Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Sanctimonious Deficit Hawks Target Social Safety Net


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Sanctimonious Deficit Hawks Target Social Safety Net Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Sanctimonious Deficit Hawks Target Social Safety Net - 5/2/2010 7:14:50 PM   
pahunkboy


Posts: 33061
Joined: 2/26/2006
From: Central Pennsylvania
Status: offline 		well 6000 years says that gold and silver is money.

terribly inconvenient.  LOL.



(in reply to brainiacsub)
Profile   Post #: 81
RE: Sanctimonious Deficit Hawks Target Social Safety Net - 7/31/2010 12:02:54 PM   
dbloomer


Posts: 137
Joined: 7/9/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: brainiacsub

These are the kinds of solutions you get from people who have little understanding of the problem. The guy who invented this concept admittedly has no formal education, so it doesn't surprise me that so many would see it as a panacea to world peace.


By your logic we should disregard everything YOU say in this thread if you lack the necessary credentials.

(in reply to brainiacsub)
Profile   Post #: 82
RE: Sanctimonious Deficit Hawks Target Social Safety Net - 7/31/2010 12:07:54 PM   
dbloomer


Posts: 137
Joined: 7/9/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: brainiacsub

I share the dream, but unfortunately that's all it is - just a dream. If someone can demonstrate such a workable utopia, I'd be willing to listen.


This "I have-to-see-it-to-believe-it" mentality is reactive, not proactive. You being willing to listen is kind of irrelivant once proof of concept exists. It's like asking someone to convince you that an air-plane is real, when there are already air-planes flying overhead and the need for convincing is no longer necessary.

(in reply to brainiacsub)
Profile   Post #: 83
RE: Sanctimonious Deficit Hawks Target Social Safety Net - 7/31/2010 12:15:20 PM   
dbloomer


Posts: 137
Joined: 7/9/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: brainiacsub

You can't change human behavior just because you will it to be something else. Just ain't going to happen.


The behavior of anyone or anything can be changed, and is subject to the environment. Why do you think advertisement exists? To alter peoples perceptions and buying patterns. You make a statement like the one I've quoted, fail to support it with evidence, and simutaneously, in other posts preach about the importance of being accredited, and when your intellect has arrived at a dead end you just call people "stupid" or "nutters".

quote:


One of the many flaws of your theory is that resources can always be available all the time in the quantities needed by all the people.


Nobody has proven or dissproven the above theory. However, one thing HAS been proven. We're consuming non-renewable resources at a disproportionate rate. Something tells me that when it comes to facts that don't support your view, you suddenly aren't such a fan of facts.

(in reply to brainiacsub)
Profile   Post #: 84
RE: Sanctimonious Deficit Hawks Target Social Safety Net - 7/31/2010 12:25:39 PM   
dbloomer


Posts: 137
Joined: 7/9/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: brainiacsub

It may be entirely possible that these goals aren't achievable unless you change human nature itself. Good luck with that. I prefer to improve on what we have as opposed to starting over.


Thinking you'll improve on what we've got in any realistic way without evolving out of what we've got is as idealistic as trying to build something new. Good luck with that.


quote:


If you are really serious about RBE being the solution to the utopia that you seek, then start with the building blocks.


People are the building blocks. That's why threads like this exist.

quote:


Since religion is the major cause of so much that is wrong with humanity, tell me how you would eliminate it, since you can't achieve the goals you stated as long as religion controls culture and human behavior.


You don't eliminate religion, you eliminate the establishment structure behind religion that tells people "Do this, and do not question it.", and thus, the control mechanism of religion diminishes and people begin to realize the power 1 person can have.



quote:


You started a thread on this topic a couple of months ago, and you didn't have any converts then, and you are kinda wasting your time with me, and it's not because I don't value rational discussion. This just doesn't qualify in my view. No pissing match intended.


The fact that this feels like "conversion" to you is a testiment to your identification with how things are now. If you think absorbing new information makes you a "convert", you're missing the point. If I teach you math, you haven't "Converted" to mathmaticianism, you've just learned useful information that gives you a better understanding.

(in reply to brainiacsub)
Profile   Post #: 85
RE: Sanctimonious Deficit Hawks Target Social Safety Net - 7/31/2010 12:31:35 PM   
Brain


Posts: 3792
Joined: 2/14/2007
Status: offline
@h#j$piiop$#$$%$% him/them! give the people back their money.

And although he won't say it in so many words, Peterson's message to the retirees, widows and orphans who depend on Social Security is: Sorry! We already spent all your money feeding the military industrial complex and paying for tax cuts for the rich and so on. We don't owe you a thing.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/29/sanctimonious-deficit-haw_n_557383.html



quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

Sanctimonious Deficit Hawks Target Social Safety Netthe only concrete deficit-reducing proposal that they all agree on involves cutting Social Security payouts, in part by raising the retirement age/snip




(in reply to pahunkboy)
Profile   Post #: 86
RE: Sanctimonious Deficit Hawks Target Social Safety Net - 7/31/2010 12:33:14 PM   
brainiacsub


Posts: 1209
Joined: 11/11/2007
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: dbloomer


quote:

ORIGINAL: brainiacsub

These are the kinds of solutions you get from people who have little understanding of the problem. The guy who invented this concept admittedly has no formal education, so it doesn't surprise me that so many would see it as a panacea to world peace.


By your logic we should disregard everything YOU say in this thread if you lack the necessary credentials.


I'm not sure it was necessary to resurrect this thread in order to respond to me. I will say - just this once in this thread - that I am not one of those who believes that all opinions matter and are equally valid. I believe in meritocracy. One must demonstrate a grasp of the facts, subject matter expertise, and at least a willingness to study and understand problems and their solutions beyond simple ideology. The founder of the Venus Project and it's followers don't qualify. That is not just my personal opinion, but is shared pretty universally by people who are the experts.

I am not interested in entering this debate with you. All I am suggesting is that you research the criticisms of a resource based economy and address them with facts and knowledge of the subject rather than ideology. Or, you can continue to duke it out in the forums with those who are better informed than you. Your choice.

(in reply to dbloomer)
Profile   Post #: 87
RE: Sanctimonious Deficit Hawks Target Social Safety Net - 7/31/2010 12:33:22 PM   
dbloomer


Posts: 137
Joined: 7/9/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella

So um, who's going to provide these available services? It's one thing to say "I'm a dentist, I'll work on the mechanic's teeth in exchange for him fixing my car" but it's quite another to say "do any work you find fulfilling" and not expect there to be an abundance of "artists" and a shortage of manual laborers.


The problem with this question is it supposes people will act the same then, as they do now.

If you gave a person 10 million dollars now, and they were free from the burden of responsibility, they may very well become complacent and lazy, for a time at least, because they've FINALLY had relief from a system that forced them in to leighbor for so long.

However, if you were born in to a system where you were free to pursue ANY interest you wanted, people WOULD WILLINGLY (voluntarily) assume the "available services" you speak of, and more importantly, they would only need to fullfil these "Jobs" for a TINY TINY portion of their time because the need for human labor will have deminished so much.



(in reply to Elisabella)
Profile   Post #: 88
RE: Sanctimonious Deficit Hawks Target Social Safety Net - 7/31/2010 12:36:04 PM   
dbloomer


Posts: 137
Joined: 7/9/2010
Status: offline
quote:



I am not interested in entering this debate with you. All I am suggesting is that you research the criticisms of a resource based economy and address them with facts and knowledge of the subject rather than ideology. Or, you can continue to duke it out in the forums with those who are better informed than you. Your choice.


I respectfully ask that you do not join in a discussion if you're not interested in contributing to it. If you take an opposing view and then hit the eject button when it comes time to substantiating it, it's not helpful to anyone. I would LOVE to look at the figures that are contrary to the Venus Project. When you point me towards them and demonstrate to me how well informed you are, then I will take what you say with more clout. I have no problem being wrong. This isn't about proving my point, it's about proving a better model for society is viable here, now, today. If the model gets disproven with science, GOOD. I will celebrate the day that The Venus Project gets disproven by science because I'm interested in truth. However, If it's refuted by superstition and fear, I won't let it stand.




< Message edited by dbloomer -- 7/31/2010 12:44:56 PM >

(in reply to brainiacsub)
Profile   Post #: 89
RE: Sanctimonious Deficit Hawks Target Social Safety Net - 7/31/2010 12:36:58 PM   
Brain


Posts: 3792
Joined: 2/14/2007
Status: offline
Did you read this???

No, their only fully developed policy proposal -- one to which they adhere to with nearly religious devotion --is that America's most successful social program needs to be scaled back so that it provides fewer people less money over a shorter period of time. This despite admonitions from progressive economists that they are exaggerating the positive effects of Social Security cuts on deficit reduction, while being cavalier about the effect on people.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/29/sanctimonious-deficit-haw_n_557383.html


quote:

ORIGINAL: brainiacsub

Why must these two options be mutually exclusive? Why can't we stop the war machine AND cut entitlements, especially for the wealthiest Americans? If we are serious about debt reduction, we may not have a choice.


(in reply to brainiacsub)
Profile   Post #: 90
RE: Sanctimonious Deficit Hawks Target Social Safety Net - 7/31/2010 12:40:52 PM   
Brain


Posts: 3792
Joined: 2/14/2007
Status: offline 		I agree, give people their money back!

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: brainiacsub

Entitlements such as Social Security should be on the table. Everyone will have to sacrifice to get us out of this debt shithole, but I question the credibility of anyone who takes a partisan stance on this issue. Cuts to defense, reduction or elimination of wasteful govt programs, and increased taxes all need to be considered as part of the solution.

<edited to add: Consider the source. The Huff Post is not exactly unbiased in its approach.>


Why should Social Security be on the table?

This isn't a welfare program.

The article sums it up very well:



Peterson, however, just can't help himself when it comes to Social Security; for instance, he asks guest after guest to explain to the audience how the Social Security Trust Fund, which holds more than $2.5 trillion in government debt, is actually a fiction.

That $2.5 trillion Trust Fund is the repository of payroll taxes paid by generations of working Americans, and the government bonds it holds are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States of America.

But to Peterson, that doesn't count, because the actual money that was paid in has been spent on other things and the government, to pay it back, would have to find the money somewhere else -- maybe in taxes, maybe by borrowing more money.

So while he won't say it in so many words, Peterson is essentially advocating for the U.S. to default on its debts -- not to the Chinese, of course, (that would "reduce investor confidence"), but to the American working people.



(in reply to rulemylife)
Profile   Post #: 91
RE: Sanctimonious Deficit Hawks Target Social Safety Net - 7/31/2010 12:47:09 PM   
Brain


Posts: 3792
Joined: 2/14/2007
Status: offline 		It’s healthy to eat squid, cheap (buy it in the grocery store) and delicious.

quote:

ORIGINAL: brainiacsub


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeffff

If they cut Social Securtiy, I won't be able to afford caliamari when I retire.

What kind of retirement is that?

Calamari is icky. You won't be missing anything.


(in reply to brainiacsub)
Profile   Post #: 92
RE: Sanctimonious Deficit Hawks Target Social Safety Net - 7/31/2010 12:51:55 PM   
Brain


Posts: 3792
Joined: 2/14/2007
Status: offline 		BULLSHIT!!@@


quote:

ORIGINAL: brainiacsub

It is not a ponzi by the classical definition, but the mechanics still hold. If you prefer, we can call it a pyramid or a "rob Peter to pay Paul" type of scenario. They are all similar in nature, but I will concede that SS is not a "fraudulent investment" scheme. Many believed in good faith that there would always be a supply of new contributors at the bottom. The govt forces people to participate, vs a true ponzi or pyramid where investors are voluntary. The point is, that fact that payments out > payments in is something that politicians should have considered along the way. Application of a little basic math could have alerted us that the system was unsustainable once the baby boomers reached retirement age. Our politicians have known this for years, there just hasn't been the political will to do anything about it.

<edited to add: You don't think a trust can be underfunded? Because it's a trust the well should never run dry?>


(in reply to brainiacsub)
Profile   Post #: 93
RE: Sanctimonious Deficit Hawks Target Social Safety Net - 7/31/2010 1:14:11 PM   
brainiacsub


Posts: 1209
Joined: 11/11/2007
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline 		How wonderful that you think so.

You are aware that this is an old thread?

(in reply to Brain)
Profile   Post #: 94
RE: Sanctimonious Deficit Hawks Target Social Safety Net - 7/31/2010 4:49:10 PM   
alwayssummer


Posts: 89
Joined: 9/13/2008
Status: offline
quote:

(
Brain, I've contributed to yours and other threads more recently on the threats to social security. I commiserate with your frustration of trying to reason with those who base their knowledge of this trumpted up "crisis" on what they learn only through yahoo, the nightly news and other mainstream media. They  regurgitate this complete and utter propaganda that the age of soc sec must be raised and that the benefits need to be cut to save it or  to lower the national deficit or other bs.

Soc security is  always framed as an "entitlement"...a word that (deliberately) reeks of  welfarishness.  It would be more accurate to call it an obligation -  to pay back a debt to the workers/taxpayers who have faithfully contributed to it & will over their lifetime.  The adjustments for the baby boomers retiring was made decades ago.  Lengthened life span also has been factored in years ago and the age raised twice... now it's at 67.  Seventy is too high. That blatantly cuts the payouts already contributed and is just plain cruel and punishing to the hard working elderly... like waitresses and roofers who actually labor for a living...to work until age 70?  Inconceivable people mention this as a reasonable option.

If someone won't research the truth about soc sec( yes, here again "reality does have a liberal bias") in The Nation, or HuffPo, or Firedoglake for example ...then it's impossible to carry on a conversation about social security with them.   It's like talking to people who fell hook & sinker for the WMD mythology.  Very, very apt parallel actually on so many levels.  Another example of (fake) "crisis capitalism" at work this social security "crisis". Ezra Klein recently wrote a very good  article on these similarities in The Nation.

Social security has not added to the deficit.     Though it has been raided and money replaced with treasury bonds.  Those bonds need to be honored  and also  interest paid back to the taxpayers into the fund for these forced loans.    The Bush tax cuts- especially for the rich and the demise of the estate tax- and his off the books war in Iraq are seen as the two greatest original causes of our current economic mess..Add to that the financial debacle,foreclosures, poverty and unemployment (and trillions that simply vanished out of the economy!)  caused by the unregulated Wall Street Casino Exploding in October 2008 and ever ballooning military budget now into Afghanistan, and certainly the national deficit is obscene.

But not to be paid back by slashing  social security -  forcing people to work until seventy or reducing already barely subsistence payments.  The only justifiable adjustment that should be made to social security is raising or eliminating the annual income cap.  If the Dems capitulate to the (anti soc security ) Catfood Commission and the Repugs in their eternal desire to destroy or even reduce social security ...or give it all to Wall Street ...then the Dems  will  be committing political and moral suicide.

The model of social security  was not designed to do anything but provide an economic safety net for the elderly & disabled. There are  legal and responsible ways to raise money if Congress is truly serious about the lowering deficit:  Letting the tax cuts for the rich expire, reinstating the estate tax (this year billions lost bkz it was not renewed - thanks, John Kyl et alios), charging a  tax (like sales tax) for every Wall Street transaction, imposing an internet sales tax (and give some back to the states, that have been raped by this exclusion), implementing a public option & importing Canadian drugs,  cutting the military budget...see Barney Frank's quick trillion dollar cuts in military waste and duplication... legalizing marijuana as a  cost cutting measure (cops, courts, DEA and prisons) and source of tax revenue, and lets look at all the agribusiness and big oil  subsidies and tax exemptions.   How about making Govt Contractors pay US taxes instead of blatant evasion by headquartering with 3 employees in Dubai, Caymens etc.There are soooo many places to look.  The list is truly endless.... 



 



(in reply to Brain)
Profile   Post #: 95
RE: Sanctimonious Deficit Hawks Target Social Safety Net - 7/31/2010 9:17:28 PM   
thornhappy


Posts: 8596
Joined: 12/16/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: dbloomer

quote:



I am not interested in entering this debate with you. All I am suggesting is that you research the criticisms of a resource based economy and address them with facts and knowledge of the subject rather than ideology. Or, you can continue to duke it out in the forums with those who are better informed than you. Your choice.


I respectfully ask that you do not join in a discussion if you're not interested in contributing to it. If you take an opposing view and then hit the eject button when it comes time to substantiating it, it's not helpful to anyone. I would LOVE to look at the figures that are contrary to the Venus Project. When you point me towards them and demonstrate to me how well informed you are, then I will take what you say with more clout. I have no problem being wrong. This isn't about proving my point, it's about proving a better model for society is viable here, now, today. If the model gets disproven with science, GOOD. I will celebrate the day that The Venus Project gets disproven by science because I'm interested in truth. However, If it's refuted by superstition and fear, I won't let it stand.

Fortunately, you don't control who can contribute to a discussion.

(in reply to dbloomer)
Profile   Post #: 96
RE: Sanctimonious Deficit Hawks Target Social Safety Net - 7/31/2010 10:05:10 PM   
Brain


Posts: 3792
Joined: 2/14/2007
Status: offline 		I agree with you and I think if they fixed it before they can fix it again.

They really have a lot of nerve trying to get their stinking fingers on this money too after everything else that’s happened recently. They have no notion of morality or ethics whatsoever.

(in reply to alwayssummer)
Profile   Post #: 97
RE: Sanctimonious Deficit Hawks Target Social Safety Net - 7/31/2010 10:06:12 PM   
Brain


Posts: 3792
Joined: 2/14/2007
Status: offline 		It came up in the news recently so I thought this thread was current.

(in reply to brainiacsub)
Profile   Post #: 98
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Sanctimonious Deficit Hawks Target Social Safety Net Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




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

0.078