear. It's demeaning and you're not qualified. You started the name calling By calling you Mr. Expert? Well, ok. Just because something is unsustainable doesn't mean it's an imminent problem. Nobody disputes that both need to be fixed. When are they going to start? Obama just made the problem worse by lowering taxes when they really should be going up. The only real fix will be adjusting eligibility age to reflect life expectancy and nobody will even talk about that. "They" already have. Changes are being discussed (rationally) on both sides of the isle. Even the lunatics who want to gut the safety net have a voice, albeit a hysterical one. Sometimes, and I know this is non-intuitive, but it's a long term problem not a short term problem. If your google is broken, I suppose I can find you the projections of what the debt will cost us at various increasing interest rates but I am sure you saw those projections and rejected them as fear mongering. It is just the math that makes me worry. Math shouldn't make you worry. It's just math. When the math shows us bankrupting the government and devaluing the dollar, it is a reason to worry. This is not a long term problem anymore. We are already upside down, borrowing money to cover the short fall. Nope. It's a long term problem. A short term problem is something like the nuclear plants in Japan. A middle term problem is something like job growth. A long term problem is something like SS/MC. Actually, US economic problems are near, mid and long term. USD is loosing value pretty fast and accelerating. Faster she goes, the harder it is to stop. Widmark? Zimbabwe? 1948 German currency reform. Hey, USD might be revalued at 10 cents on the dollar tomorrow. If you own gold or oil, who cares. If you own USD, you got wiped out. |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| The Smell of Blood | General | |||
| A little something to get the blood moving... | General | |||
| Blood on my mast | ASA | |||
| Kira draw blood yet? | ASA | |||
| O/T Any French blood out there? | General | |||
Hybrid Mode
