Page 9 of 12 FirstFirst ... 56789101112 LastLast
Results 121 to 135 of 178

Thread: Republicans have no answer to this simple chart

  1. #121 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    825
    Thanks
    38
    Thanked 237 Times in 172 Posts
    Groans
    18
    Groaned 8 Times in 8 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cawacko View Post
    It is true. They are overwhelming the budget and it's only going to get worse as boomers retire.
    Remove the cap on Social Security contributions - fixed indefinitely. Other fixes are quite possible for any of the programs. As I said, Republicans don't want to fix them, they want to destroy them. And they use debt to force cuts.

  2. #122 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    825
    Thanks
    38
    Thanked 237 Times in 172 Posts
    Groans
    18
    Groaned 8 Times in 8 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cawacko View Post
    Sorry man, saying Republicans want to destroy them is a flat out lie. We can go back to Nixon if you would like as grew the great society as much if not more than LBJ. And republicans in congress have gone along with all liberalizations to entitlements (other than reforming welfare). Republicans have supported Medicare and contributed to it being in the trouble it is
    No, your statement is the flat-out lie. Republicans have wanted to kill these programs from before they passed. Nixon was simply a realist at the politics of the time and knew what he could and could not do, just as Republicans sang the praises of unions under Eisenhower when they were massively popular, until they could later declare war on them. If you don't want to get an education and learn the Republican agenda, don't lie about what it is.

  3. #123 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    62,855
    Thanks
    3,734
    Thanked 20,360 Times in 14,088 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 649 Times in 616 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Craig234 View Post
    Remove the cap on Social Security contributions - fixed indefinitely. Other fixes are quite possible for any of the programs. As I said, Republicans don't want to fix them, they want to destroy them. And they use debt to force cuts.
    That would make it even a larger income redistribution program than it already is.

    S.S. isn't going anywhere and it isn't being destroyed by Republicans.

  4. #124 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    62,855
    Thanks
    3,734
    Thanked 20,360 Times in 14,088 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 649 Times in 616 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Craig234 View Post
    No, your statement is the flat-out lie. Republicans have wanted to kill these programs from before they passed. Nixon was simply a realist at the politics of the time and knew what he could and could not do, just as Republicans sang the praises of unions under Eisenhower when they were massively popular, until they could later declare war on them. If you don't want to get an education and learn the Republican agenda, don't lie about what it is.
    Go back and look at the votes those programs received when they were created. Nixon was a Keynesian who had no problem expanding the programs the way he did. Once we was out of office our modern entitlement program was essentially complete until Bush's pill bill and the ACA

  5. #125 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    825
    Thanks
    38
    Thanked 237 Times in 172 Posts
    Groans
    18
    Groaned 8 Times in 8 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cawacko View Post
    That would make it even a larger income redistribution program than it already is.

    S.S. isn't going anywhere and it isn't being destroyed by Republicans.
    Yes, it would, and totally sustainable. That's a good thing.

    Republicans want to destroy it and always have. They simply haven't found a way to do it yet, but they are threatening it by reducing the payments - even Obama endorsed lowering the increases. Far more at risk are the healthcare programs.

  6. #126 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    825
    Thanks
    38
    Thanked 237 Times in 172 Posts
    Groans
    18
    Groaned 8 Times in 8 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cawacko View Post
    Go back and look at the votes those programs received when they were created. Nixon was a Keynesian who had no problem expanding the programs the way he did. Once we was out of office our modern entitlement program was essentially complete until Bush's pill bill and the ACA
    Abortion has remained legal since the Supreme Court declared it is, but that doesn't mean you can say Republicans don't want to make it illegal, just because they haven't been able to yet. You need to look at more - that they have won elections by running against it, appointed judges who are against it, and expressed their support for ending it.

    That's not the same as the social spending, because Republicans are often much more duplicitous in what they'll admit about their intentions, but you can easily identify their interests and agenda that often is at odds with what they'll admit publicly. And they have won many elections by running against those programs when it's politically viable to do so. In your recounting you ignore things from Clinton's slashing of welfare to the increases with programs such as Head Start and CHIPS.

    You love to just ignore what you are told and respond repeating yourself ignoring the response you got, as you did again here when told that Republicans like Nixon have done 'liberal' things that are politically popular because of what they can get away with - as the example you ignored of Republicans LOVING unions under Eisenhower showed. Nixon did things to get popular support that he did not necessarily support. And Keynesian is not the same thing as supporting social programs - they may or may not overlap.

  7. #127 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    8,490
    Thanks
    796
    Thanked 3,180 Times in 2,409 Posts
    Groans
    376
    Groaned 244 Times in 225 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Craig234 View Post
    So you think the problem is Democrats helping low-paid workers, not Republicans causing workers to be low-paid.

    Look, squirrel!
    They are not "helping workers" by making them dependent on the government and the DNC. They are disrupting the labor movement every time they toss a crumb to the masses from their limousines. The GOP is a strawman.

  8. #128 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    8,490
    Thanks
    796
    Thanked 3,180 Times in 2,409 Posts
    Groans
    376
    Groaned 244 Times in 225 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nordberg View Post
    When was last raise in the minimum wage? Truth is the top tax rate was over 90 percent in Eisenhowers time and has dropped over and over. Funny, but the national debt seemed to rise with it.During OIkes time, corporations kicked in 30 percent of government revenue. Now it is under 10. The Repubs want to starve the beast . Destroy the government for their short term benefit.,
    National debt has to rise if money supply is to be expanded under the current system. It is how new money gets introduced to the market. No national debt=no new money supply. That said, I do think we should be taxing the hell out of corporations, but not by rate adjustments so much as by eliminating depreciation across the board, stopping the accounting madness that allows them to deduct future expenses not yet incurred, and end the special treatment of capital gains/losses & passive income for tax purposes.

  9. #129 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    20,706
    Thanks
    1,054
    Thanked 5,654 Times in 4,435 Posts
    Groans
    295
    Groaned 184 Times in 180 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Craig234 View Post
    Yes, it would, and totally sustainable. That's a good thing.

    Republicans want to destroy it and always have. They simply haven't found a way to do it yet, but they are threatening it by reducing the payments - even Obama endorsed lowering the increases. Far more at risk are the healthcare programs.
    Republicans saved Social Security by Reagan's SS tax increases; otherwise, there would not be a $2.5 trillion surplus which is currently paying the difference between SS revenues and benefits. Benefits began exceeding revenues in 2010 and the surplus is paying the difference until 2037 when the surplus will be depleted.

    Taking the cap off SS taxes would not account for the difference as increased taxes equals increased benefits. Obama, the Republicans, and anybody else who has bothered to look at the trustees' report knows changes have to be made or the system can only pay 70% of its benefits by around 2037.

    SS has problems because of all the additional benefits added, not because of a shortage of funds (except the decline in the birth rate and increase in life expectancy). One-third now retire early at age 62, a benefit not part of the original program. Taking more taxes should not be the first impulse when unnecessary benefits can be reduced or eliminated.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Flash For This Post:

    cawacko (02-09-2018)

  11. #130 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    825
    Thanks
    38
    Thanked 237 Times in 172 Posts
    Groans
    18
    Groaned 8 Times in 8 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cawacko View Post
    Medicare and Medicaid have been on unsustainable paths just like S.S. Congress knows this they just choose not to act. And tax cuts aren't the reason the programs are in the shape they are.
    I'm going to not keep responding to your trolling repeating yourself ignoring the responded. They're easily fixable and tax cuts for the rich are a big problem to do so. Don't say the same crap again.

  12. #131 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    825
    Thanks
    38
    Thanked 237 Times in 172 Posts
    Groans
    18
    Groaned 8 Times in 8 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kacper View Post
    They are not "helping workers" by making them dependent on the government and the DNC. They are disrupting the labor movement every time they toss a crumb to the masses from their limousines. The GOP is a strawman.
    You're an ideologue and it's a waste of time to talk to you. The word 'dependent' has fried your brain.

  13. #132 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Gone to the mattresses
    Posts
    22,458
    Thanks
    1,135
    Thanked 11,622 Times in 8,086 Posts
    Groans
    874
    Groaned 639 Times in 618 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Craig234 View Post
    You're an ideologue and it's a waste of time to talk to you. The word 'dependent' has fried your brain.
    I love how lefties believe that they themselves aren’t “ideological”

    Good stuff

  14. #133 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    825
    Thanks
    38
    Thanked 237 Times in 172 Posts
    Groans
    18
    Groaned 8 Times in 8 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Flash View Post
    Republicans saved Social Security by Reagan's SS tax increases; otherwise, there would not be a $2.5 trillion surplus which is currently paying the difference between SS revenues and benefits.
    That's a relevant point, and another case where Republicans had to deal with the political limitations of the time. He hurt social security, but did go along with the changes to help it as well, which was not just his policy, it was bi-partisan with Tip O'Neill.

    And it's why Reagan would get nowhere in the Republican Party today - just like his support for handgun control and legalization of millions of undocumented immigrants. There was times he did things like that,as exceptions.


    Taking the cap off SS taxes would not account for the difference as increased taxes equals increased benefits. Obama, the Republicans, and anybody else who has bothered to look at the trustees' report knows changes have to be made or the system can only pay 70% of its benefits by around 2037.
    That's wrong about increased benefits. Removing the cap would fix it - google and read.


    SS has problems because of all the additional benefits added, not because of a shortage of funds (except the decline in the birth rate and increase in life expectancy). One-third now retire early at age 62, a benefit not part of the original program. Taking more taxes should not be the first impulse when unnecessary benefits can be reduced or eliminated.
    I'm open to a review of options if not done by Republicans who want to gut spending on the American people.

  15. #134 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    62,855
    Thanks
    3,734
    Thanked 20,360 Times in 14,088 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 649 Times in 616 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Craig234 View Post
    Yes, it would, and totally sustainable. That's a good thing.

    Republicans want to destroy it and always have. They simply haven't found a way to do it yet, but they are threatening it by reducing the payments - even Obama endorsed lowering the increases. Far more at risk are the healthcare programs.
    Reagan kept S.S. alive and gave us the surplus we have today. It's interesting your position though because I've read a number of progressives who argue they don't want it turned into a welfare program because they feel it will be easier to cut. But that's what you're arguing for. A very different program than the 'earned right' FDR envisioned.

  16. #135 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    62,855
    Thanks
    3,734
    Thanked 20,360 Times in 14,088 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 649 Times in 616 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Craig234 View Post
    Abortion has remained legal since the Supreme Court declared it is, but that doesn't mean you can say Republicans don't want to make it illegal, just because they haven't been able to yet. You need to look at more - that they have won elections by running against it, appointed judges who are against it, and expressed their support for ending it.

    That's not the same as the social spending, because Republicans are often much more duplicitous in what they'll admit about their intentions, but you can easily identify their interests and agenda that often is at odds with what they'll admit publicly. And they have won many elections by running against those programs when it's politically viable to do so. In your recounting you ignore things from Clinton's slashing of welfare to the increases with programs such as Head Start and CHIPS.

    You love to just ignore what you are told and respond repeating yourself ignoring the response you got, as you did again here when told that Republicans like Nixon have done 'liberal' things that are politically popular because of what they can get away with - as the example you ignored of Republicans LOVING unions under Eisenhower showed. Nixon did things to get popular support that he did not necessarily support. And Keynesian is not the same thing as supporting social programs - they may or may not overlap.
    We could talk all about the '96 welfare reform. I'm sure you remember the predictions that millions of kids would be out on the streets hungry if it passed. It was great legislation which got more people off welfare and into work and did not have the horrifying affects its opponents predicted. If you remember Bill Clinton took office saying we were going to change welfare as we know it. Even Democrats then knew how bloated the welfare roles were and incentives for one to want to get off were so out of whack.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 20
    Last Post: 05-04-2017, 01:15 PM
  2. Obama and Democrats, Not Republicans, Need to Answer for Debt Ceiling
    By Rationalist in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 60
    Last Post: 05-25-2011, 10:29 AM
  3. Still no answer, same simple question for DIXIE!!!
    By Jarod in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 79
    Last Post: 07-19-2008, 07:31 AM
  4. A Challenge: Answer a Very Simple Question.
    By jollie in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 05-06-2008, 02:34 PM
  5. A Simple Fact: Republicans Can't Manage the Economy
    By Cypress in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 08-24-2007, 07:38 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •