RE: 1.9 Trillion more... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


MzMia -> RE: 1.9 Trillion more... (2/12/2010 10:15:08 PM)

I read your thread Uncle Nasty, and posted to it also.
It is a very informative post, full of interesting information.
I am not sure how I missed it, but some days you have people starting so many threads,

that threads are pushed to page 2 rather quickly!
I am going to start making it a point to read page 2 more often.


Don't stop sharing what you learn from researching!
I appreciate your efforts!

I agree many people are not paying attention, but eventually they will have
to pay attention.
I will get up off my ass and dance with you!
[;)]
The next revolution will be televised.




Brain -> RE: 1.9 Trillion more... (2/12/2010 11:00:06 PM)

So the Bush tax cuts were wrong???

quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

I'm willing to bet that the "proposed" 15 billion freeze will never happen. This country is in deep shit with this much debt..





blacksword404 -> RE: 1.9 Trillion more... (2/12/2010 11:19:02 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brain

So the Bush tax cuts were wrong???

quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

I'm willing to bet that the "proposed" 15 billion freeze will never happen. This country is in deep shit with this much debt..




No.  Tax cuts can be a good thing. But without spending cuts you won't get a balanced budget. I would like to see a ratio of tax cuts to spending cuts of 1.5 : 2
Whether we do it quickly or slowly we need to make these politicians get off the debt. Damn junkies.




Brain -> RE: 1.9 Trillion more... (2/12/2010 11:43:34 PM)

It’s probably just a drop in the bucket when compared to the overall deficit and it will put a lot of unemployed people (1million) to work pronto as compared to the slowness of 95,000 a month projected now. And we need to create jobs as fast as possible because people are hurting.

The more I think about this idea the more I like it. So what if they retire one year early? At least it will get 1million people off collecting unemployment insurance. It looks like it can do a lot of good and we would just be paying Social security instead of unemployment insurance.

I think you need to reevaluate how you think about these matters because you are too quick to dismiss ideas from the left as being loonie. In my opinion, I think you need to be more objective and pragmatic. Do what works instead of being constrained by ideology and religion. I used to be a right wing Reagan, Thatcher, Mulroney conservative until I realized the right doesn’t have all the answers.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thadius

I just heard Kucinich propose that we lower the retirement age (for Social security) temporarily to allow 1 million folks to retire and get on the rolls, thus opening up 1 million jobs.

God I love the logic of some of our elected officials.





Real0ne -> RE: 1.9 Trillion more... (2/12/2010 11:51:45 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MzMia

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeffff

I still don't feel bailed out.

Jeff


10 trillion more and you might start to feel it!
[;)]


and 5 bucks for a loaf of bread




Musicmystery -> RE: 1.9 Trillion more... (2/13/2010 6:09:13 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: blacksword404

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brain

So the Bush tax cuts were wrong???

quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

I'm willing to bet that the "proposed" 15 billion freeze will never happen. This country is in deep shit with this much debt..




No.  Tax cuts can be a good thing. But without spending cuts you won't get a balanced budget. I would like to see a ratio of tax cuts to spending cuts of 1.5 : 2
Whether we do it quickly or slowly we need to make these politicians get off the debt. Damn junkies.


Well, those particular cuts came with increased spending.

A very bad idea. And simply reversing the damage will be called "increasing" taxes.

When you or I can't pay our bills, we cut where we can, and then work to increase income.

Bush did exactly the opposite.




DarkSteven -> RE: 1.9 Trillion more... (2/13/2010 6:24:45 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thadius

I just heard Kucinich propose that we lower the retirement age (for Social security) temporarily to allow 1 million folks to retire and get on the rolls, thus opening up 1 million jobs.

God I love the logic of some of our elected officials.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Brain

It’s probably just a drop in the bucket when compared to the overall deficit and it will put a lot of unemployed people (1million) to work pronto as compared to the slowness of 95,000 a month projected now. And we need to create jobs as fast as possible because people are hurting.

The more I think about this idea the more I like it. So what if they retire one year early? At least it will get 1million people off collecting unemployment insurance. It looks like it can do a lot of good and we would just be paying Social security instead of unemployment insurance.

I think you need to reevaluate how you think about these matters because you are too quick to dismiss ideas from the left as being loonie. In my opinion, I think you need to be more objective and pragmatic. Do what works instead of being constrained by ideology and religion. I used to be a right wing Reagan, Thatcher, Mulroney conservative until I realized the right doesn’t have all the answers.



Brain, Social Security is about to be bankrupt.  The proposal intends to shift people from one bucket of money (unemployment) to another (SS).  Somehow, Kucinch thinks that people on unemployment are actively looking for a FT job and those on SS are happily retired and will not work

SS was never intended to be a livable income.  If I were on SS, I'd be looking for work under the table to supplement my income.

I have an ideological reason for opposing this.  I consider that the ONLY viable solution is for existing business to grow, and for new businesses to start up.  As they do, they will create jobs.  Having people on a government-supplied dole (whether unemployment, welfare, or SS) is a necessary evil but should not be expanded.

I am not certain how the government should be involved with encouraging businesses to start/grow... maybe something along the lines of the SBIR.




Real0ne -> RE: 1.9 Trillion more... (2/13/2010 6:47:43 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven
Brain, Social Security is about to be bankrupt.  The proposal intends to shift people from one bucket of money (unemployment) to another (SS).  Somehow, Kucinch thinks that people on unemployment are actively looking for a FT job and those on SS are happily retired and will not work

SS was never intended to be a livable income.  If I were on SS, I'd be looking for work under the table to supplement my income.

I have an ideological reason for opposing this.  I consider that the ONLY viable solution is for existing business to grow, and for new businesses to start up.  As they do, they will create jobs.  Having people on a government-supplied dole (whether unemployment, welfare, or SS) is a necessary evil but should not be expanded.

I am not certain how the government should be involved with encouraging businesses to start/grow... maybe something along the lines of the SBIR.



speaking of putting blame in the wrong place.  Thats what its all about now days.  Imagine.....

Social security is pay as you go.   New people coming into the system or those not yet collecting SS pay for those who are presently collecting.  No different than paying the landlord rent every month.

You hear people talk about having a revolution and 99% of americans would witch hunt the wrong people








pyroaquatic -> RE: 1.9 Trillion more... (2/13/2010 6:58:58 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

But simplistic magic money solutions should be ridiculed (as Bush and Dole did when Reagan first proposed his nonsense) and dropped, not enshrined.

This nation needs a lobotomy.




YES! This solves two birds with one stone. I won't have my mind controlled and I can fit my change in thar.

---

There must be a solution that benefits us in the short and long term.

thinkthinkthinkthinkthinkthinkthinkthinkthinkthinkthinkthink(alreadyknowstheanswer)




DarkSteven -> RE: 1.9 Trillion more... (2/13/2010 7:58:08 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

Social security is pay as you go.   New people coming into the system or those not yet collecting SS pay for those who are presently collecting.  No different than paying the landlord rent every month.



Nope.  That's the theory, but... for years, SS has taken in more from workers than it paid out in benefits.  That money was not escrowed, as it should have been, but was used as a slush fund to pay for other programs.  Now with the baby boomers nearing retirement, the government faces a double whammy - it cannot count on the income it took from SS payments previously, and it also must pay out benefits that exceed the amount paid into SS by the workers.

That's the crisis in SS that was talked about for quite a while.




Thadius -> RE: 1.9 Trillion more... (2/13/2010 10:33:01 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Brain

It’s probably just a drop in the bucket when compared to the overall deficit and it will put a lot of unemployed people (1million) to work pronto as compared to the slowness of 95,000 a month projected now. And we need to create jobs as fast as possible because people are hurting.

The more I think about this idea the more I like it. So what if they retire one year early? At least it will get 1million people off collecting unemployment insurance. It looks like it can do a lot of good and we would just be paying Social security instead of unemployment insurance.

I think you need to reevaluate how you think about these matters because you are too quick to dismiss ideas from the left as being loonie. In my opinion, I think you need to be more objective and pragmatic. Do what works instead of being constrained by ideology and religion. I used to be a right wing Reagan, Thatcher, Mulroney conservative until I realized the right doesn’t have all the answers.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thadius

I just heard Kucinich propose that we lower the retirement age (for Social security) temporarily to allow 1 million folks to retire and get on the rolls, thus opening up 1 million jobs.

God I love the logic of some of our elected officials.



Oh I looked at the logic and it is deeply flawed for a few reasons.
First, social security will be going into the red this year as those scheduled to retire hit the books (first wave of baby boomers).

Second, Steven pretty well covered that point.

Finally, there is no guarantee that the companies those 1 million retire from would hire somebody to replace them, which means you could potentially be taking people from the pool that are still paying and getting a net loss of revenues coming in, with a definite increase in money going out. Not only would such a scheme be risky, in my opinion it would be foolish and potentially fatal to the social security system.

As for social security being a drop in the bucket of the deficit, that is simply not the case. Social security, Medicare, and Medicaid account for almost $2.5 Trillion dollars of the budget this year, and will increase significantly over the next few. It is the proverbial third rail of the budget, as mentioned elsewhere it is a pretty popular program, so any changes to it will mean potentially lots of pain for the person with enough courage to do so. This problem has been known for decades now, and the answer has always been a bandaid to push off to a later date the impending collapse of the program. Such bandaids have included raising the age at which somebody can collect a few times.




housesub4you -> RE: 1.9 Trillion more... (2/13/2010 10:53:55 AM)

Well, other than more tax cuts, I have yet to see the GOP support or offer anything. 

Spending is not the answer alone, we need to create our manufacturing base we lost in the last 30 years.  But, when you see how we have to cave into China's demands because of all the money borrowed for the wars, our options are very slim.

So, O'bama wants to borrow to try to build this country back up, and everyone bitches, when Bush borrowed for a war it was OK

If the GOP would stop their BS party line and actually work on helping, perhaps things would start to get better, but as Obama stated just doing what 1 party wants or they vote NO, is not working

So if you are not part of the answer, then you are part of the problem




Thadius -> RE: 1.9 Trillion more... (2/13/2010 11:22:57 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: housesub4you

Well, other than more tax cuts, I have yet to see the GOP support or offer anything. 

Spending is not the answer alone, we need to create our manufacturing base we lost in the last 30 years.  But, when you see how we have to cave into China's demands because of all the money borrowed for the wars, our options are very slim.

So, O'bama wants to borrow to try to build this country back up, and everyone bitches, when Bush borrowed for a war it was OK

If the GOP would stop their BS party line and actually work on helping, perhaps things would start to get better, but as Obama stated just doing what 1 party wants or they vote NO, is not working

So if you are not part of the answer, then you are part of the problem

Uhm, the one bipartisan bill that has been worked on, just got shot down by the majority (because it included some concessions to the minority).

Ah and then since everybody enjoyed the President visiting the GOP retreat, lets take a look at how accurate you are in your description of the GOP not offering anything.

quote:


Tom Price, Georgia?

PRICE: Thank you.

I want to stick on -- on the general topic of health care, but ask a very specific question.

You have repeatedly said, most recently at -- at the State of the Union, that Republicans have offered no ideas and no solutions, in spite of the fact...

OBAMA: I don't think I said that.

What I said was within the context of health care -- I remember that speech pretty well. It was only two days ago.

(LAUGHTER)

I said I'd welcome ideas that you might provide.

I didn't say that you haven't provided ideas.
I said I'd welcome those ideas that you'll provide.

PRICE: Mr. President, multiple times from your administration there have come statements that Republicans have no ideas and no solutions, in spite of that fact that we've offered, as demonstrated today, positive solutions to all of the challenges we face, including energy and the economy and health care.
Specifically, in the area of health care, this bill, H.R. 3400, that has more cosponsors than any health care bill in the House. It is a bill that would provide health coverage for all Americans, would correct the significant insurance challenges of portability and preexisting, would solve the lawsuit abuse issue, which isn't addressed significantly in the other proposals that went through the House and the Senate, would write into law that medical decisions are made between patients and families and doctors, and does all of that without raising taxes by a penny.

But my specific question is, what should we tell our constituents who know that Republicans have offered positive solutions to the challenges that Americans face and yet continue to hear out of the administration that we've offered nothing?

OBAMA: Tell them I -- look, I have to say, that on the -- let's just take the health care debate. And it's probably not constructive for us to try to debate a particular bill. This isn't the venue to do it.

But if you say that we can offer coverage for all Americans and it won't cost a penny, that's just not true. You can't structure a bill where suddenly 30 million people have coverage and it costs nothing.

If...

(CROSSTALK)

PRICE: ... and I understand that we're not interested in debating this bill.

OBAMA: Sir...

PRICE: But what should we tell our constituents, who know that we've offered these solutions, and yet hear from the administration that -- that we have offered nothing?

OBAMA: Let me -- I'm using this as a specific example, so let me answer your question. You asked a question, I want to answer it.

OBAMA: It's not enough, if you say, for example, that we've offered a health care plan and I look up -- this is just under the section that you've just provided me -- or the book that you've just provided me, "Summary of GOP Health Care Reform Bill."

"The GOP plan will lower health care premiums for American families and small businesses, addressing America's number one priority for health reform."

I mean, that's an idea that we all embrace. But specifically it's got to work. I mean, there's got to be a mechanism in these plans that I can go to an independent health care expert and say, "Is this something that will actually work or is it boilerplate?"

You know, if I'm told, for example, that the solution to dealing with health care costs is tort reform, something that I've said I am willing to work with you on, but the CBO or other experts say to me, you know, "At best, this could reduce health care costs relative to where they're growing by a couple of percentage points or save $5 billion a year, that's what we can score it at, and it will not bend the cost curve long term or reduce premiums significantly," then you can't make the claim that that's the only thing that we have to do.

If we're going to do multi-state insurance so that people can go across state lines, I've got to be able to go to an independent health care expert, Republican or Democrat, who can tell me that this won't result in cherry-picking of the healthiest going to some and the least healthy being worse off.

So I am absolutely committed to working with you on these issues. But it can't just be political assertions that aren't substantiated when it comes to the actual details of policy, because otherwise we're going to be selling the American people a bill of goods.

I mean, the easiest thing for me to do on the health care debate would have been to tell people that, "What you're going to get is guaranteed health insurance, lower your costs, all the insurance reforms, we're going to lower the cost of Medicare and Medicaid, and it won't cost anybody anything." That's great politics. It's just not true.

OBAMA: So there's got to be some test of realism in any of these proposals, mine included. I've got to hold myself accountable, and I guarantee the American people will hold themselves -- will hold me accountable if what I'm selling doesn't actually deliver.

PENCE: Mr. President, a point of clarification.

What's in the "Better Solutions" book are all the legislative proposals that were offered...

OBAMA: Oh, I understand. I've actually read your bills.

PENCE: ... throughout 2009.

OBAMA: I understand.

PENCE: And so rest assured the summary document that you received is backed up by precisely the kind of detailed legislation that Speaker Pelosi and your administration have been busy ignoring for 12 months.




Of course this could just be some spin that got lost in the bright lights and pretty pictures. There are also a number of bills, including some bipartisan bills that were completely stopped by Pelosi or Reid simply because they didn't fall in line with their agendas.

Feb. 25th is going to be fun to watch.




blacksword404 -> RE: 1.9 Trillion more... (2/13/2010 1:48:22 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery


quote:

ORIGINAL: blacksword404

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brain

So the Bush tax cuts were wrong???

quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

I'm willing to bet that the "proposed" 15 billion freeze will never happen. This country is in deep shit with this much debt..




No.  Tax cuts can be a good thing. But without spending cuts you won't get a balanced budget. I would like to see a ratio of tax cuts to spending cuts of 1.5 : 2
Whether we do it quickly or slowly we need to make these politicians get off the debt. Damn junkies.


Well, those particular cuts came with increased spending.

A very bad idea. And simply reversing the damage will be called "increasing" taxes.

When you or I can't pay our bills, we cut where we can, and then work to increase income.

Bush did exactly the opposite.


The government needs to have itself audited. The CBO or something like it would do a decent job. But as soon as you say anything like that to them their chin fat would start to wiggle while they stammer and bullshit on why they can't.




housesub4you -> RE: 1.9 Trillion more... (2/13/2010 1:52:16 PM)

What is your point, where is the bill? he talked about, other than tax breaks for the top1%

Still where is the GOP answer. other than talking points and a bill?  What they have offered is the same crap that got us here




blacksword404 -> RE: 1.9 Trillion more... (2/13/2010 1:53:40 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

Social security is pay as you go.   New people coming into the system or those not yet collecting SS pay for those who are presently collecting.  No different than paying the landlord rent every month.



Nope.  That's the theory, but... for years, SS has taken in more from workers than it paid out in benefits.  That money was not escrowed, as it should have been, but was used as a slush fund to pay for other programs.  Now with the baby boomers nearing retirement, the government faces a double whammy - it cannot count on the income it took from SS payments previously, and it also must pay out benefits that exceed the amount paid into SS by the workers.

That's the crisis in SS that was talked about for quite a while.



I think these baby boomers retiring will make for an interesting stock market in the next 5 years.




housesub4you -> RE: 1.9 Trillion more... (2/13/2010 1:59:32 PM)

I do not, they have the fortune of having pensions, and social security. 

unlike those of us stuck with 401k's who lost thousands in the last 6 years




popeye1250 -> RE: 1.9 Trillion more... (2/13/2010 2:36:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

Chapman said the DOW is going to go down so as to shift investors into US bonds.

Imagine.



It'll be just the opposite, out of govt bonds and into stocks. Who the hell wants to hold govt bonds paying 1-3% when you can buy stocks cheap that pay 8-12% and who's companies don't have the debt of the govt?




housesub4you -> RE: 1.9 Trillion more... (2/13/2010 2:53:41 PM)

Really when every report over 20 years shows stocks lose and so does every plan based on it.  I won't give links, just goggle it,  Bonds did much better than the market, so privatization would have lost millions for the average person and made Billions for Wall Street




Thadius -> RE: 1.9 Trillion more... (2/13/2010 4:30:31 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: housesub4you

What is your point, where is the bill? he talked about, other than tax breaks for the top1%

Still where is the GOP answer. other than talking points and a bill?  What they have offered is the same crap that got us here



Well, the section I quoted from the retreat has Obama admitting that there have been GOP bills, and that there were even enough of them to create a book that summarized them.

I am not even trying to defend the GOP, I am stating fact.

As for your question, do you not realize how our congressional bodies work? The majority gets to control what comes to the floor for a vote, and with the size of the majorities that they had, they could walk over any legislation that was presented anyways.

I keep hearing about where are the solutions, the problem is the only solution you want to hear is what comes from Pelosi and Reid.

One last fun tidbit, did you catch the interview with Obama where he suggests that it is possible that he will go back on his promise about tax hikes on those that make less than $250k a year?




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125