AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Oct 21, 2013 8:27:31 GMT -5
... In speaking with Tea Party base members, both of us doubt that a large percentage of them are actually committed to trimming the deficit. The message when chatting is often pretty clearly "cut everything except what affects me and my friends." They're nice people usually. They don't want their friends to suffer. It's the ambiguous "others" who can bite it and take program cuts. DF's dad nearly flipped out at the idea that SS and Medicare might be trimmed. He's relying on both entirely in old age, since he's always been very low income. I absolutely agree, and the problem isn't just limited to the Tea Party. However, the Tea Party is the only movement in the US federally where I've seen any conviction whatsoever in serious cuts. It's a travesty that those convictions are so tightly proscribed. The FED was about to taper bond buying, but because the TP were the ones that essentially shut down the govt, the FRB had no choice but to stay its course. ![](http://syonidv.hodginsmedia.com/vsmileys/rofl.gif) Just like they were "just about" to taper buying 3 months ago, and 6 months ago, and 9 months ago, and 12 months ago, and... But you can rest soundly, Ham. It may seem like Ms. Yellen confirmed their QE-to-infinity strategy, but I'll bet they're just about to taper buying 3 months from now. ...and 6 months from now. ...and 9 months from now. To prove China is losing faith in the US, using the example of China selling short term debt at super low interest rates, to buy long term investments in the US that will only appreciate if the US continues to prospers is, in fact, an oxymoron. China is doing the only thing they can to protect the declining value of their investment: keeping Uncle Sam happy by buying his bonds in piecemeal spurts with one hand, and unloading their debt to buy up actual, productive US assets with the other. And gold, of course. Something like 2,000 metric tonnes of it over the past two years. Sure beats a supply of toilet paper growing at $85 billion a month. The 85 billion in bonds isn't for fun or because "debt inc." is prospering from all this debt. It's so that US bond auctions are oversubscribed, keeping interest low, which has helped the housing market recover. Most of the interest on the 45 billion a month is less than 3%, and of course Virg, you neglect to bring up the fact that since the crisis the FRB has returned billions, hundreds of billions, in interest to the UST. I don't give a toot how much interest they've returned. All it means is they have to e-print up slightly less money in the next go-round. They're piling into the auctions and monetizing the debt because nobody will buy it at reasonable interest rates. And why would they when the bonds are practically guaranteed to lose value in real terms? Even Zimbabwe got to be experts at buying their own debt. I'm not saying that the Fed buying debt is a bad course of action. It's the underlying need to buy a gigaton of debt that's the problem. And finally, not all of the $85 billion is going directly into bond purchases. A lot of that phantom money is being dumped directly into US equities--stocks, etc.--to inflate their values. And that's where men like Bloomberg can make a killing. Even Dallas FED prez Fisher, who is a hawk, has said that thanks to the US politicians creating economic uncertainty in the US economy, it's hard to argue for tapering. ...and if it hadn't been that, it would be that global warming and fur-lined mittens makes it hard to taper. Sigh. Oh well. I guess we'll have to keep doing it. Forever. Aww shucks. ![](http://images.proboards.com/new/tongue.png)
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Oct 21, 2013 8:50:24 GMT -5
I remember reading the headline about it, I think it was at Bloomberg. "Fed Shocker: No Tapering" or something similar.
Uh huh. Shocker.
At least Ham still trusts them.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Oct 21, 2013 9:03:37 GMT -5
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Oct 21, 2013 10:34:51 GMT -5
the last i checked, the F in FICA stood for FEDERAL. Ok people. Fica does not run the government agencies. Grow up and at least admit what taxes are used for what purposes. Money in, money out. Not sure why which tax the money comes from is relevent. Over 1/3 of federal receipts come from FICA taxes. The actual breakdown is ~45% individual income taxes, 35% FICA, 10% corporate, 10% excise. So FICA brings in almost as much money as individual income taxes. Yet, you want to count one as paying taxes and the other as not paying somehow. Just don't get the logic except to use it as an excuse to hate on people. Very few get more back than they pay in when you count ALL federal taxes. The real number is less than 15%. I find it very disingenuous to just point at certain taxes and say people aren't paying their fair share. The idea behind fairtax (which I know some of you love) is that ALL these federal taxes would be done away with and replaced with a single sales tax. There is no reason to be separating out some people as payers and non-payers due to which taxes they pay when in a proposed system the taxes aren't even broken down. It must not be too important to have the taxes separate if we are willing to lump them all into a single tax in that proposal. Yet, when adding up how much people pay into the system for some reason certain people feel the need to pretend FICA isn't just as much of a tax as the income tax. You must be thinking of someone else. I get insurance through my workplace, so I am not signing up for insurance through the exchanges. Second, I think I have been very fair in my opinion of the ACA. I have shared in multiple posts what I find to be problems with the current law. If it were up to me, a lot would be changed. What I don't think is that keeping the status quo is an acceptable solution. What I haven't seen is any real proposals from the anti-Obamacare folks that fix what Obamacare fixes. For the most part, I haven't seen real critiques of Obamacare from those that hate it. When I ask for details on why it is so bad I almost never get an answer. In fact, let me ask you - What is so bad about it? Why can't it be fixed by modifying the current law rather than repealing the whole thing? What would you propose to replace it that fixes many of the same problems? I would love answers on those questions.ETA - In fact I would fully be behind any such proposal that fixes our healthcare problems in a better way than the ACA. Let's hear what that solution is... This attitude is exactly the problem and the reason I say you (and others) hate on them. You don't have a freaking clue who makes up the 47% if you are making judgements like this. Heck, I fell into the 47% one year and I made ~$60K that year. You want to share with me what poor decisions I have made that led me to be a part of that group? What certain people fail to realize is that it is really easy to fall into the 47% if you have a lot of deductions and a family. That doesn't make them poor, believing they are victims, dependent on the govt, believing they are entitled to food, housing, entitlements from the govt. It just means that following the tax laws they don't owe federal INCOME tax. It doesn't mean they get EITC, it doesn't mean they are on welfare, it doesn't mean they still don't pay quite a bit in other federal taxes. But, somehow Romney and others look at this group as slackers and made them their scapegoat as what is wrong with the country. If you have a problem that it is fairly easy to make a middle class income and not owe federal taxes, then maybe we should look at the tax code rather than assuming people who don't pay are somehow living on your tax dollars and slackers. Cut the child tax credit in half, lower the 401K and IRA deductions, get rid of the HSA/FSA deductions. Then more people would pay. I just find it really f'ed up that people don't seem to realize who are actually in the 47% and seriously believe these people are a huge drain on our country. They aren't, they probably just have more kids than you - you know future taxpayers who one day will be covering your SS and medicare, and they might be putting more into retirement than you - you know so they won't someday be a drain on the system by wasting all their income.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 25, 2024 18:45:01 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2013 10:41:43 GMT -5
Jeez, give Ebola a chance. The Black Death was so fifteenth century.
Learning from history? Man, I can barely keep up with rewriting it, let alone reading the stuff!
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 25, 2024 18:45:01 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2013 10:45:10 GMT -5
In 2017 "dollars"? ![](http://syonidv.hodginsmedia.com/vsmileys/sarcasm.png) Why is $20T a problem where $19T isn't? Round number fallacy? Or something more substantial?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 25, 2024 18:45:01 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2013 10:51:35 GMT -5
It's hard to credit that you can have a situation where one group sincerely believes the country is on a path to economic and social ruin, and the other group sincerely believes it isn't, and have both groups be equally well-informed.
What data could we all accept that might lead us to adopt such profoundly contrary conclusions?
How can Social Security be on a sustainable and unsustainable path, based on the same data?
How can the economy be growing and getting worse simultaneously, based on the same data?
How can inflation be under control but prices soaring, based on the same data?
How can large majorities of Americans believe the country is on the wrong track yet support the status quo, based on the same data?
How can so much of what the Establishment tell us be demonstrably inconsistent with experience and not be false?
"Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?" ~ Jay Carney
|
|
usaone
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 9:10:23 GMT -5
Posts: 3,429
|
Post by usaone on Oct 21, 2013 12:56:19 GMT -5
It's hard to credit that you can have a situation where one group sincerely believes the country is on a path to economic and social ruin, and the other group sincerely believes it isn't, and have both groups be equally well-informed. What data could we all accept that might lead us to adopt such profoundly contrary conclusions? How can Social Security be on a sustainable and unsustainable path, based on the same data? How can the economy be growing and getting worse simultaneously, based on the same data?
How can inflation be under control but prices soaring, based on the same data? How can large majorities of Americans believe the country is on the wrong track yet support the status quo, based on the same data? How can so much of what the Establishment tell us be demonstrably inconsistent with experience and not be false? "Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?" ~ Jay Carney Politics.........
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Oct 21, 2013 13:23:32 GMT -5
It's hard to credit that you can have a situation where one group sincerely believes the country is on a path to economic and social ruin, and the other group sincerely believes it isn't, and have both groups be equally well-informed. What data could we all accept that might lead us to adopt such profoundly contrary conclusions? How can Social Security be on a sustainable and unsustainable path, based on the same data? How can the economy be growing and getting worse simultaneously, based on the same data?
How can inflation be under control but prices soaring, based on the same data? How can large majorities of Americans believe the country is on the wrong track yet support the status quo, based on the same data? How can so much of what the Establishment tell us be demonstrably inconsistent with experience and not be false? "Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?" ~ Jay Carney Politics......... Bingo! I would add bias, as our own bias will act upon what we perceive as the "correct data". One might ask: "What makes you think you're not falling for spin, ol' frien'?" All we really have to go on is what we read and/or hear. We don't know, for sure, how the data we're fed was gleaned. We don't know if it's real, or tweaked for effect. Some of us may think they know. I don't believe they do.
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Oct 21, 2013 13:47:44 GMT -5
Bingo! I would add bias, as our own bias will act upon what we perceive as the "correct data". One might ask: "What makes you think you're not falling for spin, ol' frien'?" All we really have to go on is what we read and/or hear. We don't know, for sure, how the data we're fed was gleaned. We don't know if it's real, or tweaked for effect. Some of us may think they know. I don't believe they do. I would also say most people aren't really even looking at actual data. Most people seem to dislike numbers, a lot of facts, details. People seem to respond best to catchy phrases and buzz words, so that is what the media feeds us. Even politicians often seem frighteningly uneducated when it comes to a lot of topics, yet they are the ones voting on a lot of this stuff ![](http://images.proboards.com/new/tongue.png)
|
|
rockon
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 8:49:55 GMT -5
Posts: 2,384
|
Post by rockon on Oct 21, 2013 13:48:07 GMT -5
The Tea Party is right, we have to do something about our exploding debt. The Tea Party is also the only ones with balls enough to risk their political lifes to stand up and vote for that principle. The method of doing it is really the problem I really have with this movement. Obama said "If you want to change things then go win elections". Guess how they got there? They won the elections in 2010 because of how he handled ACA.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Oct 21, 2013 14:18:55 GMT -5
The Tea Party is right, we have to do something about our exploding debt. The Tea Party is also the only ones with balls enough to risk their political lifes to stand up and vote for that principle. The method of doing it is really the problem I really have with this movement. Obama said "If you want to change things then go win elections". Guess how they got there? They won the elections in 2010 because of how he handled ACA. You win elections by spending like a drunken sailor on goodies for the public. Therein lies the paradox. ![](http://images.proboards.com/new/undecided.png)
|
|
usaone
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 9:10:23 GMT -5
Posts: 3,429
|
Post by usaone on Oct 21, 2013 14:32:57 GMT -5
The Tea Party is NOT risking there political lives doing this. Its there only way to stay in Power. Most of it is political and not about our debt.
If the government stops spending at the same time the private sector is deleveraging it will be catastrophic. The time for the government to cut spending is during a time when the economy is doing better.
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Oct 21, 2013 15:19:41 GMT -5
If the government stops spending at the same time the private sector is deleveraging it will be catastrophic. The time for the government to cut spending is during a time when the economy is doing better.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Oct 21, 2013 16:13:03 GMT -5
I expect the GOP to suffer in 2014 and 2016- 2016 is likely to be Hillary, but then, I would have said that about 2008... I think 2016, the GOP infighting is going to come to a head, and the RINO is going to be shellacked, then the conservative nominee-- our 2016 "Goldwater" is going to be beaten soundly because the GOP establishment will undermine our nominee. I could be wrong- we might just overcome. This isn't 1964, the point about information being the key, and being widely available sans traditional political organizations and media outlets could mean something, but politics is a ground game- and I don't think being denied the phone banks, precinct captains, and door to door foot soldiers is something the TEA Party is going to overcome via facebook.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Oct 21, 2013 16:18:38 GMT -5
The Tea Party is NOT risking there political lives doing this. Its there only way to stay in Power. Most of it is political and not about our debt. If the government stops spending at the same time the private sector is deleveraging it will be catastrophic. The time for the government to cut spending is during a time when the economy is doing better. Monetary chaos is pretty much unavoidable. Best thing that could happen is we stop playing games now, take our medicine, and rebuild the Dollar and our credibility. Don't get me wrong- I don't see that happening, but it should. My key economic prediction is this: The size of government, ObamaCare, Social Security, Medicare, and the long-term structural debt won't be dealt with. The system will reform itself. When it collapses. When? Who knows. Nothing is left to check off on the road to hyperinflation checklist. I would have thought we'd have hit the wall in 2009. I'm frankly shocked we're still humming along with inflation below 1% to 5% a week.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Oct 21, 2013 16:20:23 GMT -5
The Tea Party is right, we have to do something about our exploding debt. The Tea Party is also the only ones with balls enough to risk their political lifes to stand up and vote for that principle. The method of doing it is really the problem I really have with this movement. Obama said "If you want to change things then go win elections". Guess how they got there? They won the elections in 2010 because of how he handled ACA. You win elections by spending like a drunken sailor on goodies for the public. Therein lies the paradox. ![](http://images.proboards.com/new/undecided.png) We're going to hit our credit limit, and at that point- conservative ideas are going to seem much more attractive since this option will be off the table. Back towards liberty, or lurching forward into full blown tyrannical dictatorship will be our options at that point. I only hope we can make the turn back to liberty without bloodshed.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,447
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 21, 2013 18:59:17 GMT -5
Jeez, give Ebola a chance. The Black Death was so fifteenth century. Learning from history? Man, I can barely keep up with rewriting it, let alone reading the stuff! i love this comparison. private health insurance for some -vs- Ebola. rad.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,447
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 21, 2013 19:01:43 GMT -5
Ok people. Fica does not run the government agencies. Grow up and at least admit what taxes are used for what purposes. Money in, money out. Not sure why which tax the money comes from is relevent. Over 1/3 of federal receipts come from FICA taxes. The actual breakdown is ~45% individual income taxes, 35% FICA, 10% corporate, 10% excise. So FICA brings in almost as much money as individual income taxes. Yet, you want to count one as paying taxes and the other as not paying somehow. Just don't get the logic except to use it as an excuse to hate on people. it is because FICA taxes are the most regressive of all taxation- meaning that is precisely what Paul (and anyone like him) wants.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,447
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 21, 2013 19:03:10 GMT -5
In 2017 "dollars"? yeah.Why is $20T a problem where $19T isn't? Round number fallacy? Or something more substantial? you keep saying problem. i said worried.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,447
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 21, 2013 19:06:01 GMT -5
Bingo! I would add bias, as our own bias will act upon what we perceive as the "correct data". One might ask: "What makes you think you're not falling for spin, ol' frien'?" All we really have to go on is what we read and/or hear. We don't know, for sure, how the data we're fed was gleaned. We don't know if it's real, or tweaked for effect. Some of us may think they know. I don't believe they do. we rarely argue data around here. mostly arguments go like this: Person 1: Social Security is going broke!!!! Person 2: no, it really isn't. since it is a "pay as you go" system, it really can't go broke. rather, it will lessen benefits to match incoming revenues, which means that, unlike other aspects of the budget, it is self regulating. Person 1: SOCIALIST! it gets really tiresome.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Oct 21, 2013 19:09:06 GMT -5
Bingo! I would add bias, as our own bias will act upon what we perceive as the "correct data". One might ask: "What makes you think you're not falling for spin, ol' frien'?" All we really have to go on is what we read and/or hear. We don't know, for sure, how the data we're fed was gleaned. We don't know if it's real, or tweaked for effect. Some of us may think they know. I don't believe they do. we rarely argue data around here. mostly arguments go like this: Person 1: Social Security is going broke!!!! Person 2: no, it really isn't. since it is a "pay as you go" system, it really can't go broke. rather, it will lessen benefits to match incoming revenues, which means that, unlike other aspects of the budget, it is self regulating. Person 1: SOCIALIST! it gets really tiresome. Just as long as you're the one goes out and tell the seniors that they have to take a 10% haircut this year and another 10% haircut next year, even though things will cost 4% more this year, and another 4% more the year after that. Methinks your nose will be what's broke.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Oct 21, 2013 19:09:42 GMT -5
Bingo! I would add bias, as our own bias will act upon what we perceive as the "correct data". One might ask: "What makes you think you're not falling for spin, ol' frien'?" All we really have to go on is what we read and/or hear. We don't know, for sure, how the data we're fed was gleaned. We don't know if it's real, or tweaked for effect. Some of us may think they know. I don't believe they do. we rarely argue data around here. mostly arguments go like this: Person 1: Social Security is going broke!!!! Person 2: no, it really isn't. since it is a "pay as you go" system, it really can't go broke. rather, it will lessen benefits to match incoming revenues, which means that, unlike other aspects of the budget, it is self regulating. Person 1: SOCIALIST! it gets really tiresome. Yes, it does. It would be nice if folks could get over the factional stuff and actually talk about things, read and absorb other views and try to understand them, offer ideas and ways of thinking that might be helpful to others, and refrain from pointing the finger and name-calling. *sigh* The pipe dreams of an old woman, I suppose.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 25, 2024 18:45:01 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2013 19:10:06 GMT -5
"Tiresome", as euphenisms go, is quite mild. There are other, more precise adjectives.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,447
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 21, 2013 19:10:35 GMT -5
The Tea Party is right, we have to do something about our exploding debt. of course. everyone agrees about that. but what the TP suggests is the equivalent of chopping off your arm to remove a splinter. a pair of tweezers will work just fine.The Tea Party is also the only ones with balls enough to risk their political lifes to stand up and vote for that principle. The method of doing it is really the problem I really have with this movement. oh yes, they have balls for days. it would be nice if they would put them to productive use, because we could really use SENSIBLE SOLUTIONS in DC. Obama said "If you want to change things then go win elections". Guess how they got there? They won the elections in 2010 because of how he handled ACA. not enough seats. you cannot, nor should you, be entitled to anything more than a voice with 50 seats in the House. consider this: the progressive coalition, the group Allen West calls "communists", would like to se 50% tax rates for the rich and single payer. they have FAR MORE seats than the TP- but did they shut the government down when they didn't get their way? don't answer that. it was rhetorical.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,447
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 21, 2013 19:11:07 GMT -5
The Tea Party is right, we have to do something about our exploding debt. The Tea Party is also the only ones with balls enough to risk their political lifes to stand up and vote for that principle. The method of doing it is really the problem I really have with this movement. Obama said "If you want to change things then go win elections". Guess how they got there? They won the elections in 2010 because of how he handled ACA. You win elections by spending like a drunken sailor on goodies for the public. Therein lies the paradox. ![](http://images.proboards.com/new/undecided.png) perhaps.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Oct 21, 2013 19:12:40 GMT -5
we rarely argue data around here. mostly arguments go like this: Person 1: Social Security is going broke!!!! Person 2: no, it really isn't. since it is a "pay as you go" system, it really can't go broke. rather, it will lessen benefits to match incoming revenues, which means that, unlike other aspects of the budget, it is self regulating. Person 1: SOCIALIST! it gets really tiresome. Just as long as you're the one goes out and tell the seniors that they have to take a 10% haircut this year and another 10% haircut next year, even though things will cost 4% more this year, and another 4% more the year after that. Methinks your nose will be what's broke. I think it should be means tested, Virgil. I have nothing against taking "a 10% haircut" because I'm smart enough to realize I'm not the only one in this country that's going to be getting that same haircut. With the economy down, raises aren't what they had been, prices are rising for everyone, etc. I don't know why I would expect to sit here fat, dumb and happy while others take all the blows. I would, however, want to see means testing. Some folks could not afford such a cut.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,447
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 21, 2013 19:12:41 GMT -5
I expect the GOP to suffer in 2014 and 2016- 2016 is likely to be Hillary, but then, I would have said that about 2008... I think 2016, the GOP infighting is going to come to a head, and the RINO is going to be shellacked, then the conservative nominee-- our 2016 "Goldwater" is going to be beaten soundly because the GOP establishment will undermine our nominee. I could be wrong- we might just overcome. This isn't 1964, the point about information being the key, and being widely available sans traditional political organizations and media outlets could mean something, but politics is a ground game- and I don't think being denied the phone banks, precinct captains, and door to door foot soldiers is something the TEA Party is going to overcome via facebook. interesting perspective. i am guessing that the TP will be co-opted and purged.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Oct 21, 2013 19:13:43 GMT -5
You win elections by spending like a drunken sailor on goodies for the public. Therein lies the paradox. ![](http://images.proboards.com/new/undecided.png) perhaps. Don't make Paul pull out the "Obama's gonna buy us a cell phone, and buy us our groceries, and gonna fix our schools, and gonna..." video clips again. ![](http://syonidv.hodginsmedia.com/vsmileys/tongue2.png)
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,447
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 21, 2013 19:15:24 GMT -5
we rarely argue data around here. mostly arguments go like this: Person 1: Social Security is going broke!!!! Person 2: no, it really isn't. since it is a "pay as you go" system, it really can't go broke. rather, it will lessen benefits to match incoming revenues, which means that, unlike other aspects of the budget, it is self regulating. Person 1: SOCIALIST! it gets really tiresome. Just as long as you're the one goes out and tell the seniors that they have to take a 10% haircut this year and another 10% haircut next year, even though things will cost 4% more this year, and another 4% more the year after that. no need. the feds have to pay out of the "trust fund" (borrowed funds) until they reach zero. that won't happen for at least a decade. or did you mean medicare?Methinks your nose will be what's broke. the threat of violence has not stopped me from doing the right thing so far. i doubt it ever will.
|
|