|
Why we can't have good things
Why we can't have good things… (continued)
http://tinyurl.com/ckot44q Half of Christians Think Jesus Will Return Within 40 Years Christian views in America on the return of Christ. By Heather Brady|Posted Friday, March 29, 2013, at 5:00 AM PF_13.03.22_JesusReturn-02 As Christians worldwide prepare for Easter, a time of reflection on Jesus’ death and a celebration of his resurrection, many seem to be looking forward as well. A Pew Research Center survey on the religious beliefs of Christians in the United States shows that about half believe Jesus will either definitely or probably return in the next 40 years. - - - If that's the case, why are conservative christians so worried about social security and deficits? |
Why we can't have good things
On 3/29/13 1:19 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 12:54:14 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: Why we can't have good things… (continued) http://tinyurl.com/ckot44q Half of Christians Think Jesus Will Return Within 40 Years Christian views in America on the return of Christ. By Heather Brady|Posted Friday, March 29, 2013, at 5:00 AM PF_13.03.22_JesusReturn-02 As Christians worldwide prepare for Easter, a time of reflection on Jesus’ death and a celebration of his resurrection, many seem to be looking forward as well. A Pew Research Center survey on the religious beliefs of Christians in the United States shows that about half believe Jesus will either definitely or probably return in the next 40 years. - - - If that's the case, why are conservative christians so worried about social security and deficits? Maybe they expect to die or go broke before Jesus gets here. I am not really up on my Thessalonians but isn't the rapture supposed to be in response to the apocalypse? Maybe they think that is when SS goes broke. Damifino I dunno, either. |
Why we can't have good things
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 14:54:06 -0400, wrote:
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 10:28:02 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 13:19:05 -0400, wrote: Maybe they think that is when SS goes broke. Damifino I thougth you keep saying that SS IS broke? Which is it? Damdifyouknow. Exactly. They are currently running a $66 billion dollar deficit and we are borrowing money to cover it. Medicare is in even worse shape. My reference to "going broke" was when the government simply says they can't pay all of the benefits. As I've said and as the facts indicate, SS will pay 100% of the benefits for another 25 years, and it will pay 85-95% thereafter for perpetuity without any fix at all. It's a minor problem. Medicare is in worse shape, but not catastrophically so... and again, it will be decades before it becomes so. A fix is indicated, but not on the backs of middle and lower income. http://www.nasi.org/learn/medicare/financial-problems http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3130421 |
Why we can't have good things
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 16:45:59 -0400, wrote:
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 12:49:00 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: They are currently running a $66 billion dollar deficit and we are borrowing money to cover it. Medicare is in even worse shape. My reference to "going broke" was when the government simply says they can't pay all of the benefits. As I've said and as the facts indicate, SS will pay 100% of the benefits for another 25 years, and it will pay 85-95% thereafter for perpetuity without any fix at all. It's a minor problem. What "facts"? The whole program is based on the ability of the government to borrow more money and raise taxes more. There is no "trust funds" they spent every dime of that money and it is unclear how they will ever pay it back. Feel free to dispute the facts. That don't make you right. http://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/fundFAQ.html How far do you have to go back to actually see the federal government paying down a dime of the debt? (hint: new cars had tail fins) Which has nothing to do with anything. Medicare is in worse shape, but not catastrophically so... and again, it will be decades before it becomes so. A fix is indicated, but not on the backs of middle and lower income. There are not enough rich people to save these programs, who do you think will have to pay? You're just being deliberately dense. The worst thing we can right now is make middle and lower income families pay more. When the economy recovers, then the middle income families will be able to afford to help a bit more. http://www.nasi.org/learn/medicare/financial-problems $32 billion out of whack 3 years ago ... What I said. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3130421 Do you really think medical care will ever cost less? Don't know. I do know that the rate of increase can be slowed. It doesn't need to exceed inflation the way it does. But you know, right? |
Why we can't have good things
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 18:16:10 -0400, wrote:
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 14:16:21 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 16:45:59 -0400, wrote: On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 12:49:00 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: What "facts"? The whole program is based on the ability of the government to borrow more money and raise taxes more. There is no "trust funds" they spent every dime of that money and it is unclear how they will ever pay it back. Feel free to dispute the facts. That don't make you right. http://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/fundFAQ.html That demonstrates that the federal government spent all of the surplus and they promise to pay it back but they have not said how. The don't have to "pay it back". It's a trust fund. Do you need me to tell you to look it up? How far do you have to go back to actually see the federal government paying down a dime of the debt? (hint: new cars had tail fins) Which has nothing to do with anything. Medicare is in worse shape, but not catastrophically so... and again, it will be decades before it becomes so. A fix is indicated, but not on the backs of middle and lower income. There are not enough rich people to save these programs, who do you think will have to pay? You're just being deliberately dense. The worst thing we can right now is make middle and lower income families pay more. When the economy recovers, then the middle income families will be able to afford to help a bit more. If you took every dime from the Forbes 400, it would run SS for about 175 days. The middle class is going to have to pay more, at least the Clinton tax rates and maybe even the Reagan tax rates. Which has nothing to do with anything. Feel free to hide under your house if you're that afraid. http://www.nasi.org/learn/medicare/financial-problems $32 billion out of whack 3 years ago ... What I said. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3130421 Do you really think medical care will ever cost less? Don't know. I do know that the rate of increase can be slowed. It doesn't need to exceed inflation the way it does. But you know, right? I can look at the trends. Feel free. The US has been solvent and paid it's debts since the 1700s. |
Why we can't have good things
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 21:14:41 -0400, wrote:
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 17:15:47 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 18:16:10 -0400, wrote: On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 14:16:21 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 16:45:59 -0400, wrote: On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 12:49:00 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: What "facts"? The whole program is based on the ability of the government to borrow more money and raise taxes more. There is no "trust funds" they spent every dime of that money and it is unclear how they will ever pay it back. Feel free to dispute the facts. That don't make you right. http://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/fundFAQ.html That demonstrates that the federal government spent all of the surplus and they promise to pay it back but they have not said how. The don't have to "pay it back". It's a trust fund. Do you need me to tell you to look it up? It is simply part of the $16 trillion dollar debt and if they can't pay it back, SS will not have the money. You can call it a trust fund, a bond or simply an IOU but the fact is there is no money there, only a promise that our children will pay for our retirement. It is a promise that they did not make and that they did not get to vote for. The fact is that you're wrong. You act like the US economy is stagnent or has negative growth. You act like this is some sort of crisis that has to be fixed immediately or all hell will break lose. You're just a paranoid dip**** if you actually believe that crap. |
Why we can't have good things
In article ,
says... On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 14:16:21 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 16:45:59 -0400, wrote: On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 12:49:00 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: What "facts"? The whole program is based on the ability of the government to borrow more money and raise taxes more. There is no "trust funds" they spent every dime of that money and it is unclear how they will ever pay it back. Feel free to dispute the facts. That don't make you right. http://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/fundFAQ.html That demonstrates that the federal government spent all of the surplus and they promise to pay it back but they have not said how. If you loan someone or some entity money, do you really care how they made the money to pay you back as long as it's legitimate? .. |
Why we can't have good things
In article ,
says... On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 09:34:37 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 14:16:21 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 16:45:59 -0400, wrote: On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 12:49:00 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: What "facts"? The whole program is based on the ability of the government to borrow more money and raise taxes more. There is no "trust funds" they spent every dime of that money and it is unclear how they will ever pay it back. Feel free to dispute the facts. That don't make you right. http://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/fundFAQ.html That demonstrates that the federal government spent all of the surplus and they promise to pay it back but they have not said how. If you loan someone or some entity money, do you really care how they made the money to pay you back as long as it's legitimate? . I would not willingly put money in a Ponzi scheme in the first place. That's not even close to what I asked. |
Why we can't have good things
On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 10:12:11 -0400, wrote:
On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 09:34:37 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 14:16:21 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 16:45:59 -0400, wrote: On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 12:49:00 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: What "facts"? The whole program is based on the ability of the government to borrow more money and raise taxes more. There is no "trust funds" they spent every dime of that money and it is unclear how they will ever pay it back. Feel free to dispute the facts. That don't make you right. http://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/fundFAQ.html That demonstrates that the federal government spent all of the surplus and they promise to pay it back but they have not said how. If you loan someone or some entity money, do you really care how they made the money to pay you back as long as it's legitimate? . I would not willingly put money in a Ponzi scheme in the first place. So, you haven't participated in Social Security, Medicare, and all the other federal and state programs supported by taxes. As usual, you're full of it. You can call SS a Ponzi, but that's just your and your right wing ****head's view. It's a promise.. made by some of the people in this country to other people in this country. |
Why we can't have good things
On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 11:17:23 -0400, iBoaterer
wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 09:34:37 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 14:16:21 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 16:45:59 -0400, wrote: On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 12:49:00 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: What "facts"? The whole program is based on the ability of the government to borrow more money and raise taxes more. There is no "trust funds" they spent every dime of that money and it is unclear how they will ever pay it back. Feel free to dispute the facts. That don't make you right. http://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/fundFAQ.html That demonstrates that the federal government spent all of the surplus and they promise to pay it back but they have not said how. If you loan someone or some entity money, do you really care how they made the money to pay you back as long as it's legitimate? . I would not willingly put money in a Ponzi scheme in the first place. That's not even close to what I asked. Well, exactly. He's can't seem to figure out what to say, so he tries to change the subject and hopes nobody'll notice. |
Why we can't have good things
On 3/30/13 5:01 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 11:17:23 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 09:34:37 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 14:16:21 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 16:45:59 -0400, wrote: On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 12:49:00 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: What "facts"? The whole program is based on the ability of the government to borrow more money and raise taxes more. There is no "trust funds" they spent every dime of that money and it is unclear how they will ever pay it back. Feel free to dispute the facts. That don't make you right. http://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/fundFAQ.html That demonstrates that the federal government spent all of the surplus and they promise to pay it back but they have not said how. If you loan someone or some entity money, do you really care how they made the money to pay you back as long as it's legitimate? . I would not willingly put money in a Ponzi scheme in the first place. That's not even close to what I asked. If you are asking whether I will cash my SS checks, yes I will but I do wonder how they are actually getting the money. Unfortunately a lot of it is simply created out of thin air and I know that is the road to runaway inflation. I filed my application the beginning of this month via the "internets." It's a few bucks more than I thought it would be, maybe because I waited longer than I had to. |
Boats ... Was the can't have good things thread
|
Why we can't have good things
In article ,
says... On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 11:17:23 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 09:34:37 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 14:16:21 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 16:45:59 -0400, wrote: On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 12:49:00 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: What "facts"? The whole program is based on the ability of the government to borrow more money and raise taxes more. There is no "trust funds" they spent every dime of that money and it is unclear how they will ever pay it back. Feel free to dispute the facts. That don't make you right. http://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/fundFAQ.html That demonstrates that the federal government spent all of the surplus and they promise to pay it back but they have not said how. If you loan someone or some entity money, do you really care how they made the money to pay you back as long as it's legitimate? . I would not willingly put money in a Ponzi scheme in the first place. That's not even close to what I asked. If you are asking whether I will cash my SS checks, yes I will but I do wonder how they are actually getting the money. Unfortunately a lot of it is simply created out of thin air and I know that is the road to runaway inflation. Still not what I asked. |
Why we can't have good things
In article ,
says... On Mon, 1 Apr 2013 10:45:06 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 11:17:23 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 09:34:37 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 14:16:21 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 16:45:59 -0400, wrote: On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 12:49:00 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: What "facts"? The whole program is based on the ability of the government to borrow more money and raise taxes more. There is no "trust funds" they spent every dime of that money and it is unclear how they will ever pay it back. Feel free to dispute the facts. That don't make you right. http://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/fundFAQ.html That demonstrates that the federal government spent all of the surplus and they promise to pay it back but they have not said how. If you loan someone or some entity money, do you really care how they made the money to pay you back as long as it's legitimate? . I would not willingly put money in a Ponzi scheme in the first place. That's not even close to what I asked. If you are asking whether I will cash my SS checks, yes I will but I do wonder how they are actually getting the money. Unfortunately a lot of it is simply created out of thin air and I know that is the road to runaway inflation. Still not what I asked. The question was meaningless in this context. SS was never a loan or an investment. It was simply taxation into a pay as you go program with the government spending the surplus as ordinary revenue. After 1968 that was made clear when SS was put on budget. Now that program is not collecting enough to pay as they go and the government does not seem to have the will to tax at a rate to maintain the program. We borrow 40% of the shortfall right now. (or simply print money) They are not making the money to pay me back at all. They are simply passing debt on to my kids. No it wasn't meaningless. It was directly related to what YOU said. |
Why we can't have good things
On 4/1/13 1:23 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 1 Apr 2013 11:47:07 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Mon, 1 Apr 2013 10:45:06 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 11:17:23 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 09:34:37 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 14:16:21 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 16:45:59 -0400, wrote: On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 12:49:00 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: What "facts"? The whole program is based on the ability of the government to borrow more money and raise taxes more. There is no "trust funds" they spent every dime of that money and it is unclear how they will ever pay it back. Feel free to dispute the facts. That don't make you right. http://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/fundFAQ.html That demonstrates that the federal government spent all of the surplus and they promise to pay it back but they have not said how. If you loan someone or some entity money, do you really care how they made the money to pay you back as long as it's legitimate? . I would not willingly put money in a Ponzi scheme in the first place. That's not even close to what I asked. If you are asking whether I will cash my SS checks, yes I will but I do wonder how they are actually getting the money. Unfortunately a lot of it is simply created out of thin air and I know that is the road to runaway inflation. Still not what I asked. The question was meaningless in this context. SS was never a loan or an investment. It was simply taxation into a pay as you go program with the government spending the surplus as ordinary revenue. After 1968 that was made clear when SS was put on budget. Now that program is not collecting enough to pay as they go and the government does not seem to have the will to tax at a rate to maintain the program. We borrow 40% of the shortfall right now. (or simply print money) They are not making the money to pay me back at all. They are simply passing debt on to my kids. No it wasn't meaningless. It was directly related to what YOU said. I suppose a direct answer to the question is that I would not consider it legitimate if they said "I will give you your money as soon as I can print some" Any shortfall problems with Social Security are easy enough to fix. |
Why we can't have good things
On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 17:01:07 -0400, wrote:
On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 11:17:23 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 09:34:37 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 14:16:21 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 16:45:59 -0400, wrote: On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 12:49:00 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: What "facts"? The whole program is based on the ability of the government to borrow more money and raise taxes more. There is no "trust funds" they spent every dime of that money and it is unclear how they will ever pay it back. Feel free to dispute the facts. That don't make you right. http://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/fundFAQ.html That demonstrates that the federal government spent all of the surplus and they promise to pay it back but they have not said how. If you loan someone or some entity money, do you really care how they made the money to pay you back as long as it's legitimate? . I would not willingly put money in a Ponzi scheme in the first place. That's not even close to what I asked. If you are asking whether I will cash my SS checks, yes I will but I do wonder how they are actually getting the money. Unfortunately a lot of it is simply created out of thin air and I know that is the road to runaway inflation. So, you're contributing big time to the problem you said is going to **** over your grandkids. What a mensh. |
Why we can't have good things
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 11:37:20 -0400, wrote:
On Mon, 1 Apr 2013 10:45:06 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 11:17:23 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 09:34:37 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 14:16:21 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 16:45:59 -0400, wrote: On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 12:49:00 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: What "facts"? The whole program is based on the ability of the government to borrow more money and raise taxes more. There is no "trust funds" they spent every dime of that money and it is unclear how they will ever pay it back. Feel free to dispute the facts. That don't make you right. http://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/fundFAQ.html That demonstrates that the federal government spent all of the surplus and they promise to pay it back but they have not said how. If you loan someone or some entity money, do you really care how they made the money to pay you back as long as it's legitimate? . I would not willingly put money in a Ponzi scheme in the first place. That's not even close to what I asked. If you are asking whether I will cash my SS checks, yes I will but I do wonder how they are actually getting the money. Unfortunately a lot of it is simply created out of thin air and I know that is the road to runaway inflation. Still not what I asked. The question was meaningless in this context. SS was never a loan or an investment. It was simply taxation into a pay as you go program with the government spending the surplus as ordinary revenue. After 1968 that was made clear when SS was put on budget. Now that program is not collecting enough to pay as they go and the government does not seem to have the will to tax at a rate to maintain the program. We borrow 40% of the shortfall right now. (or simply print money) They are not making the money to pay me back at all. They are simply passing debt on to my kids. It has a trust fund, and it's 100% solvent for 25 years. After that, 95%. A small fix, not the voucher system Ryan the Moron aka Ayn Rand wants. |
Why we can't have good things
On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 17:02:16 -0400, wrote:
On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 09:21:10 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 10:12:11 -0400, wrote: On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 09:34:37 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 14:16:21 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 16:45:59 -0400, wrote: On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 12:49:00 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: What "facts"? The whole program is based on the ability of the government to borrow more money and raise taxes more. There is no "trust funds" they spent every dime of that money and it is unclear how they will ever pay it back. Feel free to dispute the facts. That don't make you right. http://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/fundFAQ.html That demonstrates that the federal government spent all of the surplus and they promise to pay it back but they have not said how. If you loan someone or some entity money, do you really care how they made the money to pay you back as long as it's legitimate? . I would not willingly put money in a Ponzi scheme in the first place. So, you haven't participated in Social Security, Medicare, and all the other federal and state programs supported by taxes. As usual, you're full of it. ... at the point of a government gun. Huh? You're being forced at gun point to cash your check? No, you do it willingly. You can call SS a Ponzi, but that's just your and your right wing ****head's view. It's a promise.. made by some of the people in this country to other people in this country. That is what Bernie said You're disputing it's a promise made to seniors and unfortunates who've lost parents? That's what Stalin said. (yeah, I'm kidding) |
Why we can't have good things
On 4/1/13 1:46 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 13:26:04 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 4/1/13 1:23 PM, wrote: Any shortfall problems with Social Security are easy enough to fix. Sure, just raise the SS tax about 5% and lift the cap. The problem is finding a politician who would actually do it. As I said, easy enough to fix. |
Why we can't have good things
In article ,
says... On Mon, 1 Apr 2013 11:47:07 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Mon, 1 Apr 2013 10:45:06 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 11:17:23 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 09:34:37 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 14:16:21 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 16:45:59 -0400, wrote: On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 12:49:00 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: What "facts"? The whole program is based on the ability of the government to borrow more money and raise taxes more. There is no "trust funds" they spent every dime of that money and it is unclear how they will ever pay it back. Feel free to dispute the facts. That don't make you right. http://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/fundFAQ.html That demonstrates that the federal government spent all of the surplus and they promise to pay it back but they have not said how. If you loan someone or some entity money, do you really care how they made the money to pay you back as long as it's legitimate? . I would not willingly put money in a Ponzi scheme in the first place. That's not even close to what I asked. If you are asking whether I will cash my SS checks, yes I will but I do wonder how they are actually getting the money. Unfortunately a lot of it is simply created out of thin air and I know that is the road to runaway inflation. Still not what I asked. The question was meaningless in this context. SS was never a loan or an investment. It was simply taxation into a pay as you go program with the government spending the surplus as ordinary revenue. After 1968 that was made clear when SS was put on budget. Now that program is not collecting enough to pay as they go and the government does not seem to have the will to tax at a rate to maintain the program. We borrow 40% of the shortfall right now. (or simply print money) They are not making the money to pay me back at all. They are simply passing debt on to my kids. No it wasn't meaningless. It was directly related to what YOU said. I suppose a direct answer to the question is that I would not consider it legitimate if they said "I will give you your money as soon as I can print some" I suppose you either don't understand the question I asked, or you don't want to honestly answer it. |
Why we can't have good things
|
Why we can't have good things
|
Why we can't have good things
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 13:46:21 -0400, wrote:
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 13:26:04 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 4/1/13 1:23 PM, wrote: Any shortfall problems with Social Security are easy enough to fix. Sure, just raise the SS tax about 5% and lift the cap. The problem is finding a politician who would actually do it. Or, raise the cap. The problem is that you keep cashing your check. You're not required to cash it. Lifting the cap alone is not really that much help. All you really have to do top see that is look at the delta between Medicare and SS. Medicare is not capped now. Bull****. It has been a couple years since I did it but the numbers are not really that significant. We just do not have that many W2 people who make more than the $113.7k that it is capped at now. (I think it was $102k when I did it) You can go to IRS.GOV and look at tax stats if you want to see for yourself. They are in Excel format so you can download the files and change the view Feel free to give us your studied, indepth analysis. We know you're an expert accountant among your other bull****. |
Why we can't have good things
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 14:31:37 -0400, wrote:
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 13:51:54 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 4/1/13 1:46 PM, wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 13:26:04 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 4/1/13 1:23 PM, wrote: Any shortfall problems with Social Security are easy enough to fix. Sure, just raise the SS tax about 5% and lift the cap. The problem is finding a politician who would actually do it. As I said, easy enough to fix. We can't even get Democrats to agree to rolling taxes back to the Clinton rates and the GOP still thinks current taxes are too high. We are going to keep hurtling from cliff to cliff until we finally fall over one of them. We might take the whole world economy down with us. Huh? The rich are now paying a whopping 4% more? What a tradgety! You and your fiscally stupid buddies want to hit up the middle class now, rather than let them recover a bit. Why don't you tell us about austerity again, and how it'll solve all our problems. |
Why we can't have good things
On Mon, 1 Apr 2013 13:53:32 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:
In article , says... On Mon, 1 Apr 2013 11:47:07 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Mon, 1 Apr 2013 10:45:06 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 11:17:23 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 09:34:37 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 14:16:21 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 16:45:59 -0400, wrote: On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 12:49:00 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: What "facts"? The whole program is based on the ability of the government to borrow more money and raise taxes more. There is no "trust funds" they spent every dime of that money and it is unclear how they will ever pay it back. Feel free to dispute the facts. That don't make you right. http://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/fundFAQ.html That demonstrates that the federal government spent all of the surplus and they promise to pay it back but they have not said how. If you loan someone or some entity money, do you really care how they made the money to pay you back as long as it's legitimate? . I would not willingly put money in a Ponzi scheme in the first place. That's not even close to what I asked. If you are asking whether I will cash my SS checks, yes I will but I do wonder how they are actually getting the money. Unfortunately a lot of it is simply created out of thin air and I know that is the road to runaway inflation. Still not what I asked. The question was meaningless in this context. SS was never a loan or an investment. It was simply taxation into a pay as you go program with the government spending the surplus as ordinary revenue. After 1968 that was made clear when SS was put on budget. Now that program is not collecting enough to pay as they go and the government does not seem to have the will to tax at a rate to maintain the program. We borrow 40% of the shortfall right now. (or simply print money) They are not making the money to pay me back at all. They are simply passing debt on to my kids. No it wasn't meaningless. It was directly related to what YOU said. I suppose a direct answer to the question is that I would not consider it legitimate if they said "I will give you your money as soon as I can print some" I suppose you either don't understand the question I asked, or you don't want to honestly answer it. Bingo! |
Why we can't have good things
|
Why we can't have good things
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 14:02:59 -0400, wrote:
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 10:40:46 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 17:01:07 -0400, wrote: If you are asking whether I will cash my SS checks, yes I will but I do wonder how they are actually getting the money. Unfortunately a lot of it is simply created out of thin air and I know that is the road to runaway inflation. So, you're contributing big time to the problem you said is going to **** over your grandkids. What a mensh. The government forced me into the program at the point of a gun, yes, I will participate. So you do whatever you're told, even if it's wrong. Would I rather have had my $100k in a Roth 401k type investment? Yes I would. Too bad you didn't plan ahead very well. |
Why we can't have good things
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 14:04:48 -0400, wrote:
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 10:43:55 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 17:02:16 -0400, wrote: You can call SS a Ponzi, but that's just your and your right wing ****head's view. It's a promise.. made by some of the people in this country to other people in this country. That is what Bernie said You're disputing it's a promise made to seniors and unfortunates who've lost parents? That's what Stalin said. (yeah, I'm kidding) It is a promise but it is an unfunded promise. The Trust Fund is just a line item on the national debt. And, how exactly would you prefer it to be funded? Perhaps in gold bullion? Or, in a 100% risk free account... like perhaps one guaranteed by the full faith and credit of the US? Oh yeah, you're full of it. |
Why we can't have good things
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 17:51:00 -0400, wrote:
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 14:21:24 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 14:31:37 -0400, wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 13:51:54 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 4/1/13 1:46 PM, wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 13:26:04 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 4/1/13 1:23 PM, wrote: Any shortfall problems with Social Security are easy enough to fix. Sure, just raise the SS tax about 5% and lift the cap. The problem is finding a politician who would actually do it. As I said, easy enough to fix. We can't even get Democrats to agree to rolling taxes back to the Clinton rates and the GOP still thinks current taxes are too high. We are going to keep hurtling from cliff to cliff until we finally fall over one of them. We might take the whole world economy down with us. Huh? The rich are now paying a whopping 4% more? What a tradgety! You and your fiscally stupid buddies want to hit up the middle class now, rather than let them recover a bit. Your buddy Bill said we could tax him at 100% and it would not fix this problem. Did Clinton claim it would fix the problem? No and I didn't either. But your buddy Bush really helped! |
Why we can't have good things
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 17:49:21 -0400, wrote:
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 14:19:55 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 13:46:21 -0400, wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 13:26:04 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 4/1/13 1:23 PM, wrote: Any shortfall problems with Social Security are easy enough to fix. Sure, just raise the SS tax about 5% and lift the cap. The problem is finding a politician who would actually do it. Or, raise the cap. The problem is that you keep cashing your check. You're not required to cash it. Why should I, you are good for the money. You seem to enjoy paying for my new boat. Huh? You're the ****ing hypocrit. "Why should I?" for the good of your grandkids asshole. You want everyone else to do the "right thing" but not you. Lifting the cap alone is not really that much help. All you really have to do top see that is look at the delta between Medicare and SS. Medicare is not capped now. Bull****. How would you compare it? They're two completely different programs and need different fixes. It is actually quite simple SS is capped and Medicare isn't. You have no problem seeing how much is raised and interpolate what happens when the cap is lifted on SS. Apples to oranges. But feel free to look stupid in public. It has been a couple years since I did it but the numbers are not really that significant. We just do not have that many W2 people who make more than the $113.7k that it is capped at now. (I think it was $102k when I did it) You can go to IRS.GOV and look at tax stats if you want to see for yourself. They are in Excel format so you can download the files and change the view Feel free to give us your studied, indepth analysis. We know you're an expert accountant among your other bull****. I do know how to crunch numbers, it is actually pretty simple to do this one. Maybe beyond your ability but not that hard. Maybe when you get to high school you will learn a little elementary algebra. Maybe you should try harder to insult me ****head.. you're the ****ing expert, but you can't even figure out that SS and MC are two completely different things. |
Why we can't have good things
|
Why we can't have good things
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 17:55:33 -0400, wrote:
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 14:23:12 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 14:02:59 -0400, wrote: The government forced me into the program at the point of a gun, yes, I will participate. So you do whatever you're told, even if it's wrong. If the government is pointing a gun at me, yes I do, don't you? The government is not requiring that you cash the check. They might force you to be in the program but they can't force you to take the money. Try weaseling out... oh yeah, you'd rather have your kids suffer than not buy another crappy boat. Would I rather have had my $100k in a Roth 401k type investment? Yes I would. Too bad you didn't plan ahead very well. What plan would have stopped the government from taking my money? Leaving the country and not contributing to it. I did plan for myself fairly well, that is why I don't really need my SS money. Then why are you cashing the check? Do you hate your grand kids that much? |
Why we can't have good things
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 18:06:33 -0400, wrote:
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 14:24:36 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 14:04:48 -0400, wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 10:43:55 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 17:02:16 -0400, wrote: You can call SS a Ponzi, but that's just your and your right wing ****head's view. It's a promise.. made by some of the people in this country to other people in this country. That is what Bernie said You're disputing it's a promise made to seniors and unfortunates who've lost parents? That's what Stalin said. (yeah, I'm kidding) It is a promise but it is an unfunded promise. The Trust Fund is just a line item on the national debt. And, how exactly would you prefer it to be funded? Perhaps in gold bullion? Or, in a 100% risk free account... like perhaps one guaranteed by the full faith and credit of the US? Oh yeah, you're full of it. That is the main flaw in the plan. There is no real way for the government to save money since they don't back currency with any hard asset. They back it with the faith and credit of a country that has never defaulted on it's debt...NEVER by statute. Money is simply whatever the fed says it is. If they "save" money it is the same as reducing the money supply. Feel free to hoard gold. I'm sure there's a supermarket somewhere that'll take it. SS should have always been, what it was for 73 years, pay as you go but that would have required raising the retirement age and increasing the FICA tax. It's still pay as you go. 100% for the next 25 years and beyond that forever at close to 100%. Reagan and Clinton both did things along those lines but nobody has tried it since. Reagan did ****. http://home.adelphi.edu/sbloch/deficits.html They should have adjusted the tax rate to reflect actual costs, as the system was originally designed. Unfortunately in 1939-40 it became apparent they were accumulating a big pot of unspent money and so they started spending it, putting an IOU in the box. You're such an expert. You should run from something... like your paranoia. |
Why we can't have good things
On 4/1/2013 10:52 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 16:16:52 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 17:55:33 -0400, wrote: I did plan for myself fairly well, that is why I don't really need my SS money. Then why are you cashing the check? Do you hate your grand kids that much? I will end up giving them more money when I die than I ever collect from SS. I am ****ing you and your kids, and it feels good. Greg man... are you gonna' let kevin get you going like that. At least bin him so he changes his name again:) |
Why we can't have good things
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 22:50:00 -0400, wrote:
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 16:14:22 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 17:49:21 -0400, wrote: Why should I, you are good for the money. You seem to enjoy paying for my new boat. Huh? You're the ****ing hypocrit. "Why should I?" for the good of your grandkids asshole. You want everyone else to do the "right thing" but not you. My kids may get most of my SS money when I die. How's that? The country will be completely bankrupt by then. You've been talking about for a while now. Doom is in the air, and it's all your fault. Lifting the cap alone is not really that much help. All you really have to do top see that is look at the delta between Medicare and SS. Medicare is not capped now. Bull****. How would you compare it? They're two completely different programs and need different fixes. It is actually quite simple SS is capped and Medicare isn't. You have no problem seeing how much is raised and interpolate what happens when the cap is lifted on SS. Apples to oranges. But feel free to look stupid in public. As usual you totally miss the point. The point on the top of your head? Didn't miss it at tall. HI is not capped and raises $182 billion collection 2.9 percent of all wages, tips.etc If you uncapped OASDI (presently capped at $106k) you would raise an extra $140 billion over the $637B we collected in 2010 on a 12.4% tax. I am not going to use 11 or 12 because the 2% tax holiday skews the numbers. That seems like a lot of money but it would barely cover the shortfall in SS/MC now. That deficit goes up every year. "While the combined OASDI program continues to fail the long-range test of close actuarial balance, it does satisfy the test for short-range financial adequacy. The Trustees project that the combined trust fund assets will exceed one year’s projected cost for more than ten years, through 2027. " If you are going to "fix" SS./MC you need more than simply uncapping the top limit. I thought you said MC is uncapped? So, you don't know ****. It has been a couple years since I did it but the numbers are not really that significant. We just do not have that many W2 people who make more than the $113.7k that it is capped at now. (I think it was $102k when I did it) You can go to IRS.GOV and look at tax stats if you want to see for yourself. They are in Excel format so you can download the files and change the view Feel free to give us your studied, indepth analysis. We know you're an expert accountant among your other bull****. I do know how to crunch numbers, it is actually pretty simple to do this one. Maybe beyond your ability but not that hard. Maybe when you get to high school you will learn a little elementary algebra. Maybe you should try harder to insult me ****head.. you're the ****ing expert, but you can't even figure out that SS and MC are two completely different things. I know they are different brands of the same basic Ponzi but it does give you a convenient way to see what happens when you remove the OASDI cap. HI is not capped and OASDI is, taxing the same salary base. If you interpolate the result of the OASDI rate to the HI rate you get the delta. No. You know how to fake being an intellectual, well-read, and a fair minded person. What you are is a fraud, but I wouldn't call it a Ponzi fraud. You can go to tax stats, look at the raw data and do the computations based on the percentages but you will still end up with about the same numbers. Uh huh. Sure. Bascially, you're pulling the numbers out your ass and smearing it on your **** to make them look better. |
Why we can't have good things
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 22:52:11 -0400, wrote:
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 16:16:52 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 17:55:33 -0400, wrote: I did plan for myself fairly well, that is why I don't really need my SS money. Then why are you cashing the check? Do you hate your grand kids that much? I will end up giving them more money when I die than I ever collect from SS. I am ****ing you and your kids, and it feels good. Yup. That's right. Thanks for being honest. What you didn't add was that this is and will always be your intent. **** everyone else. That's exactly what I was saying. Thanks for confirming. |
Why we can't have good things
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 22:57:49 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute
wrote: On 4/1/2013 10:52 PM, wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 16:16:52 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 17:55:33 -0400, wrote: I did plan for myself fairly well, that is why I don't really need my SS money. Then why are you cashing the check? Do you hate your grand kids that much? I will end up giving them more money when I die than I ever collect from SS. I am ****ing you and your kids, and it feels good. Greg man... are you gonna' let kevin get you going like that. At least bin him so he changes his name again:) Yeah bin kevin... whoever the **** that is. You are a ****ing moron. Thanks though for confirming that Greg and you are on the same page intellectually speaking. |
Why we can't have good things
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 23:27:02 -0400, wrote:
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 16:20:50 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 18:06:33 -0400, wrote: That is the main flaw in the plan. There is no real way for the government to save money since they don't back currency with any hard asset. They back it with the faith and credit of a country that has never defaulted on it's debt...NEVER by statute. We are still young How is Stockton, San Bernadino and Compton doing? So, now you're claiming that cities never fail and never go bankrupt. You're claiming that stockton is somehow representative of the entire US? Money is simply whatever the fed says it is. If they "save" money it is the same as reducing the money supply. Feel free to hoard gold. I'm sure there's a supermarket somewhere that'll take it. If the **** hits the fan, gold and silver might be all they do take. In the mean time, the bag of silver coins I have has turned a nice profit. Ah yes, the "**** hits the fan" line. Like "when the crunch comes" or when the blacks start the racial war or when Manson does or someone. That's pretty close to the most looney thing you've said, well, since you told me you want to **** over my family I guess. SS should have always been, what it was for 73 years, pay as you go but that would have required raising the retirement age and increasing the FICA tax. It's still pay as you go. 100% for the next 25 years and beyond that forever at close to 100%. Not at all, SS is $85 billion in the hole as we speak, being bailed out by federal revenue, 40% of which is borrowed. So what? I thought you said it was bankrupt? Oh yeah, you're just full of ****. Reagan and Clinton both did things along those lines but nobody has tried it since. Reagan did ****. http://home.adelphi.edu/sbloch/deficits.html Again you are not addressing the issue Yes I am. You're just changing the subject. Sure is easy, but it's totally transparent. The 1983 tax bill Reagan signed raised the tax rate on wages for SS from 10.7% to 12.2% and it was in the bill that it would rise to the current 12.4% in 1990. That bill also allowed the IRS to tax SS benefits, originally up to 50% was subject to the income tax. It also accelerated the increase in the salary cap and raised the full retirement age. That is a lot more than "not ****" The 1993 tax bill that Clinton signed (passed by a tie breaking vote from Gore) raised the taxable amount of SS benefits to 85%, It uncapped the top salary for medicare taxes The 1994 law imposed FICA taxes on all domestic help with a threshold of $1000 a year. Maybe you should learn how to use Thomas if you want to play the game. What's your point? You quoted Thomas but you don't provide any reference point. What point are you trying to make? that we should go back to the gold standard? Jesuss christ you sound like you need to take a lude. They should have adjusted the tax rate to reflect actual costs, as the system was originally designed. Unfortunately in 1939-40 it became apparent they were accumulating a big pot of unspent money and so they started spending it, putting an IOU in the box. You're such an expert. You should run from something... like your paranoia. |
Why we can't have good things
On 4/1/2013 10:50 PM, wrote:
My kids may get most of my SS money when I die. How does that work? |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:51 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com