"Super Committee" decides to go full stupid

I like what Cain said. Don't try to fix broken agencies. Just delete them. That will balance the budget and get government off our backs. You liberals can then all move to "your" states and vote yourselves whatever the hell pleases you, but at the state and local level.
 
Onceler said:
Darla, that's just not correct. SS is going to keep chewing up a bigger portion of the budget pie until it is wholly unsustainable. And what is tragic about that is that the more pie it takes, the less there is for many other progressive ideals to move forward.

By mid-century, life expectancies will exceed 100. Combined with exponential population growth & cost of living, SS will fail, in a big way. It's amazing to me how many times I have heard people brag that SS can stay the way it is until 2037, at which point we'll have to cut it by 25%. Do you want to be the politician who has to tell seniors that their checks are going to be cut by 25% in 2037? Or 40% 30 years after that?
Click to expand...

Actually, what you are saying is just not true. I believe that you really believe this, but that's sad because you've been lied to.

First of all, on life expectancy. Amazingly, the designers of SS took that into account! Yes, they knew that life expectancy would rise, isn't that something? This is no big shocking emergency. This is not even a problem. And life expectancy is going to rise to 100 in 2050, really? For whom Onceler? Let's look at how life expectancy has risen thus far: http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/13/live-long-and-prosper-2/

Yeah, most of us aren't going to live to be 100.

As far as SS being unsustainable that is just poppycock! I am for lifting the cap, period. However, if that makes too many people clutch their pearls in the worry that when they reach millionaire status they'll have to pay more into SS OMG!, then we can do this: gradually lift the cap beginning in 2030 from 100 to 250 thousand, and raise the payroll tax 1 lousy percent across the board. This will insure the solvency of SS for...well forever.

I don't scare on SS, because the scare tactics are so easily debunked. I'm really surprised you believe them.
 
We've seen the occupy movement and how the left degenerates into a self-loathing mass of nincompoops who prey on each other when left to themselves. This is how it will end in this nation. Unless they are stopped, they will continue to demand more from the working class until there is no more and then we all go down the shitter.

Time for real change. Throw the bastards out into the street and govern ourselves again.
 
Darla said:
Actually, what you are saying is just not true. I believe that you really believe this, but that's sad because you've been lied to.

First of all, on life expectancy. Amazingly, the designers of SS took that into account! Yes, they knew that life expectancy would rise, isn't that something? This is no big shocking emergency. This is not even a problem. And life expectancy is going to rise to 100 in 2050, really? For whom Onceler? Let's look at how life expectancy has risen thus far: http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/13/live-long-and-prosper-2/

Yeah, most of us aren't going to live to be 100.

As far as SS being unsustainable that is just poppycock! I am for lifting the cap, period. However, if that makes too many people clutch their pearls in the worry that when they reach millionaire status they'll have to pay more into SS OMG!, then we can do this: gradually lift the cap beginning in 2030 from 100 to 250 thousand, and raise the payroll tax 1 lousy percent across the board. This will insure the solvency of SS for...well forever.

I don't scare on SS, because the scare tactics are so easily debunked. I'm really surprised you believe them.
Click to expand...

Honestly, people have no idea what's going to happen in the next couple of decades. I hate to sound like Dixie, but between stem cells, gene therapy & other techniques, treatment for most major diseases will either be improved greatly, or perfected. Technology advancement is exponential, and that includes medical technology. Life expectancies will clear 100 - I was being conservative w/ 'mid-century.' And cost of living will continue to go up. And our population will come close to doubling, barring a pandemic.

SS doesn't work mathematically; it just doesn't. If the big solution is to keep raising taxes on higher incomes to keep paying for more & more people who are living much longer than we thought, it's lame. Like I said, it will chew up a ton of other progressive programs & ideals. The only think I ever heard Rick Perry say that I agree w/ is that SS is a Ponzi scheme. If you look at the math, it's pretty close.
 
the 1% should lose some of it's grip but the occupiers are too stupid to know how to ask for it.
Less Lobbying, CEO's and boards stripped of the country club mentality. IE I'll pay you $250,000 a year to come rubberstamp my $3,000,000 salary thereby assfucking shareholders without the curtesy of a reacharound.
 
Onceler said:
Honestly, people have no idea what's going to happen in the next couple of decades. I hate to sound like Dixie, but between stem cells, gene therapy & other techniques, treatment for most major diseases will either be improved greatly, or perfected. Technology advancement is exponential, and that includes medical technology. Life expectancies will clear 100 - I was being conservative w/ 'mid-century.' And cost of living will continue to go up. And our population will come close to doubling, barring a pandemic.

SS doesn't work mathematically; it just doesn't. If the big solution is to keep raising taxes on higher incomes to keep paying for more & more people who are living much longer than we thought, it's lame. Like I said, it will chew up a ton of other progressive programs & ideals. The only think I ever heard Rick Perry say that I agree w/ is that SS is a Ponzi scheme. If you look at the math, it's pretty close.
Click to expand...

So you want to slash Ss now because we all have to agree that within a few decades we are going to be living in some sort of sci-fi future where we all live to be 125 years of age? And because of that the math on SS doesn't work, it just doesn't?

You know Onceler, no thanks. I'll stick with the reality we know about now, and the math's been done. We've got really immediate problems to solve, we don't need to go inventing problems based on science fiction, that may or may not come to pass. And I'm betting it doesn't. It'd be good news if it does. But I feel pretty confident it won't. Not for most of us anyway. I'm a realist and a pragmatist.
 
the SS argument is gay'r than Elton John, I don't make much but I stay just ahead of the cutoff and for a month each year I don't pay. I get hit yearly with the bracket creep and don't feel it a stitch. So people making real money would not stop buying Don P and Lexus. Trust me, the smug market is in no danger.
 
I feel bad about skewering you Onceler. I'd much rather skewer Superfreak, as I do on a daily basis. But on SS...I just can't deal with this stuff. There is no problem.
 
Onceler said:
Who thinks that SS & Medicare will be intact for their children?
Click to expand...

SS is an easy fix. Medicare, not so much.

You all know where I stand on the tax code in general, it needs to be simplified and ALL sources of income need to be taxed at the same rate(s).
 
Darla said:
So you want to slash Ss now because we all have to agree that within a few decades we are going to be living in some sort of sci-fi future where we all live to be 125 years of age? And because of that the math on SS doesn't work, it just doesn't?

You know Onceler, no thanks. I'll stick with the reality we know about now, and the math's been done. We've got really immediate problems to solve, we don't need to go inventing problems based on science fiction, that may or may not come to pass. And I'm betting it doesn't. It'd be good news if it does. But I feel pretty confident it won't. Not for most of us anyway. I'm a realist and a pragmatist.
Click to expand...

You brought up saving it for our children. And their world will be as different from ours as ours is from our parents. Don't even get me started on the grandkids. There are a lot of things that people are betting on w/ SS that could fluctuate wildly, and already are. Nary a year goes by when they don't change the forecast in some way because of some "unforeseen" factor.

It's not realistic or pragmatic to think SS can survive as the kind of program it currently is. I'm not suggesting slashing it, but I wish more people would consider privatization.
 
Superfreak said:
SS is an easy fix. Medicare, not so much.

You all know where I stand on the tax code in general, it needs to be simplified and ALL sources of income need to be taxed at the same rate(s).
Click to expand...

You think that SS is an easy fix?

And Onceler wants to slash it. I have to get some work done, this place is driving me mad. It's like up is down down is up, left is right right is left.
 
Onceler said:
You brought up saving it for our children. And their world will be as different from ours as ours is from our parents. Don't even get me started on the grandkids. There are a lot of things that people are betting on w/ SS that could fluctuate wildly, and already are. Nary a year goes by when they don't change the forecast in some way because of some "unforeseen" factor.

It's not realistic or pragmatic to think SS can survive as the kind of program it currently is. I'm not suggesting slashing it, but I wish more people would consider privatization.
Click to expand...

I think it is realistic. And I won't consider privatization. I believe you have fallen for scare tactics, as well as some wishful thinking about your life span.

But again, you reference what could happen and fluctuating data. Let's deal with our immediate problems. You propose slashing SS now , or eliminating it now in favor of a private system which would be run by the same criminals who just stole everything else, so that we don't have to slash SS in 2037. To me, this makes no sense. It's ridiculous. It's we have to destroy the village in order to save the village. I will never agree with it or to it.
 
Darla said:
I think it is realistic. And I won't consider privatization. I believe you have fallen for scare tactics, as well as some wishful thinking about your life span.

But again, you reference what could happen and fluctuating data. Let's deal with our immediate problems. You propose slashing SS now , or eliminating it now in favor of a private system which would be run by the same criminals who just stole everything else, so that we don't have to slash SS in 2037. To me, this makes no sense. It's ridiculous. It's we have to destroy the village in order to save the village. I will never agree with it or to it.
Click to expand...

Now you're giving in to scare tactics. Who says that the "same criminals who just stole everything else" are going to be running any kind of privatization program?

Too many people are way too knee-jerk about privatization. I've had this debate too many times on the board; all anyone can come up with is that "it's not an investment program." Which, of course, isn't saying too much if it actually works BETTER as an investment program - you know, more money for seniors when they retire & all that.

People have blinders on w/ SS. There are options out there that work for everyone, but some want to cling to a broken system until there isn't any choice but to slash, and indiscriminately. I have had many on the left tell me that this is exactly what will happen in 2037, but they have seemed happy about that.
 
I keep saying 2037, but that's wrong. They revised it this past year back to 2036, because of something they didn't foresee. But I'm sure that's the last time that will happen in the next 25 years.
 
Onceler said:
Now you're giving in to scare tactics. Who says that the "same criminals who just stole everything else" are going to be running any kind of privatization program?

Too many people are way too knee-jerk about privatization. I've had this debate too many times on the board; all anyone can come up with is that "it's not an investment program." Which, of course, isn't saying too much if it actually works BETTER as an investment program - you know, more money for seniors when they retire & all that.

People have blinders on w/ SS. There are options out there that work for everyone, but some want to cling to a broken system until there isn't any choice but to slash, and indiscriminately. I have had many on the left tell me that this is exactly what will happen in 2037, but they have seemed happy about that.
Click to expand...

No that will not happen in 2037, it is an irresponsible scare tactic. SS is completely solvent for the next quarter century, how many programs can make this claim? And come 2030, we will just have to make a few tweaks much like Ronald Reagan did. There is no problem.

If you know people on the left who "seem happy" over the idea of slashing SS in any year, they are either in need of medication or they aren't really on the left. I know of no one on the left who is anything other than determined to protect SS at all costs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top