Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Stossel: MY State of the Union address
Author Message
MileHighBronco Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 34,302
Joined: Mar 2005
Reputation: 1727
I Root For: Broncos
Location: Forgotten Time Zone
Post: #1
Stossel: MY State of the Union address
Quote:President Obama fulfilled his constitutional duty and gave his report on the state of the union last night. Here's mine:

We're in deep trouble.

You know why. Our debt has passed $14 trillion, and yet our current spending plans will make that worse. The U.S. debt will reach Greek levels in just 10 years.

But do not despair. If we make reasonable cuts to what government spends, our economy can grow us out of our debt. Cutting doesn't just make economic sense, it is also the moral thing to do. Henry David Thoreau had it right when he "accepted(ed) the motto ... that government is best which governs least."

So what should we get rid of?

While I can agree with most all of what he says, most of it will never happen. No political will on either side. No politician wants to commit political suicide. Everybody has an ox to be gored and feels that his entitlement is most important. Statists will recoil in horror at his suggestion to cut entire Federal Departments, like Education, HUD and Commerce.

Quote:Now the biggest cuts. Republicans propose to cut discretionary nonmilitary spending. Good. But why stop there? That's only 15 percent of our budget. We must cut more. That means cutting Medicare, Social Security and the military.

I know. Medicare and Social Security are popular, but they are unsustainable. We must privatize Social Security and slowly replace Medicare with vouchers.

And that brings me to Obamacare. The only way to cut costs and still have medical innovation is to free the market. So I propose that we repeal Obamacare immediately. Then we must do more: We must repeal all government interference in the medical and insurance industries, including licensing. All that impedes competition.

.....We must shrink the military's mission to truly national defense. That means pulling our troops out of Germany, Japan, Italy and dozens of other countries. America cannot and should not try to police the entire world. We can't afford it, and it's not right.

Those cuts will put America on the road to solvency. But that's not enough. We also need economic growth.

I DO like the Stossel Rule: for every new law passed, we must repeal two old ones.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=255649
01-26-2011 06:40 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


nomad2u2001 Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 18,356
Joined: Nov 2006
Reputation: 450
I Root For: ECU
Location: NC
Post: #2
RE: Stossel: MY State of the Union address
(01-26-2011 06:40 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  
Quote:President Obama fulfilled his constitutional duty and gave his report on the state of the union last night. Here's mine:

We're in deep trouble.

You know why. Our debt has passed $14 trillion, and yet our current spending plans will make that worse. The U.S. debt will reach Greek levels in just 10 years.

But do not despair. If we make reasonable cuts to what government spends, our economy can grow us out of our debt. Cutting doesn't just make economic sense, it is also the moral thing to do. Henry David Thoreau had it right when he "accepted(ed) the motto ... that government is best which governs least."

So what should we get rid of?

While I can agree with most all of what he says, most of it will never happen. No political will on either side. No politician wants to commit political suicide. Everybody has an ox to be gored and feels that his entitlement is most important. Statists will recoil in horror at his suggestion to cut entire Federal Departments, like Education, HUD and Commerce.

Quote:Now the biggest cuts. Republicans propose to cut discretionary nonmilitary spending. Good. But why stop there? That's only 15 percent of our budget. We must cut more. That means cutting Medicare, Social Security and the military.

I know. Medicare and Social Security are popular, but they are unsustainable. We must privatize Social Security and slowly replace Medicare with vouchers.

And that brings me to Obamacare. The only way to cut costs and still have medical innovation is to free the market. So I propose that we repeal Obamacare immediately. Then we must do more: We must repeal all government interference in the medical and insurance industries, including licensing. All that impedes competition.

.....We must shrink the military's mission to truly national defense. That means pulling our troops out of Germany, Japan, Italy and dozens of other countries. America cannot and should not try to police the entire world. We can't afford it, and it's not right.

Those cuts will put America on the road to solvency. But that's not enough. We also need economic growth.

I DO like the Stossel Rule: for every new law passed, we must repeal two old ones.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=255649

I'm not an expert of economics or finance so how do you privatize social security while maintaining the trust of those who pay into it?
(This post was last modified: 01-27-2011 01:03 AM by nomad2u2001.)
01-27-2011 12:59 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ClairtonPanther Offline
people need to wake up
*

Posts: 25,056
Joined: Mar 2005
Reputation: 777
I Root For: Pitt/Navy
Location: Portland, Oregon

Donators
Post: #3
RE: Stossel: MY State of the Union address
Man it felt like he's been reading my posts on this board. I totally agree with his ideas.
01-27-2011 01:07 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 80,656
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 3192
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #4
RE: Stossel: MY State of the Union address
(01-27-2011 12:59 AM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  I'm not an expert of economics or finance so how do you privatize social security while maintaining the trust of those who pay into it?

The same way Sweden does.

Seriously, the better question is how do you maintain the trust of those who pay into it WITHOUT privatizing it? Right now there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING backing up your social security entitlement. The "trust fund" is absolutely certain to go broke at the current pace. You want to trust a Ponzi scheme?

Let's take a look at the scare tactic used by those who oppose privatization. Let's talk about the person who was about to retire when the crash of 2008 wiped out his/her holdings. Suppose those holdings were all invested in a Dow Jones index fund. If the person was retiring in 2009, that means he/she probably started working--and contributing to the fund--around 1965, when the DJI was under 1000 (it crossed over in 1972). From 1965-1987 he/she had 22 years of contributions when the DJI was basically between 1000 and 2000. Then 8 years of contributions when the DJI was between 2000 and 5000. From 1995-1999, the DJI climbed from 5000-10000. Then we had the post-9/11 crash where the Dow fell to around 7500, then climbed out to 14000 by 2007, then fell back to 6500 early in 2009, and now has recovered back to 12000.

OK, so what does that mean? That means there were 30 years of contributions that were probably worth 5 times what the person paid in, 5 years that were probably worth about the same, and 8 years that were probably worth less--although if the money were paid out monthly, and remaining funds were left in the DJI, even those losses would have been substantially recovered by now. Yes, the latter years' contributions were probably larger. But if the person were smart enough to realize that with about 10 years left to retirement it made sense to move the money to something safer, he/she would have dodged the fluctuations of the 2000's. In any event, there would be a LOT more money than if the same amount had been put into social security with its zero percent ROI. That's the dirty little secret the fear mongers on the left don't want you to realize--even with the WORST POSSIBLE market timing, and with a less than intelligent investment strategy, the privatized fund is still WAY ahead of current social security.

Think about it. Even after getting "wiped out" our example is WAY ahead of where he/she would be under social security. That's how bad a deal social security is. And it's going to get worse.

So, what would I do? Emulate Sweden. Let part of social security work kinda like ours does now, go into a fund that pays a guaranteed payout. This is a one size fits all minimum benefit, not based on how much you put in. Now let the other part go into a private investment fund. I'd let this go to three places. The first part would go to invest in certain current federal functions which would be privatized. The second part would go to some fairly conservative mix of index funds. After an individual's balance in these two parts exceeds a certain amount, the remainder could be invested like a super 401k.

What would go into that first part? First off, while the feds have a lot of unrecorded trust fund liabilities on their books, they also have a lot of unrecorded assets, like TVA, the western dams and power plants, the air traffic control system, post office facilities, and many more. These existing assets could be transferred to satisfy some of the IOU's from the feds to he "trust fund." Remaining assets could be acquired with future contributions.

As an example, privatize TVA and the western power agencies as a private US power company. Set rates to earn a 5% ROI. Let future contributions go to invest in green energy and nukes on a massive scale.

As another example, take the interstate highway system. I believe the individual roads are now the property of the states. So let future contributions buy them back for a new private US highway company. Convert them all to toll roads. Now you have a huge cash cow. The money you paid to the states goes a long way toward bailing them out. You've added a subtle tax on gasoline/diesel that shifts some transportation away to more fuel-efficient rail. You've made mass transit more attractive in urban areas.

Those two ideas emulate France in some ways. You could also copy New Zealand and privatize the postal service; in their case an agency about as inefficient and unprofitable as ours has been transformed into a much more efficient--and profitable--operation. Do like Canada and privatize the air control system. Same results. Other opportunities abound.

Hmmm. Who are my models here? Sweden. France. New Zealand. Canada. A bunch of socialist countries. I guess a lot of those socialists aren't really as socialistic as we are. Maybe the left should be all over this.
(This post was last modified: 01-27-2011 06:38 AM by Owl 69/70/75.)
01-27-2011 06:32 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
nomad2u2001 Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 18,356
Joined: Nov 2006
Reputation: 450
I Root For: ECU
Location: NC
Post: #5
RE: Stossel: MY State of the Union address
(01-27-2011 06:32 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(01-27-2011 12:59 AM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  I'm not an expert of economics or finance so how do you privatize social security while maintaining the trust of those who pay into it?

The same way Sweden does.

Seriously, the better question is how do you maintain the trust of those who pay into it WITHOUT privatizing it? Right now there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING backing up your social security entitlement. The "trust fund" is absolutely certain to go broke at the current pace. You want to trust a Ponzi scheme?

Let's take a look at the scare tactic used by those who oppose privatization. Let's talk about the person who was about to retire when the crash of 2008 wiped out his/her holdings. Suppose those holdings were all invested in a Dow Jones index fund. If the person was retiring in 2009, that means he/she probably started working--and contributing to the fund--around 1965, when the DJI was under 1000 (it crossed over in 1972). From 1965-1987 he/she had 22 years of contributions when the DJI was basically between 1000 and 2000. Then 8 years of contributions when the DJI was between 2000 and 5000. From 1995-1999, the DJI climbed from 5000-10000. Then we had the post-9/11 crash where the Dow fell to around 7500, then climbed out to 14000 by 2007, then fell back to 6500 early in 2009, and now has recovered back to 12000.

OK, so what does that mean? That means there were 30 years of contributions that were probably worth 5 times what the person paid in, 5 years that were probably worth about the same, and 8 years that were probably worth less--although if the money were paid out monthly, and remaining funds were left in the DJI, even those losses would have been substantially recovered by now. Yes, the latter years' contributions were probably larger. But if the person were smart enough to realize that with about 10 years left to retirement it made sense to move the money to something safer, he/she would have dodged the fluctuations of the 2000's. In any event, there would be a LOT more money than if the same amount had been put into social security with its zero percent ROI. That's the dirty little secret the fear mongers on the left don't want you to realize--even with the WORST POSSIBLE market timing, and with a less than intelligent investment strategy, the privatized fund is still WAY ahead of current social security.

Think about it. Even after getting "wiped out" our example is WAY ahead of where he/she would be under social security. That's how bad a deal social security is. And it's going to get worse.

So, what would I do? Emulate Sweden. Let part of social security work kinda like ours does now, go into a fund that pays a guaranteed payout. This is a one size fits all minimum benefit, not based on how much you put in. Now let the other part go into a private investment fund. I'd let this go to three places. The first part would go to invest in certain current federal functions which would be privatized. The second part would go to some fairly conservative mix of index funds. After an individual's balance in these two parts exceeds a certain amount, the remainder could be invested like a super 401k.

What would go into that first part? First off, while the feds have a lot of unrecorded trust fund liabilities on their books, they also have a lot of unrecorded assets, like TVA, the western dams and power plants, the air traffic control system, post office facilities, and many more. These existing assets could be transferred to satisfy some of the IOU's from the feds to he "trust fund." Remaining assets could be acquired with future contributions.

As an example, privatize TVA and the western power agencies as a private US power company. Set rates to earn a 5% ROI. Let future contributions go to invest in green energy and nukes on a massive scale.

As another example, take the interstate highway system. I believe the individual roads are now the property of the states. So let future contributions buy them back for a new private US highway company. Convert them all to toll roads. Now you have a huge cash cow. The money you paid to the states goes a long way toward bailing them out. You've added a subtle tax on gasoline/diesel that shifts some transportation away to more fuel-efficient rail. You've made mass transit more attractive in urban areas.

Those two ideas emulate France in some ways. You could also copy New Zealand and privatize the postal service; in their case an agency about as inefficient and unprofitable as ours has been transformed into a much more efficient--and profitable--operation. Do like Canada and privatize the air control system. Same results. Other opportunities abound.

Hmmm. Who are my models here? Sweden. France. New Zealand. Canada. A bunch of socialist countries. I guess a lot of those socialists aren't really as socialistic as we are. Maybe the left should be all over this.

Thanks for that. I really had no idea how it would work. And that's right, I don't believe most of the Commonwealth countries are very socialist. If only they can work on their healthcare.
01-27-2011 03:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.