The ones they fund by stealing our 401K accounts.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=39336

isn't this, oh i don't know, unconstitutional?

Anytime I hear from a politician the word "Guaranteed", the seizure of something I own, or thought I owned, comes to mind.

read what this leftist nutjob has to say about this: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/saul-fried...53536.html

(10-11-2010 12:13 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  read what this leftist nutjob has to say about this: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/saul-fried...53536.html

Wow, that article is so full of holes, it makes Swiss cheese look structurally sound.

Quote:Here's a novel idea. Instead of worrying that Social Security will go bust in 30 years (it won't)

And it took two whole lines to lose all credibility.

Quote:It's really not such a novel idea; most modern and civilized industrial nations have in place such pension systems, although some are not as generous as Social Security.

And they're all going bankrupt too.

Quote:Social Security (average benefit, $15,588 for men; $12,012 for women) alone is not enough to provide a stable, poverty-free retirement for many Americans -- the very old, especially widows who have not worked, workers who are too young to retire but have been unable to find steady jobs with decent salaries, students whose families have lost their breadwinners, Hispanics and blacks who have made little money during their life times.

Why does he single out Hispanics and blacks? Racist.

(10-11-2010 01:12 PM)BlazerFan11 Wrote:  

(10-11-2010 12:13 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  read what this leftist nutjob has to say about this: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/saul-fried...53536.html

Wow, that article is so full of holes, it makes Swiss cheese look structurally sound.

Quote:Here's a novel idea. Instead of worrying that Social Security will go bust in 30 years (it won't)

And it took two whole lines to lose all credibility.

Quote:It's really not such a novel idea; most modern and civilized industrial nations have in place such pension systems, although some are not as generous as Social Security.

And they're all going bankrupt too.

That's exactly what I thought. Proof that you must actively deny reality to hold onto the "progressive" position.

Quote:

Quote:Social Security (average benefit, $15,588 for men; $12,012 for women) alone is not enough to provide a stable, poverty-free retirement for many Americans -- the very old, especially widows who have not worked, workers who are too young to retire but have been unable to find steady jobs with decent salaries, students whose families have lost their breadwinners, Hispanics and blacks who have made little money during their life times.

Why does he single out Hispanics and blacks? Racist.

But, SS was explicitly started with the premise that it was not supposed to work alone. This was a intentional. Now it's ignored.

the author acts as if the government is kind enough to give us that SS money. he seems to forget that it's stolen from me in the form of 13% of my salary (6.5/6.5 breakdown that we all know). if i was given that 13% i could build up one hell of a nice nest egg by the time i retire.

(10-11-2010 01:26 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  But, SS was explicitly started with the premise that it was not supposed to work alone. This was a intentional. Now it's ignored.

SS is no different than Obama Care... It's nothing but the Camels nose in the tent. Eventually somebody is going to try to push the rest of the came in as well.

If they wanted to save SS (and yes it needs saving)

==
Raise the retirement age to Life expectancy and readjust it every decade when the census is taken.

Raise Employee ceilings on contributions 50% (leave employer alone).

Means test benefits
==

(10-11-2010 01:54 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(10-11-2010 01:26 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  But, SS was explicitly started with the premise that it was not supposed to work alone. This was a intentional. Now it's ignored.

SS is no different than Obama Care... It's nothing but the Camels nose in the tent. Eventually somebody is going to try to push the rest of the came in as well.
If they wanted to save SS (and yes it needs saving)
==
Raise the retirement age to Life expectancy and readjust it every decade when the census is taken.
Raise Employee ceilings on contributions 50% (leave employer alone).
Means test benefits
==

Eliminate contribution ceilings altogether. They are too regressive to make sense.
Phase in higher retirement age.
Apply inflation more slowly to higher-end SS benefits payouts than lower-end ones. Eventually you get to a single monthly payment, or a narrow range of options. At that point, have in place a signficant privatized supplemental account (the Swedish model).
Make SS benefits tax-free. After all, you are just getting (finally) money that you already paid taxes on.
Get rid of means testing across the board. It's probably cheaper to pay everyone a basic safety net than it is to administer all the myriad of speical-interest focused and means-tested welfare programs.

(10-11-2010 01:54 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(10-11-2010 01:26 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  But, SS was explicitly started with the premise that it was not supposed to work alone. This was a intentional. Now it's ignored.

SS is no different than Obama Care... It's nothing but the Camels nose in the tent. Eventually somebody is going to try to push the rest of the came in as well.

If they wanted to save SS (and yes it needs saving)

==
Raise the retirement age to Life expectancy and readjust it every decade when the census is taken.

Raise Employee ceilings on contributions 50% (leave employer alone).

Means test benefits
==

Work (slave) until you die. Hopefully, die while you are still working. And the gov't will help you along, by deny and delay medical treatment that could keep you alive long enough to pay you benefits. Mighty white of you.

(10-11-2010 04:11 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Work (slave) until you die. Hopefully, die while you are still working. And the gov't will help you along, by deny and delay medical treatment that could keep you alive long enough to pay you benefits. Mighty white of you.

SOF are you freaking kidding me? The life expecancy in America in 1935 (when ss was implimented) was 61 years. If anything what I just said is more generous than the origional purpose of the program.

Social Security was not supposed to guarentee quality of living for people who retired, it was supposed to keep them out of the street..

But hey I know many people here would be happy to enslave this, and the next generation to pay for the excesses of the Boomers and Gen Xers.

(10-11-2010 05:03 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(10-11-2010 04:11 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Work (slave) until you die. Hopefully, die while you are still working. And the gov't will help you along, by deny and delay medical treatment that could keep you alive long enough to pay you benefits. Mighty white of you.

I know many people here would be happy to enslave this, and the next generation to pay for the excesses of the Boomers and Gen Xers.

here, as in this board?

(10-11-2010 05:04 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  

(10-11-2010 05:03 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(10-11-2010 04:11 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Work (slave) until you die. Hopefully, die while you are still working. And the gov't will help you along, by deny and delay medical treatment that could keep you alive long enough to pay you benefits. Mighty white of you.

I know many people here would be happy to enslave this, and the next generation to pay for the excesses of the Boomers and Gen Xers.

here, as in this board?

naa more here, as in America...

(10-11-2010 05:07 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(10-11-2010 05:04 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  

(10-11-2010 05:03 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(10-11-2010 04:11 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Work (slave) until you die. Hopefully, die while you are still working. And the gov't will help you along, by deny and delay medical treatment that could keep you alive long enough to pay you benefits. Mighty white of you.

I know many people here would be happy to enslave this, and the next generation to pay for the excesses of the Boomers and Gen Xers.

here, as in this board?

naa more here, as in America...

class warfare against the baby boomers. I get it. If the politicians would have kept their greedy hands off the SS money and invested it, guess what, boomers and xers and all SS would be covered.

Once you put your money in an account controlled by legislation, you no longer have control of your money. I find it amazing that an entire generation has been sucked into giving up control of their money.

(10-11-2010 05:03 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(10-11-2010 04:11 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Work (slave) until you die. Hopefully, die while you are still working. And the gov't will help you along, by deny and delay medical treatment that could keep you alive long enough to pay you benefits. Mighty white of you.

SOF are you freaking kidding me? The life expecancy in America in 1935 (when ss was implimented) was 61 years. If anything what I just said is more generous than the origional purpose of the program.

Social Security was not supposed to guarentee quality of living for people who retired, it was supposed to keep them out of the street..

But hey I know many people here would be happy to enslave this, and the next generation to pay for the excesses of the Boomers and Gen Xers.

Xers get excesses? Since when?

Sorry, I fully confess that I believe the Boomers have instituted class warfare. I just think the Xers have been a long-term target.

Xers did get to participate in the go-go 1990s, but Xers did a lot of the "heavy lifting" when it came to IT.

Other than that, Xers have been the biggest victims to date.

(10-11-2010 10:03 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  class warfare against the baby boomers. I get it. If the politicians would have kept their greedy hands off the SS money and invested it, guess what, boomers and xers and all SS would be covered.

I was not aware the boomers were a 'class', but hey maybe you could just go completely off the deep end and call me a boomaphobe

Fact is that structurally SS, Medicare/Medicade are going to fail for anyone under 35 unless something big is done but the boomers that have been running the country for 20 years won't have it.

(10-12-2010 07:25 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(10-11-2010 10:03 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  class warfare against the baby boomers. I get it. If the politicians would have kept their greedy hands off the SS money and invested it, guess what, boomers and xers and all SS would be covered.

I was not aware the boomers were a 'class', but hey maybe you could just go completely off the deep end and call me a boomaphobe

Fact is that structurally SS, Medicare/Medicade are going to fail for anyone under 35 unless something big is done but the boomers that have been running the country for 20 years won't have it.

No, the fact is the gov't spent the SS Trust money. Had they not done that SS would be fine, but the quality of life here in the US would be worse. To what degree is unknown, knowing just how wasteful the gov't is, I'd just say half of it. People are owed what they pay for and what is promised them, if not it's just tyranny.

Why are you such a hater.

SS recipients are getting far more than they paid in which is the problem. It's a ponzi-scheme and should be stopped. Those that advocate keeping SS going should have told Bernie Madoff to keep suckering folks, it's the same principle. Time to end the fraud.

(10-12-2010 11:35 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  No, the fact is the gov't spent the SS Trust money. Had they not done that SS would be fine, but the quality of life here in the US would be worse. To what degree is unknown, knowing just how wasteful the gov't is, I'd just say half of it. People are owed what they pay for and what is promised them, if not it's just tyranny.

Why are you such a hater.

1) Who has been running congress since 1990? A: Mainly boomers...