RE: Bernie Sanders It Is Clear Republicans Want To Destroy Social Security (Full Version)

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



Message

Lucylastic -> RE: Bernie Sanders It Is Clear Republicans Want To Destroy Social Security (4/29/2011 3:08:30 PM)

oh dear oh dear, oh dear



Sanity -> RE: Bernie Sanders It Is Clear Republicans Want To Destroy Social Security (4/29/2011 3:18:45 PM)


Bravo, very well put. [sm=applause.gif]



mnottertail -> RE: Bernie Sanders It Is Clear Republicans Want To Destroy Social Security (4/30/2011 6:51:10 AM)

How inchoate is all this nonsense?  The problem of holding someone (especially a corporation) responsible is once again exemplified by Bernie Madoff.  Exact some revenge, I don't give a fiddlers fuck, widows and orphans are still starving and nobody is going to do a fucking thing for them.

The notions forwarded, innumeracy, ignorant platitudes about accountability and corporations are your friends notwithstanding, there is no fiscal responsibility whatsoever in this asswipe.

Tell you what, if the government sticks in IOUs and with whatever money is there buys US T-Bills or Bonds or any other government instrument, everybody lies in the same boat if they default, all of us, down to the child that will be born 10 or even 20 years from now.  It is going to be something to somebody if you believe the United States will survive in some form or another.

Now, lets say we allow some beneficent, munificent, altruistic, self-sacrificing, virtuous, upright, chaste, exemplary corporation to take over social security....

They take over these government IOUs and do what with them?  Peddle the fuckers to neo-cons due to their inherent innumeracy and misconceived sense of some patriotism?   
So, an IOU on an IOU.

Now on these admittedly worthless (by the very ones who advocate it) IOUs, which we shall issue further junk bonding on, what sort of rate of return will we see? 

Let me tell you guys something about money you don't know.  Risk demands reward. That is, I expect to see an increase on my money if I whore it out.

So, then they somehow take these worthless (according to you) financial instruments and somehow dump them in the stockmarket...

The stock market sees them as worthless (and that's how you are settting it up to peddle them) and they immediately shit half their worthless value thru a screen door.

What?  We hold them accountable, hey we will run them thru a senate investigation!!!!!  (ooooooooooooooooooohhhhhhhh, fuckin scary, huh?) meantime, the widows and orphans starve.

I know, public execution of these criminals for dereliction, or violation of the public trust, Faux News prime time. 
Cuz not even haliburton has that sort of money to make it right.  Meanwhile, the childrens bowls go empty.

Preposterous bunkum and wholesale drivel.

Next.      



Musicmystery -> RE: Bernie Sanders It Is Clear Republicans Want To Destroy Social Security (4/30/2011 7:45:04 AM)

quote:

So you're saying that social security is NOT running a negative cash flow?


You didn't read what I wrote.

Go back and do that, then we'll discuss it.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Adjust your contributions for inflation and moderate return, and you've paid for your retirement income. Its one of the few well-funded government programs, and it eliminated a huge elderly poverty problem. And for several decades, it has run a surplus--a surplus that will long, long dwarf a relatively brief time of increased outflow (those baby boomers had kids, you know, who also pay social security). That's not the problem.

The problem is that the government consistently borrowed the SS surplus, and now that it's time to pay it back, they don't want to, because they've put taxpayers on the hook for it. Budgeting slight of hand is the problem, not SS.

As for the OP--Republicans have been trying to get rid of SS since Roosevelt created it. The only difference is that more people are listening to the ridiculous spin and ignoring the consequences.

Even with the stealing of the surplus, the matter is readily fixed. Small adjustments would resolve it. Now we need leaders with the guts to do it.

But if you let them trash it, you're a fool. And Obama was a fool to agree to this one year FICA reduction, will will hereafter be labeled "a massive tax increase" as it expires each year.





Musicmystery -> RE: Bernie Sanders It Is Clear Republicans Want To Destroy Social Security (4/30/2011 7:51:04 AM)

quote:

The reality is, if a private company had handled social security from the beginning, they would be held responsible for theft, not payed a big retirement check every month by the very people they stole from.


It's not as bad as it sounds. Loaning the surplus to the U.S. government was a fiscally sound thing to do. That in itself is not the problem. We just are now on both sides of the financial transaction (as taxpayers).

The problem is that the government treated the loan as income (for budgetary purposes), rather than setting aside funds to repay it. And the problem is exacerbated by voters who will vote for any tax cut, ignoring the consequences of that reduced income flow. In short, voters and their representatives grabbed short term gain for political expediency at the expense of solid long term planning. And they still do today.



ShadowMster -> RE: Bernie Sanders It Is Clear Republicans Want To Destroy Social Security (4/30/2011 8:08:46 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Adjust your contributions for inflation and moderate return, and you've paid for your retirement income. Its one of the few well-funded government programs, and it eliminated a huge elderly poverty problem. And for several decades, it has run a surplus--a surplus that will long, long dwarf a relatively brief time of increased outflow (those baby boomers had kids, you know, who also pay social security). That's not the problem.

The problem is that the government consistently borrowed the SS surplus, and now that it's time to pay it back, they don't want to, because they've put taxpayers on the hook for it. Budgeting slight of hand is the problem, not SS.



Did you know that the postal service years ago discovered people were sick of stamps going up every year? That they decided to raise the stamp enough for 3 years. They would run a surplus year 1, break even year 2, and use the surplus for year 3.

The problem was, congress found the surplus (under Bush mind you) and applied it to the national budget. The postal service said "Ok, as long as we can have it back next year". The following year, everyone in congress seemed to forget and the postal service had to once again request a rate increase.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

As for the OP--Republicans have been trying to get rid of SS since Roosevelt created it. The only difference is that more people are listening to the ridiculous spin and ignoring the consequences.

Even with the stealing of the surplus, the matter is readily fixed. Small adjustments would resolve it. Now we need leaders with the guts to do it.

But the longer you wait, the less time you have to react.

But if you let them trash it, you're a fool. And Obama was a fool to agree to this one year FICA reduction, will will hereafter be labeled "a massive tax increase" as it expires each year.



As Bush Sr once said "Read My Lips.. No New Taxes".. And he held true to that.. instead only raising the existing ones.





ShadowMster -> RE: Bernie Sanders It Is Clear Republicans Want To Destroy Social Security (4/30/2011 8:11:23 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: provfivetine

Social Security will destroy itself. It's already running a negative cash-flow, meaning that it's technically bankrupt as we speak. How much longer do we have to borrow money from the rest of the world to perpetuate a Ponzi-Scheme?



No. A negative cash flow does not mean bankruptcy. Bankruptcy is the inability to liquidate sufficient assets to cover your promised payments.

If all it took was a negative cash flow, how many people who are fully retired with millions in the bank would actually be bankrupt?



ShadowMster -> RE: Bernie Sanders It Is Clear Republicans Want To Destroy Social Security (4/30/2011 8:13:58 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

What MM said.

There WAS a big GOP-driven initiative to put SS in stock funds, but it failed. Years ago.



Thank god. We are just now reaching the highs of the early 2000's in the market.

Maybe if AIG had managed it, then the bailout could have served dual purposes.



RacerJim -> RE: Bernie Sanders It Is Clear Republicans Want To Destroy Social Security (4/30/2011 8:19:38 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Brain

She said the Democrats brought a bat and the Republicans brought a grenade. By grenade she means the enormous amount of money Republicans are using to advertise funded by corporations to promote Paul Ryans budget.

Bernie Sanders "It Is Clear Republicans Want To Destroy Social Security"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QX68elxTpSo&feature=feedu


Bernie Sanders is a liar.



mnottertail -> RE: Bernie Sanders It Is Clear Republicans Want To Destroy Social Security (4/30/2011 8:28:22 AM)

Thanks for the heads up.



housesub4you -> RE: Bernie Sanders It Is Clear Republicans Want To Destroy Social Security (4/30/2011 10:22:12 AM)

I agree, most people have bought into the BS the GOP is preaching, "it's an entitlement program"  Which is not true...It is a trust fund people PAY into

The only reason it has the potential of going into the RED in 30 years is because Since Reagan our GOV has borrowed against it and has not paid back one single penny. 

It just shows how little people care to look at the facts, it is so much easier to just listen to the sounds bites and blame someone else, instead of realizing the truth.

IT IS NOT AN ENTITLEMENT PROGRAM!!!!  Stop drinking the Kool-aid

An entitlement is a guarantee of access to benefits based on established rights or by legislation. A "right" is itself an entitlement associated with a moral or social principle, such that an "entitlement" is a provision made in accordance with legal framework of a society. Typically, entitlements are laws based on concepts of principle ("rights") which are themselves based in concepts of social equality or enfranchisement. In a casual sense, the term "entitlement" refers to a notion or belief that one (or oneself) is deserving of some particular reward or benefit[1]—if given without deeper legal or principled cause, the term is often given with pejorative connotation (e.g. a "sense of entitlement").

You do not pay for rights, everyone pays into social security through payroll deductions, unless of course you mean the children of deceased parents who receive their parents SS benefits until age 21, they did not pay into the system, but their parents did. 




ArizonaBossMan -> RE: Bernie Sanders It Is Clear Republicans Want To Destroy Social Security (4/30/2011 10:24:36 AM)

I find it remarkable anybody would quote that old fool socialist sanders. Liberalism IS a mental disease. Haul out the trash in 2012




Lucylastic -> RE: Bernie Sanders It Is Clear Republicans Want To Destroy Social Security (4/30/2011 10:59:40 AM)

YOu need to get a better education
Liberalism isnot in the DSM
however your Blood pressure is in danger by the looks of it
calm down dooood, wishing isnt gonna get you anywhere




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875