Social security has prevented millions of people from becoming part of the ownership class. Never allow the government to be in a position of provider or father. Even if you start very small owning something of your own, do it today and work so that it grows. Government dependency is destroying families and our society. God is your Father and you are responsible for yourself.D. C. Bear said:RMF5630 said:Doc Holliday said:Social security and Medicare are garbage.RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:Forest Bueller_bf said:Of all the things that should be cut, why would we cut the one thing that we actually have to pay for.Jack Bauer said:
Everyone is for spending cuts up to the point it impacts them.
I am convinced that SS/Medicare will NEVER EVER get cut due to scare tactics and that seniors get out to vote.
If they will lump sum me the over $400,000 that myself and employer have had to pay into these the last 40 years, if they will also accounting for inflation and a modest 5% interest return, I will take that $2.2 million dollar check and call it even.
There is no difference in money paid to Social Security and Medicare and money paid in income taxes, and we also actually have to pay income taxes. Social Security is simply a flat tax on income (up to a certain amount) and a welfare program.
Why pick the programs the vast majority of Americans have no problem with the Govt providing?
How about raising the taxes to Eisenhower levels, problem solved. The financially well off can continue to crow about how financially disciplined they are, progressives get Govt programs and actual working class workers who irresponsibly took their kids on a vacation can live their lives. All the whole touting the fiscally conservative virtues of Ike. What is more American than that?
When the social security program started the ratio between worker and retiree was 159 workers to 1 retiree. Today the ratio is 2.8 workers to 1 retiree.
It's spending more than its bringing in. Either the government will have to pay us less or raise taxes...maybe both. Even if it was an efficient entitlement program, it would still fail because it doesn't deliver enough money to support retirement. It will deliver poverty to those that solely rely on it.
An entitlement/welfare program costing 46% of the budget that delivers garbage is pointless. We'd be better off saving those tax dollars or using it to curb inflation by not having to print so much damn money.
A major problem with how we view welfare is we think entitlement programs are the answer instead of reduction toward the cost of living.
To a large part of the population they rely on Medicare, just because you are one that doesn't need it does not minimize the value it has for many. I know, you are supremely talented, disciplined and business savvy that you could do better. Says the people on the Baylor Message Board. We are talking public policy, not your portfolio. The middle class, working class and working poor rely on these garage programs. Twirl some more $100 a bottle Scotch and tell us how we should cut SS and Medicare.
At least 3/4 of the workers in the United States, most of whom who used to chug Bud Light, not twirl $100 a bottle Scotch, would be vastly better off with an individual retirement account rather than the joke that is Social Security.
Does anyone care about the USA Debt limit?
16,782 Views |
180 Replies |
Last: 2 yr ago by Redbrickbear
RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:EatMoreSalmon said:Medicare is expected to go under in the not so distant future. My own retirement will be affected, and I'm not retired yet. It will most definitely have to be scaled back or funded more (higher payroll tax). Third option would be to redo the system, which won't happen unless dire circumstances force the issue.RMF5630 said:Doc Holliday said:Social security and Medicare are garbage.RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:Forest Bueller_bf said:Of all the things that should be cut, why would we cut the one thing that we actually have to pay for.Jack Bauer said:
Everyone is for spending cuts up to the point it impacts them.
I am convinced that SS/Medicare will NEVER EVER get cut due to scare tactics and that seniors get out to vote.
If they will lump sum me the over $400,000 that myself and employer have had to pay into these the last 40 years, if they will also accounting for inflation and a modest 5% interest return, I will take that $2.2 million dollar check and call it even.
There is no difference in money paid to Social Security and Medicare and money paid in income taxes, and we also actually have to pay income taxes. Social Security is simply a flat tax on income (up to a certain amount) and a welfare program.
Why pick the programs the vast majority of Americans have no problem with the Govt providing?
How about raising the taxes to Eisenhower levels, problem solved. The financially well off can continue to crow about how financially disciplined they are, progressives get Govt programs and actual working class workers who irresponsibly took their kids on a vacation can live their lives. All the whole touting the fiscally conservative virtues of Ike. What is more American than that?
When the social security program started the ratio between worker and retiree was 159 workers to 1 retiree. Today the ratio is 2.8 workers to 1 retiree.
It's spending more than its bringing in. Either the government will have to pay us less or raise taxes...maybe both. Even if it was an efficient entitlement program, it would still fail because it doesn't deliver enough money to support retirement. It will deliver poverty to those that solely rely on it.
An entitlement/welfare program costing 46% of the budget that delivers garbage is pointless. We'd be better off saving those tax dollars or using it to curb inflation by not having to print so much damn money.
A major problem with how we view welfare is we think entitlement programs are the answer instead of reduction toward the cost of living.
To a large part of the population they rely on Medicare, just because you are one that doesn't need it does not minimize the value it has for many. I know, you are supremely talented, disciplined and business savvy that you could do better. Says the people on the Baylor Message Board. We are talking public policy, not your portfolio. The middle class, working class and working poor rely on these garage programs. Twirl some more $100 a bottle Scotch and tell us how we should cut SS and Medicare.
Same here. It needs to funded properly and not raided. Same with SS and Highway Trust Fund. Needs dedicated funding.
I truly believe if people know what they are finding, get good service and the funding is tied to service they will not have a problem with tax. I am a huge fan of dedicated funding and user fees.
I am not a fan of General Revenue and discretionary spending.
Social security is a joke with a terrible return for the majority of people and has become an incentive for huge numbers of people to not save a dollar for retirement.
70%+ of government spending comes from SS, Medicare, servicing the debt and defense. Unless significant reductions are made in those, nothing else will matter.
The debt is the problem, not the couple of social programs that the majority of Americans count on in old age. You cut those programs, you are hurting alot of people, mostly working class people.
I am all for fiscal conservatism, but it can't be at the expense the elderly.
I know you and the others were born poor, never took a vacation, lived in a shack for 49 years, paid for Baylor with returnable bottles and if you can do it everyone can do it. Great, yay you. You are a Financial God looking down at the stupid poor who brought it down on themselves by getting cable r a phone when they can't afford it. Pat yourself on the back your special. I get it.
Slash defense, increase corporate taxes, buy you can't do it on the back of the fixed income elderly and elderly medical care. SS and Medicare are relied on by too many to target that as the answer. How about raising capital gains...
The fear-mongering rhetoric you are offering here, balancing the budget "on the back of fixed income elderly and elderly medical care," does not change the basic truth about Social Security.
It is a terrible "investment" of funds.
If we took the same money taken by Social Security and allowed workers to have conservative individual investment accounts, we could expect a person (or couple) making $35,000 a year during their working years to get (1) much more income in retirement vs what Social Security pays now (at least 85 percent of their working income) and (2) have a financial legacy of more than a million dollars to leave for their family. Of course, you shouldn't just cut off payments to current retirees (although that is exactly what has been done by raising the retirement age), but the moral position is to reform the system, not scare people into thinking the current system is in their or their children's best interest.
If someone lived in a shack and never took a vacation in order to have a decent retirement, it is only because close to 13 percent of their income was taken from them over the course of their working lives to pay for other stuff instead of growing to provide for their own retirement.
RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:EatMoreSalmon said:Medicare is expected to go under in the not so distant future. My own retirement will be affected, and I'm not retired yet. It will most definitely have to be scaled back or funded more (higher payroll tax). Third option would be to redo the system, which won't happen unless dire circumstances force the issue.RMF5630 said:Doc Holliday said:Social security and Medicare are garbage.RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:Forest Bueller_bf said:Of all the things that should be cut, why would we cut the one thing that we actually have to pay for.Jack Bauer said:
Everyone is for spending cuts up to the point it impacts them.
I am convinced that SS/Medicare will NEVER EVER get cut due to scare tactics and that seniors get out to vote.
If they will lump sum me the over $400,000 that myself and employer have had to pay into these the last 40 years, if they will also accounting for inflation and a modest 5% interest return, I will take that $2.2 million dollar check and call it even.
There is no difference in money paid to Social Security and Medicare and money paid in income taxes, and we also actually have to pay income taxes. Social Security is simply a flat tax on income (up to a certain amount) and a welfare program.
Why pick the programs the vast majority of Americans have no problem with the Govt providing?
How about raising the taxes to Eisenhower levels, problem solved. The financially well off can continue to crow about how financially disciplined they are, progressives get Govt programs and actual working class workers who irresponsibly took their kids on a vacation can live their lives. All the whole touting the fiscally conservative virtues of Ike. What is more American than that?
When the social security program started the ratio between worker and retiree was 159 workers to 1 retiree. Today the ratio is 2.8 workers to 1 retiree.
It's spending more than its bringing in. Either the government will have to pay us less or raise taxes...maybe both. Even if it was an efficient entitlement program, it would still fail because it doesn't deliver enough money to support retirement. It will deliver poverty to those that solely rely on it.
An entitlement/welfare program costing 46% of the budget that delivers garbage is pointless. We'd be better off saving those tax dollars or using it to curb inflation by not having to print so much damn money.
A major problem with how we view welfare is we think entitlement programs are the answer instead of reduction toward the cost of living.
To a large part of the population they rely on Medicare, just because you are one that doesn't need it does not minimize the value it has for many. I know, you are supremely talented, disciplined and business savvy that you could do better. Says the people on the Baylor Message Board. We are talking public policy, not your portfolio. The middle class, working class and working poor rely on these garage programs. Twirl some more $100 a bottle Scotch and tell us how we should cut SS and Medicare.
Same here. It needs to funded properly and not raided. Same with SS and Highway Trust Fund. Needs dedicated funding.
I truly believe if people know what they are finding, get good service and the funding is tied to service they will not have a problem with tax. I am a huge fan of dedicated funding and user fees.
I am not a fan of General Revenue and discretionary spending.
Social security is a joke with a terrible return for the majority of people and has become an incentive for huge numbers of people to not save a dollar for retirement.
70%+ of government spending comes from SS, Medicare, servicing the debt and defense. Unless significant reductions are made in those, nothing else will matter.
The debt is the problem, not the couple of social programs that the majority of Americans count on in old age. You cut those programs, you are hurting alot of people, mostly working class people.
I am all for fiscal conservatism, but it can't be at the expense the elderly.
I know you and the others were born poor, never took a vacation, lived in a shack for 49 years, paid for Baylor with returnable bottles and if you can do it everyone can do it. Great, yay you. You are a Financial God looking down at the stupid poor who brought it down on themselves by getting cable r a phone when they can't afford it. Pat yourself on the back your special. I get it.
Slash defense, increase corporate taxes, buy you can't do it on the back of the fixed income elderly and elderly medical care. SS and Medicare are relied on by too many to target that as the answer. How about raising capital gains...
Jesus you certainly are not for fiscal conservatism. Or math. Or responsibility.
SS should at the bare minimum be raised to age 70. Life expectancy has increased. People are spending 15 years plus drawing SS checks now. I'll split the difference with you and erase the cap on SS contributions.
SS is an outdated idea that will crash and burn in its current iteration. Shaking your hand at me about being a "financial god" won't change that fact.
Like I said, if the money taken from me was put into a retirement plan, and drew a modest 5% and was adjusted for inflation, in todays $$ I'd have over 2 million waiting for me. That would be much better than the small social security payment I will get.D. C. Bear said:RMF5630 said:Doc Holliday said:Social security and Medicare are garbage.RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:Forest Bueller_bf said:Of all the things that should be cut, why would we cut the one thing that we actually have to pay for.Jack Bauer said:
Everyone is for spending cuts up to the point it impacts them.
I am convinced that SS/Medicare will NEVER EVER get cut due to scare tactics and that seniors get out to vote.
If they will lump sum me the over $400,000 that myself and employer have had to pay into these the last 40 years, if they will also accounting for inflation and a modest 5% interest return, I will take that $2.2 million dollar check and call it even.
There is no difference in money paid to Social Security and Medicare and money paid in income taxes, and we also actually have to pay income taxes. Social Security is simply a flat tax on income (up to a certain amount) and a welfare program.
Why pick the programs the vast majority of Americans have no problem with the Govt providing?
How about raising the taxes to Eisenhower levels, problem solved. The financially well off can continue to crow about how financially disciplined they are, progressives get Govt programs and actual working class workers who irresponsibly took their kids on a vacation can live their lives. All the whole touting the fiscally conservative virtues of Ike. What is more American than that?
When the social security program started the ratio between worker and retiree was 159 workers to 1 retiree. Today the ratio is 2.8 workers to 1 retiree.
It's spending more than its bringing in. Either the government will have to pay us less or raise taxes...maybe both. Even if it was an efficient entitlement program, it would still fail because it doesn't deliver enough money to support retirement. It will deliver poverty to those that solely rely on it.
An entitlement/welfare program costing 46% of the budget that delivers garbage is pointless. We'd be better off saving those tax dollars or using it to curb inflation by not having to print so much damn money.
A major problem with how we view welfare is we think entitlement programs are the answer instead of reduction toward the cost of living.
To a large part of the population they rely on Medicare, just because you are one that doesn't need it does not minimize the value it has for many. I know, you are supremely talented, disciplined and business savvy that you could do better. Says the people on the Baylor Message Board. We are talking public policy, not your portfolio. The middle class, working class and working poor rely on these garage programs. Twirl some more $100 a bottle Scotch and tell us how we should cut SS and Medicare.
At least 3/4 of the workers in the United States, most of whom who used to chug Bud Light, not twirl $100 a bottle Scotch, would be vastly better off with an individual retirement account rather than the joke that is Social Security.
BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:EatMoreSalmon said:Medicare is expected to go under in the not so distant future. My own retirement will be affected, and I'm not retired yet. It will most definitely have to be scaled back or funded more (higher payroll tax). Third option would be to redo the system, which won't happen unless dire circumstances force the issue.RMF5630 said:Doc Holliday said:Social security and Medicare are garbage.RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:Forest Bueller_bf said:Of all the things that should be cut, why would we cut the one thing that we actually have to pay for.Jack Bauer said:
Everyone is for spending cuts up to the point it impacts them.
I am convinced that SS/Medicare will NEVER EVER get cut due to scare tactics and that seniors get out to vote.
If they will lump sum me the over $400,000 that myself and employer have had to pay into these the last 40 years, if they will also accounting for inflation and a modest 5% interest return, I will take that $2.2 million dollar check and call it even.
There is no difference in money paid to Social Security and Medicare and money paid in income taxes, and we also actually have to pay income taxes. Social Security is simply a flat tax on income (up to a certain amount) and a welfare program.
Why pick the programs the vast majority of Americans have no problem with the Govt providing?
How about raising the taxes to Eisenhower levels, problem solved. The financially well off can continue to crow about how financially disciplined they are, progressives get Govt programs and actual working class workers who irresponsibly took their kids on a vacation can live their lives. All the whole touting the fiscally conservative virtues of Ike. What is more American than that?
When the social security program started the ratio between worker and retiree was 159 workers to 1 retiree. Today the ratio is 2.8 workers to 1 retiree.
It's spending more than its bringing in. Either the government will have to pay us less or raise taxes...maybe both. Even if it was an efficient entitlement program, it would still fail because it doesn't deliver enough money to support retirement. It will deliver poverty to those that solely rely on it.
An entitlement/welfare program costing 46% of the budget that delivers garbage is pointless. We'd be better off saving those tax dollars or using it to curb inflation by not having to print so much damn money.
A major problem with how we view welfare is we think entitlement programs are the answer instead of reduction toward the cost of living.
To a large part of the population they rely on Medicare, just because you are one that doesn't need it does not minimize the value it has for many. I know, you are supremely talented, disciplined and business savvy that you could do better. Says the people on the Baylor Message Board. We are talking public policy, not your portfolio. The middle class, working class and working poor rely on these garage programs. Twirl some more $100 a bottle Scotch and tell us how we should cut SS and Medicare.
Same here. It needs to funded properly and not raided. Same with SS and Highway Trust Fund. Needs dedicated funding.
I truly believe if people know what they are finding, get good service and the funding is tied to service they will not have a problem with tax. I am a huge fan of dedicated funding and user fees.
I am not a fan of General Revenue and discretionary spending.
Social security is a joke with a terrible return for the majority of people and has become an incentive for huge numbers of people to not save a dollar for retirement.
70%+ of government spending comes from SS, Medicare, servicing the debt and defense. Unless significant reductions are made in those, nothing else will matter.
The debt is the problem, not the couple of social programs that the majority of Americans count on in old age. You cut those programs, you are hurting alot of people, mostly working class people.
I am all for fiscal conservatism, but it can't be at the expense the elderly.
I know you and the others were born poor, never took a vacation, lived in a shack for 49 years, paid for Baylor with returnable bottles and if you can do it everyone can do it. Great, yay you. You are a Financial God looking down at the stupid poor who brought it down on themselves by getting cable r a phone when they can't afford it. Pat yourself on the back your special. I get it.
Slash defense, increase corporate taxes, buy you can't do it on the back of the fixed income elderly and elderly medical care. SS and Medicare are relied on by too many to target that as the answer. How about raising capital gains...
Jesus you certainly are not for fiscal conservatism. Or math. Or responsibility.
SS should at the bare minimum be raised to age 70. Life expectancy has increased. People are spending 15 years plus drawing SS checks now. I'll split the difference with you and erase the cap on SS contributions.
SS is an outdated idea that will crash and burn in its current iteration. Shaking your hand at me about being a "financial god" won't change that fact.
SS was never intended to be "the" answer to compete with pensions. It was a safety net, in case. You want to raise it to 70 due to changes in life expectancy. No issues here. You want to raise the amount contributed, no issues. Do away with it or reduce it during in a 7%CPI environment? No way, too many will be hurt. That type of change is a 30 to 50 year phased change.
Fiscal conservatism is not cutting everything to the bone, low bid wins, and all the other reduce costs schemes we see. Too many come in cut the hell out of everything, with no regard for function or ability to provide services, then turn that into a bigger job on the back of "I cut cost by 22%, what an effective manager I am" logic. Leaving a non-functioning unit that can't do the job and is a shell of what it should be.
So sorry, I have heard and seen too much of your brand of fiscal conservatism at cities around the nation. Transit agencies that can't provide service, highway departments that can't resurface roads, all in the name of what you people consider fiscal conservatism when you never have to provide a damn thing, just complain and tell them what lazy Govt workers they are when in reality you have no idea what it costs to provide services. Just continue to ***** you don't want to pay and know better
Bottom line, we need to have a long talk as a country.
Left and Right are diametrically opposed on what must be done to save us from disaster, and hate it all you want, even talking about ending Social Security or other major Entitlements is a career-ender for a politician.
As long as most people can't even manage their personal finances, don't expect their elected representatives to push for any serious correction to the Debt Crisis.
Left and Right are diametrically opposed on what must be done to save us from disaster, and hate it all you want, even talking about ending Social Security or other major Entitlements is a career-ender for a politician.
As long as most people can't even manage their personal finances, don't expect their elected representatives to push for any serious correction to the Debt Crisis.
Oldbear83 said:
Bottom line, we need to have a long talk as a country.
Left and Right are diametrically opposed on what must be done to save us from disaster, and hate it all you want, even talking about ending Social Security or other major Entitlements is a career-ender for a politician.
As long as most people can't even manage their personal finances, don't expect their elected representatives to push for any serious correction to the Debt Crisis.
I actually thought the RSC had good plan.
You cannot compare personal finances to public finance. Or require the same techniques. Two different animals.
But politicians pay attention to how people behave. As long as voters have no discipline in their spending, they won't understand or care what the government does.RMF5630 said:Oldbear83 said:
Bottom line, we need to have a long talk as a country.
Left and Right are diametrically opposed on what must be done to save us from disaster, and hate it all you want, even talking about ending Social Security or other major Entitlements is a career-ender for a politician.
As long as most people can't even manage their personal finances, don't expect their elected representatives to push for any serious correction to the Debt Crisis.
I actually thought the RSC had good plan.
You cannot compare personal finances to public finance. Or require the same techniques. Two different animals.
Oldbear83 said:But politicians pay attention to how people behave. As long as voters have no discipline in their spending, they won't understand or care what the government does.RMF5630 said:Oldbear83 said:
Bottom line, we need to have a long talk as a country.
Left and Right are diametrically opposed on what must be done to save us from disaster, and hate it all you want, even talking about ending Social Security or other major Entitlements is a career-ender for a politician.
As long as most people can't even manage their personal finances, don't expect their elected representatives to push for any serious correction to the Debt Crisis.
I actually thought the RSC had good plan.
You cannot compare personal finances to public finance. Or require the same techniques. Two different animals.
Don't get me wrong, everyone needs to know their finances and have a plan.
RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:EatMoreSalmon said:Medicare is expected to go under in the not so distant future. My own retirement will be affected, and I'm not retired yet. It will most definitely have to be scaled back or funded more (higher payroll tax). Third option would be to redo the system, which won't happen unless dire circumstances force the issue.RMF5630 said:Doc Holliday said:Social security and Medicare are garbage.RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:Forest Bueller_bf said:Of all the things that should be cut, why would we cut the one thing that we actually have to pay for.Jack Bauer said:
Everyone is for spending cuts up to the point it impacts them.
I am convinced that SS/Medicare will NEVER EVER get cut due to scare tactics and that seniors get out to vote.
If they will lump sum me the over $400,000 that myself and employer have had to pay into these the last 40 years, if they will also accounting for inflation and a modest 5% interest return, I will take that $2.2 million dollar check and call it even.
There is no difference in money paid to Social Security and Medicare and money paid in income taxes, and we also actually have to pay income taxes. Social Security is simply a flat tax on income (up to a certain amount) and a welfare program.
Why pick the programs the vast majority of Americans have no problem with the Govt providing?
How about raising the taxes to Eisenhower levels, problem solved. The financially well off can continue to crow about how financially disciplined they are, progressives get Govt programs and actual working class workers who irresponsibly took their kids on a vacation can live their lives. All the whole touting the fiscally conservative virtues of Ike. What is more American than that?
When the social security program started the ratio between worker and retiree was 159 workers to 1 retiree. Today the ratio is 2.8 workers to 1 retiree.
It's spending more than its bringing in. Either the government will have to pay us less or raise taxes...maybe both. Even if it was an efficient entitlement program, it would still fail because it doesn't deliver enough money to support retirement. It will deliver poverty to those that solely rely on it.
An entitlement/welfare program costing 46% of the budget that delivers garbage is pointless. We'd be better off saving those tax dollars or using it to curb inflation by not having to print so much damn money.
A major problem with how we view welfare is we think entitlement programs are the answer instead of reduction toward the cost of living.
To a large part of the population they rely on Medicare, just because you are one that doesn't need it does not minimize the value it has for many. I know, you are supremely talented, disciplined and business savvy that you could do better. Says the people on the Baylor Message Board. We are talking public policy, not your portfolio. The middle class, working class and working poor rely on these garage programs. Twirl some more $100 a bottle Scotch and tell us how we should cut SS and Medicare.
Same here. It needs to funded properly and not raided. Same with SS and Highway Trust Fund. Needs dedicated funding.
I truly believe if people know what they are finding, get good service and the funding is tied to service they will not have a problem with tax. I am a huge fan of dedicated funding and user fees.
I am not a fan of General Revenue and discretionary spending.
Social security is a joke with a terrible return for the majority of people and has become an incentive for huge numbers of people to not save a dollar for retirement.
70%+ of government spending comes from SS, Medicare, servicing the debt and defense. Unless significant reductions are made in those, nothing else will matter.
The debt is the problem, not the couple of social programs that the majority of Americans count on in old age. You cut those programs, you are hurting alot of people, mostly working class people.
I am all for fiscal conservatism, but it can't be at the expense the elderly.
I know you and the others were born poor, never took a vacation, lived in a shack for 49 years, paid for Baylor with returnable bottles and if you can do it everyone can do it. Great, yay you. You are a Financial God looking down at the stupid poor who brought it down on themselves by getting cable r a phone when they can't afford it. Pat yourself on the back your special. I get it.
Slash defense, increase corporate taxes, buy you can't do it on the back of the fixed income elderly and elderly medical care. SS and Medicare are relied on by too many to target that as the answer. How about raising capital gains...
Jesus you certainly are not for fiscal conservatism. Or math. Or responsibility.
SS should at the bare minimum be raised to age 70. Life expectancy has increased. People are spending 15 years plus drawing SS checks now. I'll split the difference with you and erase the cap on SS contributions.
SS is an outdated idea that will crash and burn in its current iteration. Shaking your hand at me about being a "financial god" won't change that fact.
SS was never intended to be "the" answer to compete with pensions. It was a safety net, in case. You want to raise it to 70 due to changes in life expectancy. No issues here. You want to raise the amount contributed, no issues. Do away with it or reduce it during in a 7%CPI environment? No way, too many will be hurt. That type of change is a 30 to 50 year phased change.
Fiscal conservatism is not cutting everything to the bone, low bid wins, and all the other reduce costs schemes we see. Too many come in cut the hell out of everything, with no regard for function or ability to provide services, then turn that into a bigger job on the back of "I cut cost by 22%, what an effective manager I am" logic. Leaving a non-functioning unit that can't do the job and is a shell of what it should be.
So sorry, I have heard and seen too much of your brand of fiscal conservatism at cities around the nation. Transit agencies that can't provide service, highway departments that can't resurface roads, all in the name of what you people consider fiscal conservatism when you never have to provide a damn thing, just complain and tell them what lazy Govt workers they are when in reality you have no idea what it costs to provide services. Just continue to ***** you don't want to pay and know better
Confiscating 13 percent of everyone's income up to whatever the current limits are is not good "safety net." It is and has been a financial disaster for individual Americans and their families since it was created.
D. C. Bear said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:EatMoreSalmon said:Medicare is expected to go under in the not so distant future. My own retirement will be affected, and I'm not retired yet. It will most definitely have to be scaled back or funded more (higher payroll tax). Third option would be to redo the system, which won't happen unless dire circumstances force the issue.RMF5630 said:Doc Holliday said:Social security and Medicare are garbage.RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:Forest Bueller_bf said:Of all the things that should be cut, why would we cut the one thing that we actually have to pay for.Jack Bauer said:
Everyone is for spending cuts up to the point it impacts them.
I am convinced that SS/Medicare will NEVER EVER get cut due to scare tactics and that seniors get out to vote.
If they will lump sum me the over $400,000 that myself and employer have had to pay into these the last 40 years, if they will also accounting for inflation and a modest 5% interest return, I will take that $2.2 million dollar check and call it even.
There is no difference in money paid to Social Security and Medicare and money paid in income taxes, and we also actually have to pay income taxes. Social Security is simply a flat tax on income (up to a certain amount) and a welfare program.
Why pick the programs the vast majority of Americans have no problem with the Govt providing?
How about raising the taxes to Eisenhower levels, problem solved. The financially well off can continue to crow about how financially disciplined they are, progressives get Govt programs and actual working class workers who irresponsibly took their kids on a vacation can live their lives. All the whole touting the fiscally conservative virtues of Ike. What is more American than that?
When the social security program started the ratio between worker and retiree was 159 workers to 1 retiree. Today the ratio is 2.8 workers to 1 retiree.
It's spending more than its bringing in. Either the government will have to pay us less or raise taxes...maybe both. Even if it was an efficient entitlement program, it would still fail because it doesn't deliver enough money to support retirement. It will deliver poverty to those that solely rely on it.
An entitlement/welfare program costing 46% of the budget that delivers garbage is pointless. We'd be better off saving those tax dollars or using it to curb inflation by not having to print so much damn money.
A major problem with how we view welfare is we think entitlement programs are the answer instead of reduction toward the cost of living.
To a large part of the population they rely on Medicare, just because you are one that doesn't need it does not minimize the value it has for many. I know, you are supremely talented, disciplined and business savvy that you could do better. Says the people on the Baylor Message Board. We are talking public policy, not your portfolio. The middle class, working class and working poor rely on these garage programs. Twirl some more $100 a bottle Scotch and tell us how we should cut SS and Medicare.
Same here. It needs to funded properly and not raided. Same with SS and Highway Trust Fund. Needs dedicated funding.
I truly believe if people know what they are finding, get good service and the funding is tied to service they will not have a problem with tax. I am a huge fan of dedicated funding and user fees.
I am not a fan of General Revenue and discretionary spending.
Social security is a joke with a terrible return for the majority of people and has become an incentive for huge numbers of people to not save a dollar for retirement.
70%+ of government spending comes from SS, Medicare, servicing the debt and defense. Unless significant reductions are made in those, nothing else will matter.
The debt is the problem, not the couple of social programs that the majority of Americans count on in old age. You cut those programs, you are hurting alot of people, mostly working class people.
I am all for fiscal conservatism, but it can't be at the expense the elderly.
I know you and the others were born poor, never took a vacation, lived in a shack for 49 years, paid for Baylor with returnable bottles and if you can do it everyone can do it. Great, yay you. You are a Financial God looking down at the stupid poor who brought it down on themselves by getting cable r a phone when they can't afford it. Pat yourself on the back your special. I get it.
Slash defense, increase corporate taxes, buy you can't do it on the back of the fixed income elderly and elderly medical care. SS and Medicare are relied on by too many to target that as the answer. How about raising capital gains...
Jesus you certainly are not for fiscal conservatism. Or math. Or responsibility.
SS should at the bare minimum be raised to age 70. Life expectancy has increased. People are spending 15 years plus drawing SS checks now. I'll split the difference with you and erase the cap on SS contributions.
SS is an outdated idea that will crash and burn in its current iteration. Shaking your hand at me about being a "financial god" won't change that fact.
SS was never intended to be "the" answer to compete with pensions. It was a safety net, in case. You want to raise it to 70 due to changes in life expectancy. No issues here. You want to raise the amount contributed, no issues. Do away with it or reduce it during in a 7%CPI environment? No way, too many will be hurt. That type of change is a 30 to 50 year phased change.
Fiscal conservatism is not cutting everything to the bone, low bid wins, and all the other reduce costs schemes we see. Too many come in cut the hell out of everything, with no regard for function or ability to provide services, then turn that into a bigger job on the back of "I cut cost by 22%, what an effective manager I am" logic. Leaving a non-functioning unit that can't do the job and is a shell of what it should be.
So sorry, I have heard and seen too much of your brand of fiscal conservatism at cities around the nation. Transit agencies that can't provide service, highway departments that can't resurface roads, all in the name of what you people consider fiscal conservatism when you never have to provide a damn thing, just complain and tell them what lazy Govt workers they are when in reality you have no idea what it costs to provide services. Just continue to ***** you don't want to pay and know better
Confiscating 13 percent of everyone's income up to whatever the current limits are is not good "safety net." It is and has been a financial disaster for individual Americans and their families since it was created.
Tell that to the fixed income part of our Nation. We have a huge population of fixed income in Florida. You guys whose biggest concern is calling Schwab to check rates spout the strict fiscal conservative at all costs policies and these people pay the price. A 4% decrease is real dollars to these people. I know they are not the "winners" the Baylor MBA people are, they just served your meals and maintained you lawns. Should have made better decisions, right. Give up cable. Not buy a cup of coffee or have a phone. Right
RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:EatMoreSalmon said:Medicare is expected to go under in the not so distant future. My own retirement will be affected, and I'm not retired yet. It will most definitely have to be scaled back or funded more (higher payroll tax). Third option would be to redo the system, which won't happen unless dire circumstances force the issue.RMF5630 said:Doc Holliday said:Social security and Medicare are garbage.RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:Forest Bueller_bf said:Of all the things that should be cut, why would we cut the one thing that we actually have to pay for.Jack Bauer said:
Everyone is for spending cuts up to the point it impacts them.
I am convinced that SS/Medicare will NEVER EVER get cut due to scare tactics and that seniors get out to vote.
If they will lump sum me the over $400,000 that myself and employer have had to pay into these the last 40 years, if they will also accounting for inflation and a modest 5% interest return, I will take that $2.2 million dollar check and call it even.
There is no difference in money paid to Social Security and Medicare and money paid in income taxes, and we also actually have to pay income taxes. Social Security is simply a flat tax on income (up to a certain amount) and a welfare program.
Why pick the programs the vast majority of Americans have no problem with the Govt providing?
How about raising the taxes to Eisenhower levels, problem solved. The financially well off can continue to crow about how financially disciplined they are, progressives get Govt programs and actual working class workers who irresponsibly took their kids on a vacation can live their lives. All the whole touting the fiscally conservative virtues of Ike. What is more American than that?
When the social security program started the ratio between worker and retiree was 159 workers to 1 retiree. Today the ratio is 2.8 workers to 1 retiree.
It's spending more than its bringing in. Either the government will have to pay us less or raise taxes...maybe both. Even if it was an efficient entitlement program, it would still fail because it doesn't deliver enough money to support retirement. It will deliver poverty to those that solely rely on it.
An entitlement/welfare program costing 46% of the budget that delivers garbage is pointless. We'd be better off saving those tax dollars or using it to curb inflation by not having to print so much damn money.
A major problem with how we view welfare is we think entitlement programs are the answer instead of reduction toward the cost of living.
To a large part of the population they rely on Medicare, just because you are one that doesn't need it does not minimize the value it has for many. I know, you are supremely talented, disciplined and business savvy that you could do better. Says the people on the Baylor Message Board. We are talking public policy, not your portfolio. The middle class, working class and working poor rely on these garage programs. Twirl some more $100 a bottle Scotch and tell us how we should cut SS and Medicare.
Same here. It needs to funded properly and not raided. Same with SS and Highway Trust Fund. Needs dedicated funding.
I truly believe if people know what they are finding, get good service and the funding is tied to service they will not have a problem with tax. I am a huge fan of dedicated funding and user fees.
I am not a fan of General Revenue and discretionary spending.
Social security is a joke with a terrible return for the majority of people and has become an incentive for huge numbers of people to not save a dollar for retirement.
70%+ of government spending comes from SS, Medicare, servicing the debt and defense. Unless significant reductions are made in those, nothing else will matter.
The debt is the problem, not the couple of social programs that the majority of Americans count on in old age. You cut those programs, you are hurting alot of people, mostly working class people.
I am all for fiscal conservatism, but it can't be at the expense the elderly.
I know you and the others were born poor, never took a vacation, lived in a shack for 49 years, paid for Baylor with returnable bottles and if you can do it everyone can do it. Great, yay you. You are a Financial God looking down at the stupid poor who brought it down on themselves by getting cable r a phone when they can't afford it. Pat yourself on the back your special. I get it.
Slash defense, increase corporate taxes, buy you can't do it on the back of the fixed income elderly and elderly medical care. SS and Medicare are relied on by too many to target that as the answer. How about raising capital gains...
Jesus you certainly are not for fiscal conservatism. Or math. Or responsibility.
SS should at the bare minimum be raised to age 70. Life expectancy has increased. People are spending 15 years plus drawing SS checks now. I'll split the difference with you and erase the cap on SS contributions.
SS is an outdated idea that will crash and burn in its current iteration. Shaking your hand at me about being a "financial god" won't change that fact.
SS was never intended to be "the" answer to compete with pensions. It was a safety net, in case. You want to raise it to 70 due to changes in life expectancy. No issues here. You want to raise the amount contributed, no issues. Do away with it or reduce it during in a 7%CPI environment? No way, too many will be hurt. That type of change is a 30 to 50 year phased change.
Fiscal conservatism is not cutting everything to the bone, low bid wins, and all the other reduce costs schemes we see. Too many come in cut the hell out of everything, with no regard for function or ability to provide services, then turn that into a bigger job on the back of "I cut cost by 22%, what an effective manager I am" logic. Leaving a non-functioning unit that can't do the job and is a shell of what it should be.
So sorry, I have heard and seen too much of your brand of fiscal conservatism at cities around the nation. Transit agencies that can't provide service, highway departments that can't resurface roads, all in the name of what you people consider fiscal conservatism when you never have to provide a damn thing, just complain and tell them what lazy Govt workers they are when in reality you have no idea what it costs to provide services. Just continue to ***** you don't want to pay and know better
Confiscating 13 percent of everyone's income up to whatever the current limits are is not good "safety net." It is and has been a financial disaster for individual Americans and their families since it was created.
Tell that to the fixed income part of our Nation. We have a huge population of fixed income in Florida. You guys whose biggest concern is calling Schwab to check rates spout the strict fiscal conservative at all costs policies and these people pay the price. A 4% decrease is real dollars to these people. I know they are not the "winners" the Baylor MBA people are, they just served your meals and maintained you lawns. Should have made better decisions, right. Give up cable. Not buy a cup of coffee or have a phone. Right
Nearly 100% of Americans could be millionaires by retirement, baring health related catastrophe.
RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:EatMoreSalmon said:Medicare is expected to go under in the not so distant future. My own retirement will be affected, and I'm not retired yet. It will most definitely have to be scaled back or funded more (higher payroll tax). Third option would be to redo the system, which won't happen unless dire circumstances force the issue.RMF5630 said:Doc Holliday said:Social security and Medicare are garbage.RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:Forest Bueller_bf said:Of all the things that should be cut, why would we cut the one thing that we actually have to pay for.Jack Bauer said:
Everyone is for spending cuts up to the point it impacts them.
I am convinced that SS/Medicare will NEVER EVER get cut due to scare tactics and that seniors get out to vote.
If they will lump sum me the over $400,000 that myself and employer have had to pay into these the last 40 years, if they will also accounting for inflation and a modest 5% interest return, I will take that $2.2 million dollar check and call it even.
There is no difference in money paid to Social Security and Medicare and money paid in income taxes, and we also actually have to pay income taxes. Social Security is simply a flat tax on income (up to a certain amount) and a welfare program.
Why pick the programs the vast majority of Americans have no problem with the Govt providing?
How about raising the taxes to Eisenhower levels, problem solved. The financially well off can continue to crow about how financially disciplined they are, progressives get Govt programs and actual working class workers who irresponsibly took their kids on a vacation can live their lives. All the whole touting the fiscally conservative virtues of Ike. What is more American than that?
When the social security program started the ratio between worker and retiree was 159 workers to 1 retiree. Today the ratio is 2.8 workers to 1 retiree.
It's spending more than its bringing in. Either the government will have to pay us less or raise taxes...maybe both. Even if it was an efficient entitlement program, it would still fail because it doesn't deliver enough money to support retirement. It will deliver poverty to those that solely rely on it.
An entitlement/welfare program costing 46% of the budget that delivers garbage is pointless. We'd be better off saving those tax dollars or using it to curb inflation by not having to print so much damn money.
A major problem with how we view welfare is we think entitlement programs are the answer instead of reduction toward the cost of living.
To a large part of the population they rely on Medicare, just because you are one that doesn't need it does not minimize the value it has for many. I know, you are supremely talented, disciplined and business savvy that you could do better. Says the people on the Baylor Message Board. We are talking public policy, not your portfolio. The middle class, working class and working poor rely on these garage programs. Twirl some more $100 a bottle Scotch and tell us how we should cut SS and Medicare.
Same here. It needs to funded properly and not raided. Same with SS and Highway Trust Fund. Needs dedicated funding.
I truly believe if people know what they are finding, get good service and the funding is tied to service they will not have a problem with tax. I am a huge fan of dedicated funding and user fees.
I am not a fan of General Revenue and discretionary spending.
Social security is a joke with a terrible return for the majority of people and has become an incentive for huge numbers of people to not save a dollar for retirement.
70%+ of government spending comes from SS, Medicare, servicing the debt and defense. Unless significant reductions are made in those, nothing else will matter.
The debt is the problem, not the couple of social programs that the majority of Americans count on in old age. You cut those programs, you are hurting alot of people, mostly working class people.
I am all for fiscal conservatism, but it can't be at the expense the elderly.
I know you and the others were born poor, never took a vacation, lived in a shack for 49 years, paid for Baylor with returnable bottles and if you can do it everyone can do it. Great, yay you. You are a Financial God looking down at the stupid poor who brought it down on themselves by getting cable r a phone when they can't afford it. Pat yourself on the back your special. I get it.
Slash defense, increase corporate taxes, buy you can't do it on the back of the fixed income elderly and elderly medical care. SS and Medicare are relied on by too many to target that as the answer. How about raising capital gains...
Jesus you certainly are not for fiscal conservatism. Or math. Or responsibility.
SS should at the bare minimum be raised to age 70. Life expectancy has increased. People are spending 15 years plus drawing SS checks now. I'll split the difference with you and erase the cap on SS contributions.
SS is an outdated idea that will crash and burn in its current iteration. Shaking your hand at me about being a "financial god" won't change that fact.
SS was never intended to be "the" answer to compete with pensions. It was a safety net, in case. You want to raise it to 70 due to changes in life expectancy. No issues here. You want to raise the amount contributed, no issues. Do away with it or reduce it during in a 7%CPI environment? No way, too many will be hurt. That type of change is a 30 to 50 year phased change.
Fiscal conservatism is not cutting everything to the bone, low bid wins, and all the other reduce costs schemes we see. Too many come in cut the hell out of everything, with no regard for function or ability to provide services, then turn that into a bigger job on the back of "I cut cost by 22%, what an effective manager I am" logic. Leaving a non-functioning unit that can't do the job and is a shell of what it should be.
So sorry, I have heard and seen too much of your brand of fiscal conservatism at cities around the nation. Transit agencies that can't provide service, highway departments that can't resurface roads, all in the name of what you people consider fiscal conservatism when you never have to provide a damn thing, just complain and tell them what lazy Govt workers they are when in reality you have no idea what it costs to provide services. Just continue to ***** you don't want to pay and know better
Confiscating 13 percent of everyone's income up to whatever the current limits are is not good "safety net." It is and has been a financial disaster for individual Americans and their families since it was created.
Tell that to the fixed income part of our Nation. We have a huge population of fixed income in Florida. You guys whose biggest concern is calling Schwab to check rates spout the strict fiscal conservative at all costs policies and these people pay the price. A 4% decrease is real dollars to these people. I know they are not the "winners" the Baylor MBA people are, they just served your meals and maintained you lawns. Should have made better decisions, right. Give up cable. Not buy a cup of coffee or have a phone. Right
It's funny the math people like this point to while completely ignoring the debacle financially they explicitly and full throatedly vote for overwhelmingly
They hatewe $1.69'gasoljne
They hated a fast food mean for $5
They hated a $300,000 house that was affordable with a reasonable mortgage
They hated college tuition that wasn't over $100 / hour
They voted Democrat and destroyed all the above and so much more
And then complain about what they themselves forced in everyone else through their own willful ignorance
They then move to Texas or Florida to "escape" the hell holes they've created pooped and sat in
It's amazing. Democrats.
Fre3dombear said:RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:EatMoreSalmon said:Medicare is expected to go under in the not so distant future. My own retirement will be affected, and I'm not retired yet. It will most definitely have to be scaled back or funded more (higher payroll tax). Third option would be to redo the system, which won't happen unless dire circumstances force the issue.RMF5630 said:Doc Holliday said:Social security and Medicare are garbage.RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:Forest Bueller_bf said:Of all the things that should be cut, why would we cut the one thing that we actually have to pay for.Jack Bauer said:
Everyone is for spending cuts up to the point it impacts them.
I am convinced that SS/Medicare will NEVER EVER get cut due to scare tactics and that seniors get out to vote.
If they will lump sum me the over $400,000 that myself and employer have had to pay into these the last 40 years, if they will also accounting for inflation and a modest 5% interest return, I will take that $2.2 million dollar check and call it even.
There is no difference in money paid to Social Security and Medicare and money paid in income taxes, and we also actually have to pay income taxes. Social Security is simply a flat tax on income (up to a certain amount) and a welfare program.
Why pick the programs the vast majority of Americans have no problem with the Govt providing?
How about raising the taxes to Eisenhower levels, problem solved. The financially well off can continue to crow about how financially disciplined they are, progressives get Govt programs and actual working class workers who irresponsibly took their kids on a vacation can live their lives. All the whole touting the fiscally conservative virtues of Ike. What is more American than that?
When the social security program started the ratio between worker and retiree was 159 workers to 1 retiree. Today the ratio is 2.8 workers to 1 retiree.
It's spending more than its bringing in. Either the government will have to pay us less or raise taxes...maybe both. Even if it was an efficient entitlement program, it would still fail because it doesn't deliver enough money to support retirement. It will deliver poverty to those that solely rely on it.
An entitlement/welfare program costing 46% of the budget that delivers garbage is pointless. We'd be better off saving those tax dollars or using it to curb inflation by not having to print so much damn money.
A major problem with how we view welfare is we think entitlement programs are the answer instead of reduction toward the cost of living.
To a large part of the population they rely on Medicare, just because you are one that doesn't need it does not minimize the value it has for many. I know, you are supremely talented, disciplined and business savvy that you could do better. Says the people on the Baylor Message Board. We are talking public policy, not your portfolio. The middle class, working class and working poor rely on these garage programs. Twirl some more $100 a bottle Scotch and tell us how we should cut SS and Medicare.
Same here. It needs to funded properly and not raided. Same with SS and Highway Trust Fund. Needs dedicated funding.
I truly believe if people know what they are finding, get good service and the funding is tied to service they will not have a problem with tax. I am a huge fan of dedicated funding and user fees.
I am not a fan of General Revenue and discretionary spending.
Social security is a joke with a terrible return for the majority of people and has become an incentive for huge numbers of people to not save a dollar for retirement.
70%+ of government spending comes from SS, Medicare, servicing the debt and defense. Unless significant reductions are made in those, nothing else will matter.
The debt is the problem, not the couple of social programs that the majority of Americans count on in old age. You cut those programs, you are hurting alot of people, mostly working class people.
I am all for fiscal conservatism, but it can't be at the expense the elderly.
I know you and the others were born poor, never took a vacation, lived in a shack for 49 years, paid for Baylor with returnable bottles and if you can do it everyone can do it. Great, yay you. You are a Financial God looking down at the stupid poor who brought it down on themselves by getting cable r a phone when they can't afford it. Pat yourself on the back your special. I get it.
Slash defense, increase corporate taxes, buy you can't do it on the back of the fixed income elderly and elderly medical care. SS and Medicare are relied on by too many to target that as the answer. How about raising capital gains...
Jesus you certainly are not for fiscal conservatism. Or math. Or responsibility.
SS should at the bare minimum be raised to age 70. Life expectancy has increased. People are spending 15 years plus drawing SS checks now. I'll split the difference with you and erase the cap on SS contributions.
SS is an outdated idea that will crash and burn in its current iteration. Shaking your hand at me about being a "financial god" won't change that fact.
SS was never intended to be "the" answer to compete with pensions. It was a safety net, in case. You want to raise it to 70 due to changes in life expectancy. No issues here. You want to raise the amount contributed, no issues. Do away with it or reduce it during in a 7%CPI environment? No way, too many will be hurt. That type of change is a 30 to 50 year phased change.
Fiscal conservatism is not cutting everything to the bone, low bid wins, and all the other reduce costs schemes we see. Too many come in cut the hell out of everything, with no regard for function or ability to provide services, then turn that into a bigger job on the back of "I cut cost by 22%, what an effective manager I am" logic. Leaving a non-functioning unit that can't do the job and is a shell of what it should be.
So sorry, I have heard and seen too much of your brand of fiscal conservatism at cities around the nation. Transit agencies that can't provide service, highway departments that can't resurface roads, all in the name of what you people consider fiscal conservatism when you never have to provide a damn thing, just complain and tell them what lazy Govt workers they are when in reality you have no idea what it costs to provide services. Just continue to ***** you don't want to pay and know better
Confiscating 13 percent of everyone's income up to whatever the current limits are is not good "safety net." It is and has been a financial disaster for individual Americans and their families since it was created.
Tell that to the fixed income part of our Nation. We have a huge population of fixed income in Florida. You guys whose biggest concern is calling Schwab to check rates spout the strict fiscal conservative at all costs policies and these people pay the price. A 4% decrease is real dollars to these people. I know they are not the "winners" the Baylor MBA people are, they just served your meals and maintained you lawns. Should have made better decisions, right. Give up cable. Not buy a cup of coffee or have a phone. Right
It's funny the math people like this point to while completely ignoring the debacle financially they explicitly and full throatedly vote for overwhelmingly
They hatewe $1.69'gasoljne
They hated a fast food mean for $5
They hated a $300,000 house that was affordable with a reasonable mortgage
They hated college tuition that wasn't over $100 / hour
They voted Democrat and destroyed all the above and so much more
And then complain about what they themselves forced in everyone else through their own willful ignorance
They then move to Texas or Florida to "escape" the hell holes they've created pooped and sat in
It's amazing. Democrats.
Who are you talking to?
BearTruth13 said:Fre3dombear said:RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:EatMoreSalmon said:Medicare is expected to go under in the not so distant future. My own retirement will be affected, and I'm not retired yet. It will most definitely have to be scaled back or funded more (higher payroll tax). Third option would be to redo the system, which won't happen unless dire circumstances force the issue.RMF5630 said:Doc Holliday said:Social security and Medicare are garbage.RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:Forest Bueller_bf said:Of all the things that should be cut, why would we cut the one thing that we actually have to pay for.Jack Bauer said:
Everyone is for spending cuts up to the point it impacts them.
I am convinced that SS/Medicare will NEVER EVER get cut due to scare tactics and that seniors get out to vote.
If they will lump sum me the over $400,000 that myself and employer have had to pay into these the last 40 years, if they will also accounting for inflation and a modest 5% interest return, I will take that $2.2 million dollar check and call it even.
There is no difference in money paid to Social Security and Medicare and money paid in income taxes, and we also actually have to pay income taxes. Social Security is simply a flat tax on income (up to a certain amount) and a welfare program.
Why pick the programs the vast majority of Americans have no problem with the Govt providing?
How about raising the taxes to Eisenhower levels, problem solved. The financially well off can continue to crow about how financially disciplined they are, progressives get Govt programs and actual working class workers who irresponsibly took their kids on a vacation can live their lives. All the whole touting the fiscally conservative virtues of Ike. What is more American than that?
When the social security program started the ratio between worker and retiree was 159 workers to 1 retiree. Today the ratio is 2.8 workers to 1 retiree.
It's spending more than its bringing in. Either the government will have to pay us less or raise taxes...maybe both. Even if it was an efficient entitlement program, it would still fail because it doesn't deliver enough money to support retirement. It will deliver poverty to those that solely rely on it.
An entitlement/welfare program costing 46% of the budget that delivers garbage is pointless. We'd be better off saving those tax dollars or using it to curb inflation by not having to print so much damn money.
A major problem with how we view welfare is we think entitlement programs are the answer instead of reduction toward the cost of living.
To a large part of the population they rely on Medicare, just because you are one that doesn't need it does not minimize the value it has for many. I know, you are supremely talented, disciplined and business savvy that you could do better. Says the people on the Baylor Message Board. We are talking public policy, not your portfolio. The middle class, working class and working poor rely on these garage programs. Twirl some more $100 a bottle Scotch and tell us how we should cut SS and Medicare.
Same here. It needs to funded properly and not raided. Same with SS and Highway Trust Fund. Needs dedicated funding.
I truly believe if people know what they are finding, get good service and the funding is tied to service they will not have a problem with tax. I am a huge fan of dedicated funding and user fees.
I am not a fan of General Revenue and discretionary spending.
Social security is a joke with a terrible return for the majority of people and has become an incentive for huge numbers of people to not save a dollar for retirement.
70%+ of government spending comes from SS, Medicare, servicing the debt and defense. Unless significant reductions are made in those, nothing else will matter.
The debt is the problem, not the couple of social programs that the majority of Americans count on in old age. You cut those programs, you are hurting alot of people, mostly working class people.
I am all for fiscal conservatism, but it can't be at the expense the elderly.
I know you and the others were born poor, never took a vacation, lived in a shack for 49 years, paid for Baylor with returnable bottles and if you can do it everyone can do it. Great, yay you. You are a Financial God looking down at the stupid poor who brought it down on themselves by getting cable r a phone when they can't afford it. Pat yourself on the back your special. I get it.
Slash defense, increase corporate taxes, buy you can't do it on the back of the fixed income elderly and elderly medical care. SS and Medicare are relied on by too many to target that as the answer. How about raising capital gains...
Jesus you certainly are not for fiscal conservatism. Or math. Or responsibility.
SS should at the bare minimum be raised to age 70. Life expectancy has increased. People are spending 15 years plus drawing SS checks now. I'll split the difference with you and erase the cap on SS contributions.
SS is an outdated idea that will crash and burn in its current iteration. Shaking your hand at me about being a "financial god" won't change that fact.
SS was never intended to be "the" answer to compete with pensions. It was a safety net, in case. You want to raise it to 70 due to changes in life expectancy. No issues here. You want to raise the amount contributed, no issues. Do away with it or reduce it during in a 7%CPI environment? No way, too many will be hurt. That type of change is a 30 to 50 year phased change.
Fiscal conservatism is not cutting everything to the bone, low bid wins, and all the other reduce costs schemes we see. Too many come in cut the hell out of everything, with no regard for function or ability to provide services, then turn that into a bigger job on the back of "I cut cost by 22%, what an effective manager I am" logic. Leaving a non-functioning unit that can't do the job and is a shell of what it should be.
So sorry, I have heard and seen too much of your brand of fiscal conservatism at cities around the nation. Transit agencies that can't provide service, highway departments that can't resurface roads, all in the name of what you people consider fiscal conservatism when you never have to provide a damn thing, just complain and tell them what lazy Govt workers they are when in reality you have no idea what it costs to provide services. Just continue to ***** you don't want to pay and know better
Confiscating 13 percent of everyone's income up to whatever the current limits are is not good "safety net." It is and has been a financial disaster for individual Americans and their families since it was created.
Tell that to the fixed income part of our Nation. We have a huge population of fixed income in Florida. You guys whose biggest concern is calling Schwab to check rates spout the strict fiscal conservative at all costs policies and these people pay the price. A 4% decrease is real dollars to these people. I know they are not the "winners" the Baylor MBA people are, they just served your meals and maintained you lawns. Should have made better decisions, right. Give up cable. Not buy a cup of coffee or have a phone. Right
It's funny the math people like this point to while completely ignoring the debacle financially they explicitly and full throatedly vote for overwhelmingly
They hatewe $1.69'gasoljne
They hated a fast food mean for $5
They hated a $300,000 house that was affordable with a reasonable mortgage
They hated college tuition that wasn't over $100 / hour
They voted Democrat and destroyed all the above and so much more
And then complain about what they themselves forced in everyone else through their own willful ignorance
They then move to Texas or Florida to "escape" the hell holes they've created pooped and sat in
It's amazing. Democrats.
Who are you talking to?
The "81 million."
Fre3dombear said:RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:EatMoreSalmon said:Medicare is expected to go under in the not so distant future. My own retirement will be affected, and I'm not retired yet. It will most definitely have to be scaled back or funded more (higher payroll tax). Third option would be to redo the system, which won't happen unless dire circumstances force the issue.RMF5630 said:Doc Holliday said:Social security and Medicare are garbage.RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:Forest Bueller_bf said:Of all the things that should be cut, why would we cut the one thing that we actually have to pay for.Jack Bauer said:
Everyone is for spending cuts up to the point it impacts them.
I am convinced that SS/Medicare will NEVER EVER get cut due to scare tactics and that seniors get out to vote.
If they will lump sum me the over $400,000 that myself and employer have had to pay into these the last 40 years, if they will also accounting for inflation and a modest 5% interest return, I will take that $2.2 million dollar check and call it even.
There is no difference in money paid to Social Security and Medicare and money paid in income taxes, and we also actually have to pay income taxes. Social Security is simply a flat tax on income (up to a certain amount) and a welfare program.
Why pick the programs the vast majority of Americans have no problem with the Govt providing?
How about raising the taxes to Eisenhower levels, problem solved. The financially well off can continue to crow about how financially disciplined they are, progressives get Govt programs and actual working class workers who irresponsibly took their kids on a vacation can live their lives. All the whole touting the fiscally conservative virtues of Ike. What is more American than that?
When the social security program started the ratio between worker and retiree was 159 workers to 1 retiree. Today the ratio is 2.8 workers to 1 retiree.
It's spending more than its bringing in. Either the government will have to pay us less or raise taxes...maybe both. Even if it was an efficient entitlement program, it would still fail because it doesn't deliver enough money to support retirement. It will deliver poverty to those that solely rely on it.
An entitlement/welfare program costing 46% of the budget that delivers garbage is pointless. We'd be better off saving those tax dollars or using it to curb inflation by not having to print so much damn money.
A major problem with how we view welfare is we think entitlement programs are the answer instead of reduction toward the cost of living.
To a large part of the population they rely on Medicare, just because you are one that doesn't need it does not minimize the value it has for many. I know, you are supremely talented, disciplined and business savvy that you could do better. Says the people on the Baylor Message Board. We are talking public policy, not your portfolio. The middle class, working class and working poor rely on these garage programs. Twirl some more $100 a bottle Scotch and tell us how we should cut SS and Medicare.
Same here. It needs to funded properly and not raided. Same with SS and Highway Trust Fund. Needs dedicated funding.
I truly believe if people know what they are finding, get good service and the funding is tied to service they will not have a problem with tax. I am a huge fan of dedicated funding and user fees.
I am not a fan of General Revenue and discretionary spending.
Social security is a joke with a terrible return for the majority of people and has become an incentive for huge numbers of people to not save a dollar for retirement.
70%+ of government spending comes from SS, Medicare, servicing the debt and defense. Unless significant reductions are made in those, nothing else will matter.
The debt is the problem, not the couple of social programs that the majority of Americans count on in old age. You cut those programs, you are hurting alot of people, mostly working class people.
I am all for fiscal conservatism, but it can't be at the expense the elderly.
I know you and the others were born poor, never took a vacation, lived in a shack for 49 years, paid for Baylor with returnable bottles and if you can do it everyone can do it. Great, yay you. You are a Financial God looking down at the stupid poor who brought it down on themselves by getting cable r a phone when they can't afford it. Pat yourself on the back your special. I get it.
Slash defense, increase corporate taxes, buy you can't do it on the back of the fixed income elderly and elderly medical care. SS and Medicare are relied on by too many to target that as the answer. How about raising capital gains...
Jesus you certainly are not for fiscal conservatism. Or math. Or responsibility.
SS should at the bare minimum be raised to age 70. Life expectancy has increased. People are spending 15 years plus drawing SS checks now. I'll split the difference with you and erase the cap on SS contributions.
SS is an outdated idea that will crash and burn in its current iteration. Shaking your hand at me about being a "financial god" won't change that fact.
SS was never intended to be "the" answer to compete with pensions. It was a safety net, in case. You want to raise it to 70 due to changes in life expectancy. No issues here. You want to raise the amount contributed, no issues. Do away with it or reduce it during in a 7%CPI environment? No way, too many will be hurt. That type of change is a 30 to 50 year phased change.
Fiscal conservatism is not cutting everything to the bone, low bid wins, and all the other reduce costs schemes we see. Too many come in cut the hell out of everything, with no regard for function or ability to provide services, then turn that into a bigger job on the back of "I cut cost by 22%, what an effective manager I am" logic. Leaving a non-functioning unit that can't do the job and is a shell of what it should be.
So sorry, I have heard and seen too much of your brand of fiscal conservatism at cities around the nation. Transit agencies that can't provide service, highway departments that can't resurface roads, all in the name of what you people consider fiscal conservatism when you never have to provide a damn thing, just complain and tell them what lazy Govt workers they are when in reality you have no idea what it costs to provide services. Just continue to ***** you don't want to pay and know better
Confiscating 13 percent of everyone's income up to whatever the current limits are is not good "safety net." It is and has been a financial disaster for individual Americans and their families since it was created.
Tell that to the fixed income part of our Nation. We have a huge population of fixed income in Florida. You guys whose biggest concern is calling Schwab to check rates spout the strict fiscal conservative at all costs policies and these people pay the price. A 4% decrease is real dollars to these people. I know they are not the "winners" the Baylor MBA people are, they just served your meals and maintained you lawns. Should have made better decisions, right. Give up cable. Not buy a cup of coffee or have a phone. Right
It's funny the math people like this point to while completely ignoring the debacle financially they explicitly and full throatedly vote for overwhelmingly
They hatewe $1.69'gasoljne
They hated a fast food mean for $5
They hated a $300,000 house that was affordable with a reasonable mortgage
They hated college tuition that wasn't over $100 / hour
They voted Democrat and destroyed all the above and so much more
And then complain about what they themselves forced in everyone else through their own willful ignorance
They then move to Texas or Florida to "escape" the hell holes they've created pooped and sat in
It's amazing. Democrats.
Who the hell voted Democrat? SS is a success, Medicare is a success. Compared to what was in place before, they are serving the intended purpose. Medicare is in trouble because of price gouging corporations and doctors. Not the 78 year old former butcher on a fixed income who added HBO last month that pushes his budget. Irresponsible fool .
SS is and has always been pay as you go. Do a little research on its funding, it has shallow points and then rebounds. Always will. It goes through a slim period and rebounds as next generations pay in. Only way to kill it is to not pay. I am sure you and broker are trying how to save that small amount as you ride Teachers Union retirement based hedge funds.
You guys throw out lines that anyone can be a millionaire on a rich boys College message board. I would venture that less than 1% of BU actually ever went to bed hungry or relied on a public service. Hardship at BU is cable is out. Or have to drink well brand whiskey. Yet you want to balance the budget on the backs and medical treatment of fixed income elderly. What a guy.
Drives me nuts when people who never provided a public service or infrastructure think they are experts because they ran a real estate office or Company. It is not the same and shouldn't be.Even worse as you and your cronies play every rule in the book to avoid taxes, jack up prices to record profits and ridiculous bonuses, blame the two programs that actually help people as the cause of the economic mess. You guys play your role... Try building a road, you are the first one jacking up Right of Way cost to get yours
This is an important point. If we delay addressing the problem until the future, we will weaken our economic foundation such that everyone will hurt more when the dollar is devalued and taxes have to be higher to provide less services than we have now.He Hate Me said:Thee University said:
Raising the debt limit is a farce we have to listen to all the DC shyster lawyers cry about every few years.
I wish we would default. Nothing will ever change until people start feeling some real pain. Every few years Socialist Party A & Socialist Party B take turns telling us how not raising the ceiling will spell certain doom for the country.
Bring it on! Please default! I want millions of fat, dumb and happy Americans to feel the pain.
Default is the answer. Do it now at $32T or later at $60T. Less pain today than tomorrow.
RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:EatMoreSalmon said:Medicare is expected to go under in the not so distant future. My own retirement will be affected, and I'm not retired yet. It will most definitely have to be scaled back or funded more (higher payroll tax). Third option would be to redo the system, which won't happen unless dire circumstances force the issue.RMF5630 said:Doc Holliday said:Social security and Medicare are garbage.RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:Forest Bueller_bf said:Of all the things that should be cut, why would we cut the one thing that we actually have to pay for.Jack Bauer said:
Everyone is for spending cuts up to the point it impacts them.
I am convinced that SS/Medicare will NEVER EVER get cut due to scare tactics and that seniors get out to vote.
If they will lump sum me the over $400,000 that myself and employer have had to pay into these the last 40 years, if they will also accounting for inflation and a modest 5% interest return, I will take that $2.2 million dollar check and call it even.
There is no difference in money paid to Social Security and Medicare and money paid in income taxes, and we also actually have to pay income taxes. Social Security is simply a flat tax on income (up to a certain amount) and a welfare program.
Why pick the programs the vast majority of Americans have no problem with the Govt providing?
How about raising the taxes to Eisenhower levels, problem solved. The financially well off can continue to crow about how financially disciplined they are, progressives get Govt programs and actual working class workers who irresponsibly took their kids on a vacation can live their lives. All the whole touting the fiscally conservative virtues of Ike. What is more American than that?
When the social security program started the ratio between worker and retiree was 159 workers to 1 retiree. Today the ratio is 2.8 workers to 1 retiree.
It's spending more than its bringing in. Either the government will have to pay us less or raise taxes...maybe both. Even if it was an efficient entitlement program, it would still fail because it doesn't deliver enough money to support retirement. It will deliver poverty to those that solely rely on it.
An entitlement/welfare program costing 46% of the budget that delivers garbage is pointless. We'd be better off saving those tax dollars or using it to curb inflation by not having to print so much damn money.
A major problem with how we view welfare is we think entitlement programs are the answer instead of reduction toward the cost of living.
To a large part of the population they rely on Medicare, just because you are one that doesn't need it does not minimize the value it has for many. I know, you are supremely talented, disciplined and business savvy that you could do better. Says the people on the Baylor Message Board. We are talking public policy, not your portfolio. The middle class, working class and working poor rely on these garage programs. Twirl some more $100 a bottle Scotch and tell us how we should cut SS and Medicare.
Same here. It needs to funded properly and not raided. Same with SS and Highway Trust Fund. Needs dedicated funding.
I truly believe if people know what they are finding, get good service and the funding is tied to service they will not have a problem with tax. I am a huge fan of dedicated funding and user fees.
I am not a fan of General Revenue and discretionary spending.
Social security is a joke with a terrible return for the majority of people and has become an incentive for huge numbers of people to not save a dollar for retirement.
70%+ of government spending comes from SS, Medicare, servicing the debt and defense. Unless significant reductions are made in those, nothing else will matter.
The debt is the problem, not the couple of social programs that the majority of Americans count on in old age. You cut those programs, you are hurting alot of people, mostly working class people.
I am all for fiscal conservatism, but it can't be at the expense the elderly.
I know you and the others were born poor, never took a vacation, lived in a shack for 49 years, paid for Baylor with returnable bottles and if you can do it everyone can do it. Great, yay you. You are a Financial God looking down at the stupid poor who brought it down on themselves by getting cable r a phone when they can't afford it. Pat yourself on the back your special. I get it.
Slash defense, increase corporate taxes, buy you can't do it on the back of the fixed income elderly and elderly medical care. SS and Medicare are relied on by too many to target that as the answer. How about raising capital gains...
Jesus you certainly are not for fiscal conservatism. Or math. Or responsibility.
SS should at the bare minimum be raised to age 70. Life expectancy has increased. People are spending 15 years plus drawing SS checks now. I'll split the difference with you and erase the cap on SS contributions.
SS is an outdated idea that will crash and burn in its current iteration. Shaking your hand at me about being a "financial god" won't change that fact.
SS was never intended to be "the" answer to compete with pensions. It was a safety net, in case. You want to raise it to 70 due to changes in life expectancy. No issues here. You want to raise the amount contributed, no issues. Do away with it or reduce it during in a 7%CPI environment? No way, too many will be hurt. That type of change is a 30 to 50 year phased change.
Fiscal conservatism is not cutting everything to the bone, low bid wins, and all the other reduce costs schemes we see. Too many come in cut the hell out of everything, with no regard for function or ability to provide services, then turn that into a bigger job on the back of "I cut cost by 22%, what an effective manager I am" logic. Leaving a non-functioning unit that can't do the job and is a shell of what it should be.
So sorry, I have heard and seen too much of your brand of fiscal conservatism at cities around the nation. Transit agencies that can't provide service, highway departments that can't resurface roads, all in the name of what you people consider fiscal conservatism when you never have to provide a damn thing, just complain and tell them what lazy Govt workers they are when in reality you have no idea what it costs to provide services. Just continue to ***** you don't want to pay and know better
Confiscating 13 percent of everyone's income up to whatever the current limits are is not good "safety net." It is and has been a financial disaster for individual Americans and their families since it was created.
Tell that to the fixed income part of our Nation. We have a huge population of fixed income in Florida. You guys whose biggest concern is calling Schwab to check rates spout the strict fiscal conservative at all costs policies and these people pay the price. A 4% decrease is real dollars to these people. I know they are not the "winners" the Baylor MBA people are, they just served your meals and maintained you lawns. Should have made better decisions, right. Give up cable. Not buy a cup of coffee or have a phone. Right
Ok, dear fixed income elderly of America: If the government had not confiscated 13 percent of your money for your working life and had instead had that money go to an individual account with pretty conservative investments in American companies, you would have a lot more money in retirement and, when you passed on, would have more than $1,000,000 to leave to your kids, grandkids, or anyone or any charitable cause you wished. I am sorry that your government failed you. We really should change our system so that your government does not fail your grandchildren and great grandchildren as well.
D. C. Bear said:RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:EatMoreSalmon said:Medicare is expected to go under in the not so distant future. My own retirement will be affected, and I'm not retired yet. It will most definitely have to be scaled back or funded more (higher payroll tax). Third option would be to redo the system, which won't happen unless dire circumstances force the issue.RMF5630 said:Doc Holliday said:Social security and Medicare are garbage.RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:Forest Bueller_bf said:Of all the things that should be cut, why would we cut the one thing that we actually have to pay for.Jack Bauer said:
Everyone is for spending cuts up to the point it impacts them.
I am convinced that SS/Medicare will NEVER EVER get cut due to scare tactics and that seniors get out to vote.
If they will lump sum me the over $400,000 that myself and employer have had to pay into these the last 40 years, if they will also accounting for inflation and a modest 5% interest return, I will take that $2.2 million dollar check and call it even.
There is no difference in money paid to Social Security and Medicare and money paid in income taxes, and we also actually have to pay income taxes. Social Security is simply a flat tax on income (up to a certain amount) and a welfare program.
Why pick the programs the vast majority of Americans have no problem with the Govt providing?
How about raising the taxes to Eisenhower levels, problem solved. The financially well off can continue to crow about how financially disciplined they are, progressives get Govt programs and actual working class workers who irresponsibly took their kids on a vacation can live their lives. All the whole touting the fiscally conservative virtues of Ike. What is more American than that?
When the social security program started the ratio between worker and retiree was 159 workers to 1 retiree. Today the ratio is 2.8 workers to 1 retiree.
It's spending more than its bringing in. Either the government will have to pay us less or raise taxes...maybe both. Even if it was an efficient entitlement program, it would still fail because it doesn't deliver enough money to support retirement. It will deliver poverty to those that solely rely on it.
An entitlement/welfare program costing 46% of the budget that delivers garbage is pointless. We'd be better off saving those tax dollars or using it to curb inflation by not having to print so much damn money.
A major problem with how we view welfare is we think entitlement programs are the answer instead of reduction toward the cost of living.
To a large part of the population they rely on Medicare, just because you are one that doesn't need it does not minimize the value it has for many. I know, you are supremely talented, disciplined and business savvy that you could do better. Says the people on the Baylor Message Board. We are talking public policy, not your portfolio. The middle class, working class and working poor rely on these garage programs. Twirl some more $100 a bottle Scotch and tell us how we should cut SS and Medicare.
Same here. It needs to funded properly and not raided. Same with SS and Highway Trust Fund. Needs dedicated funding.
I truly believe if people know what they are finding, get good service and the funding is tied to service they will not have a problem with tax. I am a huge fan of dedicated funding and user fees.
I am not a fan of General Revenue and discretionary spending.
Social security is a joke with a terrible return for the majority of people and has become an incentive for huge numbers of people to not save a dollar for retirement.
70%+ of government spending comes from SS, Medicare, servicing the debt and defense. Unless significant reductions are made in those, nothing else will matter.
The debt is the problem, not the couple of social programs that the majority of Americans count on in old age. You cut those programs, you are hurting alot of people, mostly working class people.
I am all for fiscal conservatism, but it can't be at the expense the elderly.
I know you and the others were born poor, never took a vacation, lived in a shack for 49 years, paid for Baylor with returnable bottles and if you can do it everyone can do it. Great, yay you. You are a Financial God looking down at the stupid poor who brought it down on themselves by getting cable r a phone when they can't afford it. Pat yourself on the back your special. I get it.
Slash defense, increase corporate taxes, buy you can't do it on the back of the fixed income elderly and elderly medical care. SS and Medicare are relied on by too many to target that as the answer. How about raising capital gains...
Jesus you certainly are not for fiscal conservatism. Or math. Or responsibility.
SS should at the bare minimum be raised to age 70. Life expectancy has increased. People are spending 15 years plus drawing SS checks now. I'll split the difference with you and erase the cap on SS contributions.
SS is an outdated idea that will crash and burn in its current iteration. Shaking your hand at me about being a "financial god" won't change that fact.
SS was never intended to be "the" answer to compete with pensions. It was a safety net, in case. You want to raise it to 70 due to changes in life expectancy. No issues here. You want to raise the amount contributed, no issues. Do away with it or reduce it during in a 7%CPI environment? No way, too many will be hurt. That type of change is a 30 to 50 year phased change.
Fiscal conservatism is not cutting everything to the bone, low bid wins, and all the other reduce costs schemes we see. Too many come in cut the hell out of everything, with no regard for function or ability to provide services, then turn that into a bigger job on the back of "I cut cost by 22%, what an effective manager I am" logic. Leaving a non-functioning unit that can't do the job and is a shell of what it should be.
So sorry, I have heard and seen too much of your brand of fiscal conservatism at cities around the nation. Transit agencies that can't provide service, highway departments that can't resurface roads, all in the name of what you people consider fiscal conservatism when you never have to provide a damn thing, just complain and tell them what lazy Govt workers they are when in reality you have no idea what it costs to provide services. Just continue to ***** you don't want to pay and know better
Confiscating 13 percent of everyone's income up to whatever the current limits are is not good "safety net." It is and has been a financial disaster for individual Americans and their families since it was created.
Tell that to the fixed income part of our Nation. We have a huge population of fixed income in Florida. You guys whose biggest concern is calling Schwab to check rates spout the strict fiscal conservative at all costs policies and these people pay the price. A 4% decrease is real dollars to these people. I know they are not the "winners" the Baylor MBA people are, they just served your meals and maintained you lawns. Should have made better decisions, right. Give up cable. Not buy a cup of coffee or have a phone. Right
Ok, dear fixed income elderly of America: If the government had not confiscated 13 percent of your money for your working life and had instead had that money go to a charity to an individual account with pretty conservative investments in American companies, you would have a lot more money in retirement and, when you passed on, would have more than $1,000,000 to leave to your kids, grandkids, or anyone or cause you wished. I am sorry that your government failed you. We really should change our system so that your government does not fail your grandchildren and great grandchildren as well.
Come on, that doesnt solve the policy issue. The vast majority would have other uses for that 13% for health, education, transportation..
There has to be some type of working solution, a model closer to a 401k, individual accounts with options? I am open to a real discussion, what are the alternatives.
RMF5630 said:Fre3dombear said:RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:EatMoreSalmon said:Medicare is expected to go under in the not so distant future. My own retirement will be affected, and I'm not retired yet. It will most definitely have to be scaled back or funded more (higher payroll tax). Third option would be to redo the system, which won't happen unless dire circumstances force the issue.RMF5630 said:Doc Holliday said:Social security and Medicare are garbage.RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:Forest Bueller_bf said:Of all the things that should be cut, why would we cut the one thing that we actually have to pay for.Jack Bauer said:
Everyone is for spending cuts up to the point it impacts them.
I am convinced that SS/Medicare will NEVER EVER get cut due to scare tactics and that seniors get out to vote.
If they will lump sum me the over $400,000 that myself and employer have had to pay into these the last 40 years, if they will also accounting for inflation and a modest 5% interest return, I will take that $2.2 million dollar check and call it even.
There is no difference in money paid to Social Security and Medicare and money paid in income taxes, and we also actually have to pay income taxes. Social Security is simply a flat tax on income (up to a certain amount) and a welfare program.
Why pick the programs the vast majority of Americans have no problem with the Govt providing?
How about raising the taxes to Eisenhower levels, problem solved. The financially well off can continue to crow about how financially disciplined they are, progressives get Govt programs and actual working class workers who irresponsibly took their kids on a vacation can live their lives. All the whole touting the fiscally conservative virtues of Ike. What is more American than that?
When the social security program started the ratio between worker and retiree was 159 workers to 1 retiree. Today the ratio is 2.8 workers to 1 retiree.
It's spending more than its bringing in. Either the government will have to pay us less or raise taxes...maybe both. Even if it was an efficient entitlement program, it would still fail because it doesn't deliver enough money to support retirement. It will deliver poverty to those that solely rely on it.
An entitlement/welfare program costing 46% of the budget that delivers garbage is pointless. We'd be better off saving those tax dollars or using it to curb inflation by not having to print so much damn money.
A major problem with how we view welfare is we think entitlement programs are the answer instead of reduction toward the cost of living.
To a large part of the population they rely on Medicare, just because you are one that doesn't need it does not minimize the value it has for many. I know, you are supremely talented, disciplined and business savvy that you could do better. Says the people on the Baylor Message Board. We are talking public policy, not your portfolio. The middle class, working class and working poor rely on these garage programs. Twirl some more $100 a bottle Scotch and tell us how we should cut SS and Medicare.
Same here. It needs to funded properly and not raided. Same with SS and Highway Trust Fund. Needs dedicated funding.
I truly believe if people know what they are finding, get good service and the funding is tied to service they will not have a problem with tax. I am a huge fan of dedicated funding and user fees.
I am not a fan of General Revenue and discretionary spending.
Social security is a joke with a terrible return for the majority of people and has become an incentive for huge numbers of people to not save a dollar for retirement.
70%+ of government spending comes from SS, Medicare, servicing the debt and defense. Unless significant reductions are made in those, nothing else will matter.
The debt is the problem, not the couple of social programs that the majority of Americans count on in old age. You cut those programs, you are hurting alot of people, mostly working class people.
I am all for fiscal conservatism, but it can't be at the expense the elderly.
I know you and the others were born poor, never took a vacation, lived in a shack for 49 years, paid for Baylor with returnable bottles and if you can do it everyone can do it. Great, yay you. You are a Financial God looking down at the stupid poor who brought it down on themselves by getting cable r a phone when they can't afford it. Pat yourself on the back your special. I get it.
Slash defense, increase corporate taxes, buy you can't do it on the back of the fixed income elderly and elderly medical care. SS and Medicare are relied on by too many to target that as the answer. How about raising capital gains...
Jesus you certainly are not for fiscal conservatism. Or math. Or responsibility.
SS should at the bare minimum be raised to age 70. Life expectancy has increased. People are spending 15 years plus drawing SS checks now. I'll split the difference with you and erase the cap on SS contributions.
SS is an outdated idea that will crash and burn in its current iteration. Shaking your hand at me about being a "financial god" won't change that fact.
SS was never intended to be "the" answer to compete with pensions. It was a safety net, in case. You want to raise it to 70 due to changes in life expectancy. No issues here. You want to raise the amount contributed, no issues. Do away with it or reduce it during in a 7%CPI environment? No way, too many will be hurt. That type of change is a 30 to 50 year phased change.
Fiscal conservatism is not cutting everything to the bone, low bid wins, and all the other reduce costs schemes we see. Too many come in cut the hell out of everything, with no regard for function or ability to provide services, then turn that into a bigger job on the back of "I cut cost by 22%, what an effective manager I am" logic. Leaving a non-functioning unit that can't do the job and is a shell of what it should be.
So sorry, I have heard and seen too much of your brand of fiscal conservatism at cities around the nation. Transit agencies that can't provide service, highway departments that can't resurface roads, all in the name of what you people consider fiscal conservatism when you never have to provide a damn thing, just complain and tell them what lazy Govt workers they are when in reality you have no idea what it costs to provide services. Just continue to ***** you don't want to pay and know better
Confiscating 13 percent of everyone's income up to whatever the current limits are is not good "safety net." It is and has been a financial disaster for individual Americans and their families since it was created.
Tell that to the fixed income part of our Nation. We have a huge population of fixed income in Florida. You guys whose biggest concern is calling Schwab to check rates spout the strict fiscal conservative at all costs policies and these people pay the price. A 4% decrease is real dollars to these people. I know they are not the "winners" the Baylor MBA people are, they just served your meals and maintained you lawns. Should have made better decisions, right. Give up cable. Not buy a cup of coffee or have a phone. Right
It's funny the math people like this point to while completely ignoring the debacle financially they explicitly and full throatedly vote for overwhelmingly
They hatewe $1.69'gasoljne
They hated a fast food mean for $5
They hated a $300,000 house that was affordable with a reasonable mortgage
They hated college tuition that wasn't over $100 / hour
They voted Democrat and destroyed all the above and so much more
And then complain about what they themselves forced in everyone else through their own willful ignorance
They then move to Texas or Florida to "escape" the hell holes they've created pooped and sat in
It's amazing. Democrats.
Who the hell voted Democrat? SS is a success, Medicare is a success. Compared to what was in place before, they are serving the intended purpose. Medicare is in trouble because of price gouging corporations and doctors. Not the 78 year old former butcher on a fixed income who added HBO last month that pushes his budget. Irresponsible fool .
SS is and has always been pay as you go. Do a little research on its funding, it has shallow points and then rebounds. Always will. It goes through a slim period and rebounds as next generations pay in. Only way to kill it is to not pay. I am sure you and broker are trying how to save that small amount as you ride Teachers Union retirement based hedge funds.
You guys throw out lines that anyone can be a millionaire on a rich boys College message board. I would venture that less than 1% of BU actually ever went to bed hungry or relied on a public service. Hardship at BU is cable is out. Or have to drink well brand whiskey. Yet you want to balance the budget on the backs and medical treatment of fixed income elderly. What a guy.
Drives me nuts when people who never provided a public service or infrastructure think they are experts because they ran a real estate office or Company. It is not the same and shouldn't be.Even worse as you and your cronies play every rule in the book to avoid taxes, jack up prices to record profits and ridiculous bonuses, blame the two programs that actually help people as the cause of the economic mess. You guys play your role... Try building a road, you are the first one jacking up Right of Way cost to get yours
I've gone through struggles financially and otherwise that you couldn't fathom.
If you invest $250 a month for 40 years, you would have more than $1.2M at an 9% interest rate. The average American making $50k is sending $250 to the government for SS every month. And they have to work 40 years to get it as well.
Sorry if you made some bad financial decisions and are bitter about it.
BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:Fre3dombear said:RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:EatMoreSalmon said:Medicare is expected to go under in the not so distant future. My own retirement will be affected, and I'm not retired yet. It will most definitely have to be scaled back or funded more (higher payroll tax). Third option would be to redo the system, which won't happen unless dire circumstances force the issue.RMF5630 said:Doc Holliday said:Social security and Medicare are garbage.RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:Forest Bueller_bf said:Of all the things that should be cut, why would we cut the one thing that we actually have to pay for.Jack Bauer said:
Everyone is for spending cuts up to the point it impacts them.
I am convinced that SS/Medicare will NEVER EVER get cut due to scare tactics and that seniors get out to vote.
If they will lump sum me the over $400,000 that myself and employer have had to pay into these the last 40 years, if they will also accounting for inflation and a modest 5% interest return, I will take that $2.2 million dollar check and call it even.
There is no difference in money paid to Social Security and Medicare and money paid in income taxes, and we also actually have to pay income taxes. Social Security is simply a flat tax on income (up to a certain amount) and a welfare program.
Why pick the programs the vast majority of Americans have no problem with the Govt providing?
How about raising the taxes to Eisenhower levels, problem solved. The financially well off can continue to crow about how financially disciplined they are, progressives get Govt programs and actual working class workers who irresponsibly took their kids on a vacation can live their lives. All the whole touting the fiscally conservative virtues of Ike. What is more American than that?
When the social security program started the ratio between worker and retiree was 159 workers to 1 retiree. Today the ratio is 2.8 workers to 1 retiree.
It's spending more than its bringing in. Either the government will have to pay us less or raise taxes...maybe both. Even if it was an efficient entitlement program, it would still fail because it doesn't deliver enough money to support retirement. It will deliver poverty to those that solely rely on it.
An entitlement/welfare program costing 46% of the budget that delivers garbage is pointless. We'd be better off saving those tax dollars or using it to curb inflation by not having to print so much damn money.
A major problem with how we view welfare is we think entitlement programs are the answer instead of reduction toward the cost of living.
To a large part of the population they rely on Medicare, just because you are one that doesn't need it does not minimize the value it has for many. I know, you are supremely talented, disciplined and business savvy that you could do better. Says the people on the Baylor Message Board. We are talking public policy, not your portfolio. The middle class, working class and working poor rely on these garage programs. Twirl some more $100 a bottle Scotch and tell us how we should cut SS and Medicare.
Same here. It needs to funded properly and not raided. Same with SS and Highway Trust Fund. Needs dedicated funding.
I truly believe if people know what they are finding, get good service and the funding is tied to service they will not have a problem with tax. I am a huge fan of dedicated funding and user fees.
I am not a fan of General Revenue and discretionary spending.
Social security is a joke with a terrible return for the majority of people and has become an incentive for huge numbers of people to not save a dollar for retirement.
70%+ of government spending comes from SS, Medicare, servicing the debt and defense. Unless significant reductions are made in those, nothing else will matter.
The debt is the problem, not the couple of social programs that the majority of Americans count on in old age. You cut those programs, you are hurting alot of people, mostly working class people.
I am all for fiscal conservatism, but it can't be at the expense the elderly.
I know you and the others were born poor, never took a vacation, lived in a shack for 49 years, paid for Baylor with returnable bottles and if you can do it everyone can do it. Great, yay you. You are a Financial God looking down at the stupid poor who brought it down on themselves by getting cable r a phone when they can't afford it. Pat yourself on the back your special. I get it.
Slash defense, increase corporate taxes, buy you can't do it on the back of the fixed income elderly and elderly medical care. SS and Medicare are relied on by too many to target that as the answer. How about raising capital gains...
Jesus you certainly are not for fiscal conservatism. Or math. Or responsibility.
SS should at the bare minimum be raised to age 70. Life expectancy has increased. People are spending 15 years plus drawing SS checks now. I'll split the difference with you and erase the cap on SS contributions.
SS is an outdated idea that will crash and burn in its current iteration. Shaking your hand at me about being a "financial god" won't change that fact.
SS was never intended to be "the" answer to compete with pensions. It was a safety net, in case. You want to raise it to 70 due to changes in life expectancy. No issues here. You want to raise the amount contributed, no issues. Do away with it or reduce it during in a 7%CPI environment? No way, too many will be hurt. That type of change is a 30 to 50 year phased change.
Fiscal conservatism is not cutting everything to the bone, low bid wins, and all the other reduce costs schemes we see. Too many come in cut the hell out of everything, with no regard for function or ability to provide services, then turn that into a bigger job on the back of "I cut cost by 22%, what an effective manager I am" logic. Leaving a non-functioning unit that can't do the job and is a shell of what it should be.
So sorry, I have heard and seen too much of your brand of fiscal conservatism at cities around the nation. Transit agencies that can't provide service, highway departments that can't resurface roads, all in the name of what you people consider fiscal conservatism when you never have to provide a damn thing, just complain and tell them what lazy Govt workers they are when in reality you have no idea what it costs to provide services. Just continue to ***** you don't want to pay and know better
Confiscating 13 percent of everyone's income up to whatever the current limits are is not good "safety net." It is and has been a financial disaster for individual Americans and their families since it was created.
Tell that to the fixed income part of our Nation. We have a huge population of fixed income in Florida. You guys whose biggest concern is calling Schwab to check rates spout the strict fiscal conservative at all costs policies and these people pay the price. A 4% decrease is real dollars to these people. I know they are not the "winners" the Baylor MBA people are, they just served your meals and maintained you lawns. Should have made better decisions, right. Give up cable. Not buy a cup of coffee or have a phone. Right
It's funny the math people like this point to while completely ignoring the debacle financially they explicitly and full throatedly vote for overwhelmingly
They hatewe $1.69'gasoljne
They hated a fast food mean for $5
They hated a $300,000 house that was affordable with a reasonable mortgage
They hated college tuition that wasn't over $100 / hour
They voted Democrat and destroyed all the above and so much more
And then complain about what they themselves forced in everyone else through their own willful ignorance
They then move to Texas or Florida to "escape" the hell holes they've created pooped and sat in
It's amazing. Democrats.
Who the hell voted Democrat? SS is a success, Medicare is a success. Compared to what was in place before, they are serving the intended purpose. Medicare is in trouble because of price gouging corporations and doctors. Not the 78 year old former butcher on a fixed income who added HBO last month that pushes his budget. Irresponsible fool .
SS is and has always been pay as you go. Do a little research on its funding, it has shallow points and then rebounds. Always will. It goes through a slim period and rebounds as next generations pay in. Only way to kill it is to not pay. I am sure you and broker are trying how to save that small amount as you ride Teachers Union retirement based hedge funds.
You guys throw out lines that anyone can be a millionaire on a rich boys College message board. I would venture that less than 1% of BU actually ever went to bed hungry or relied on a public service. Hardship at BU is cable is out. Or have to drink well brand whiskey. Yet you want to balance the budget on the backs and medical treatment of fixed income elderly. What a guy.
Drives me nuts when people who never provided a public service or infrastructure think they are experts because they ran a real estate office or Company. It is not the same and shouldn't be.Even worse as you and your cronies play every rule in the book to avoid taxes, jack up prices to record profits and ridiculous bonuses, blame the two programs that actually help people as the cause of the economic mess. You guys play your role... Try building a road, you are the first one jacking up Right of Way cost to get yours
I've gone through struggles financially and otherwise that you couldn't fathom.
If you invest $100 a month for 30 years, you would have more than $1.3M at even an 8% interest rate. The average American making $50k is sending $250 to the government for SS every month.
Sorry if you made some bad financial decisions and are bitter about it.
Your math is wrong.
D. C. Bear said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:Fre3dombear said:RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:EatMoreSalmon said:Medicare is expected to go under in the not so distant future. My own retirement will be affected, and I'm not retired yet. It will most definitely have to be scaled back or funded more (higher payroll tax). Third option would be to redo the system, which won't happen unless dire circumstances force the issue.RMF5630 said:Doc Holliday said:Social security and Medicare are garbage.RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:Forest Bueller_bf said:Of all the things that should be cut, why would we cut the one thing that we actually have to pay for.Jack Bauer said:
Everyone is for spending cuts up to the point it impacts them.
I am convinced that SS/Medicare will NEVER EVER get cut due to scare tactics and that seniors get out to vote.
If they will lump sum me the over $400,000 that myself and employer have had to pay into these the last 40 years, if they will also accounting for inflation and a modest 5% interest return, I will take that $2.2 million dollar check and call it even.
There is no difference in money paid to Social Security and Medicare and money paid in income taxes, and we also actually have to pay income taxes. Social Security is simply a flat tax on income (up to a certain amount) and a welfare program.
Why pick the programs the vast majority of Americans have no problem with the Govt providing?
How about raising the taxes to Eisenhower levels, problem solved. The financially well off can continue to crow about how financially disciplined they are, progressives get Govt programs and actual working class workers who irresponsibly took their kids on a vacation can live their lives. All the whole touting the fiscally conservative virtues of Ike. What is more American than that?
When the social security program started the ratio between worker and retiree was 159 workers to 1 retiree. Today the ratio is 2.8 workers to 1 retiree.
It's spending more than its bringing in. Either the government will have to pay us less or raise taxes...maybe both. Even if it was an efficient entitlement program, it would still fail because it doesn't deliver enough money to support retirement. It will deliver poverty to those that solely rely on it.
An entitlement/welfare program costing 46% of the budget that delivers garbage is pointless. We'd be better off saving those tax dollars or using it to curb inflation by not having to print so much damn money.
A major problem with how we view welfare is we think entitlement programs are the answer instead of reduction toward the cost of living.
To a large part of the population they rely on Medicare, just because you are one that doesn't need it does not minimize the value it has for many. I know, you are supremely talented, disciplined and business savvy that you could do better. Says the people on the Baylor Message Board. We are talking public policy, not your portfolio. The middle class, working class and working poor rely on these garage programs. Twirl some more $100 a bottle Scotch and tell us how we should cut SS and Medicare.
Same here. It needs to funded properly and not raided. Same with SS and Highway Trust Fund. Needs dedicated funding.
I truly believe if people know what they are finding, get good service and the funding is tied to service they will not have a problem with tax. I am a huge fan of dedicated funding and user fees.
I am not a fan of General Revenue and discretionary spending.
Social security is a joke with a terrible return for the majority of people and has become an incentive for huge numbers of people to not save a dollar for retirement.
70%+ of government spending comes from SS, Medicare, servicing the debt and defense. Unless significant reductions are made in those, nothing else will matter.
The debt is the problem, not the couple of social programs that the majority of Americans count on in old age. You cut those programs, you are hurting alot of people, mostly working class people.
I am all for fiscal conservatism, but it can't be at the expense the elderly.
I know you and the others were born poor, never took a vacation, lived in a shack for 49 years, paid for Baylor with returnable bottles and if you can do it everyone can do it. Great, yay you. You are a Financial God looking down at the stupid poor who brought it down on themselves by getting cable r a phone when they can't afford it. Pat yourself on the back your special. I get it.
Slash defense, increase corporate taxes, buy you can't do it on the back of the fixed income elderly and elderly medical care. SS and Medicare are relied on by too many to target that as the answer. How about raising capital gains...
Jesus you certainly are not for fiscal conservatism. Or math. Or responsibility.
SS should at the bare minimum be raised to age 70. Life expectancy has increased. People are spending 15 years plus drawing SS checks now. I'll split the difference with you and erase the cap on SS contributions.
SS is an outdated idea that will crash and burn in its current iteration. Shaking your hand at me about being a "financial god" won't change that fact.
SS was never intended to be "the" answer to compete with pensions. It was a safety net, in case. You want to raise it to 70 due to changes in life expectancy. No issues here. You want to raise the amount contributed, no issues. Do away with it or reduce it during in a 7%CPI environment? No way, too many will be hurt. That type of change is a 30 to 50 year phased change.
Fiscal conservatism is not cutting everything to the bone, low bid wins, and all the other reduce costs schemes we see. Too many come in cut the hell out of everything, with no regard for function or ability to provide services, then turn that into a bigger job on the back of "I cut cost by 22%, what an effective manager I am" logic. Leaving a non-functioning unit that can't do the job and is a shell of what it should be.
So sorry, I have heard and seen too much of your brand of fiscal conservatism at cities around the nation. Transit agencies that can't provide service, highway departments that can't resurface roads, all in the name of what you people consider fiscal conservatism when you never have to provide a damn thing, just complain and tell them what lazy Govt workers they are when in reality you have no idea what it costs to provide services. Just continue to ***** you don't want to pay and know better
Confiscating 13 percent of everyone's income up to whatever the current limits are is not good "safety net." It is and has been a financial disaster for individual Americans and their families since it was created.
Tell that to the fixed income part of our Nation. We have a huge population of fixed income in Florida. You guys whose biggest concern is calling Schwab to check rates spout the strict fiscal conservative at all costs policies and these people pay the price. A 4% decrease is real dollars to these people. I know they are not the "winners" the Baylor MBA people are, they just served your meals and maintained you lawns. Should have made better decisions, right. Give up cable. Not buy a cup of coffee or have a phone. Right
It's funny the math people like this point to while completely ignoring the debacle financially they explicitly and full throatedly vote for overwhelmingly
They hatewe $1.69'gasoljne
They hated a fast food mean for $5
They hated a $300,000 house that was affordable with a reasonable mortgage
They hated college tuition that wasn't over $100 / hour
They voted Democrat and destroyed all the above and so much more
And then complain about what they themselves forced in everyone else through their own willful ignorance
They then move to Texas or Florida to "escape" the hell holes they've created pooped and sat in
It's amazing. Democrats.
Who the hell voted Democrat? SS is a success, Medicare is a success. Compared to what was in place before, they are serving the intended purpose. Medicare is in trouble because of price gouging corporations and doctors. Not the 78 year old former butcher on a fixed income who added HBO last month that pushes his budget. Irresponsible fool .
SS is and has always been pay as you go. Do a little research on its funding, it has shallow points and then rebounds. Always will. It goes through a slim period and rebounds as next generations pay in. Only way to kill it is to not pay. I am sure you and broker are trying how to save that small amount as you ride Teachers Union retirement based hedge funds.
You guys throw out lines that anyone can be a millionaire on a rich boys College message board. I would venture that less than 1% of BU actually ever went to bed hungry or relied on a public service. Hardship at BU is cable is out. Or have to drink well brand whiskey. Yet you want to balance the budget on the backs and medical treatment of fixed income elderly. What a guy.
Drives me nuts when people who never provided a public service or infrastructure think they are experts because they ran a real estate office or Company. It is not the same and shouldn't be.Even worse as you and your cronies play every rule in the book to avoid taxes, jack up prices to record profits and ridiculous bonuses, blame the two programs that actually help people as the cause of the economic mess. You guys play your role... Try building a road, you are the first one jacking up Right of Way cost to get yours
I've gone through struggles financially and otherwise that you couldn't fathom.
If you invest $100 a month for 30 years, you would have more than $1.3M at even an 8% interest rate. The average American making $50k is sending $250 to the government for SS every month.
Sorry if you made some bad financial decisions and are bitter about it.
Your math is wrong.
It is. That's what I get for using the FV calculator on the phone. Fixed. The numbers would be 40 years (so age 62). 9.1 or 9.2% and $250 per month.
RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:EatMoreSalmon said:Medicare is expected to go under in the not so distant future. My own retirement will be affected, and I'm not retired yet. It will most definitely have to be scaled back or funded more (higher payroll tax). Third option would be to redo the system, which won't happen unless dire circumstances force the issue.RMF5630 said:Doc Holliday said:Social security and Medicare are garbage.RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:Forest Bueller_bf said:Of all the things that should be cut, why would we cut the one thing that we actually have to pay for.Jack Bauer said:
Everyone is for spending cuts up to the point it impacts them.
I am convinced that SS/Medicare will NEVER EVER get cut due to scare tactics and that seniors get out to vote.
If they will lump sum me the over $400,000 that myself and employer have had to pay into these the last 40 years, if they will also accounting for inflation and a modest 5% interest return, I will take that $2.2 million dollar check and call it even.
There is no difference in money paid to Social Security and Medicare and money paid in income taxes, and we also actually have to pay income taxes. Social Security is simply a flat tax on income (up to a certain amount) and a welfare program.
Why pick the programs the vast majority of Americans have no problem with the Govt providing?
How about raising the taxes to Eisenhower levels, problem solved. The financially well off can continue to crow about how financially disciplined they are, progressives get Govt programs and actual working class workers who irresponsibly took their kids on a vacation can live their lives. All the whole touting the fiscally conservative virtues of Ike. What is more American than that?
When the social security program started the ratio between worker and retiree was 159 workers to 1 retiree. Today the ratio is 2.8 workers to 1 retiree.
It's spending more than its bringing in. Either the government will have to pay us less or raise taxes...maybe both. Even if it was an efficient entitlement program, it would still fail because it doesn't deliver enough money to support retirement. It will deliver poverty to those that solely rely on it.
An entitlement/welfare program costing 46% of the budget that delivers garbage is pointless. We'd be better off saving those tax dollars or using it to curb inflation by not having to print so much damn money.
A major problem with how we view welfare is we think entitlement programs are the answer instead of reduction toward the cost of living.
To a large part of the population they rely on Medicare, just because you are one that doesn't need it does not minimize the value it has for many. I know, you are supremely talented, disciplined and business savvy that you could do better. Says the people on the Baylor Message Board. We are talking public policy, not your portfolio. The middle class, working class and working poor rely on these garage programs. Twirl some more $100 a bottle Scotch and tell us how we should cut SS and Medicare.
Same here. It needs to funded properly and not raided. Same with SS and Highway Trust Fund. Needs dedicated funding.
I truly believe if people know what they are finding, get good service and the funding is tied to service they will not have a problem with tax. I am a huge fan of dedicated funding and user fees.
I am not a fan of General Revenue and discretionary spending.
Social security is a joke with a terrible return for the majority of people and has become an incentive for huge numbers of people to not save a dollar for retirement.
70%+ of government spending comes from SS, Medicare, servicing the debt and defense. Unless significant reductions are made in those, nothing else will matter.
The debt is the problem, not the couple of social programs that the majority of Americans count on in old age. You cut those programs, you are hurting alot of people, mostly working class people.
I am all for fiscal conservatism, but it can't be at the expense the elderly.
I know you and the others were born poor, never took a vacation, lived in a shack for 49 years, paid for Baylor with returnable bottles and if you can do it everyone can do it. Great, yay you. You are a Financial God looking down at the stupid poor who brought it down on themselves by getting cable r a phone when they can't afford it. Pat yourself on the back your special. I get it.
Slash defense, increase corporate taxes, buy you can't do it on the back of the fixed income elderly and elderly medical care. SS and Medicare are relied on by too many to target that as the answer. How about raising capital gains...
Jesus you certainly are not for fiscal conservatism. Or math. Or responsibility.
SS should at the bare minimum be raised to age 70. Life expectancy has increased. People are spending 15 years plus drawing SS checks now. I'll split the difference with you and erase the cap on SS contributions.
SS is an outdated idea that will crash and burn in its current iteration. Shaking your hand at me about being a "financial god" won't change that fact.
SS was never intended to be "the" answer to compete with pensions. It was a safety net, in case. You want to raise it to 70 due to changes in life expectancy. No issues here. You want to raise the amount contributed, no issues. Do away with it or reduce it during in a 7%CPI environment? No way, too many will be hurt. That type of change is a 30 to 50 year phased change.
Fiscal conservatism is not cutting everything to the bone, low bid wins, and all the other reduce costs schemes we see. Too many come in cut the hell out of everything, with no regard for function or ability to provide services, then turn that into a bigger job on the back of "I cut cost by 22%, what an effective manager I am" logic. Leaving a non-functioning unit that can't do the job and is a shell of what it should be.
So sorry, I have heard and seen too much of your brand of fiscal conservatism at cities around the nation. Transit agencies that can't provide service, highway departments that can't resurface roads, all in the name of what you people consider fiscal conservatism when you never have to provide a damn thing, just complain and tell them what lazy Govt workers they are when in reality you have no idea what it costs to provide services. Just continue to ***** you don't want to pay and know better
Confiscating 13 percent of everyone's income up to whatever the current limits are is not good "safety net." It is and has been a financial disaster for individual Americans and their families since it was created.
Tell that to the fixed income part of our Nation. We have a huge population of fixed income in Florida. You guys whose biggest concern is calling Schwab to check rates spout the strict fiscal conservative at all costs policies and these people pay the price. A 4% decrease is real dollars to these people. I know they are not the "winners" the Baylor MBA people are, they just served your meals and maintained you lawns. Should have made better decisions, right. Give up cable. Not buy a cup of coffee or have a phone. Right
Ok, dear fixed income elderly of America: If the government had not confiscated 13 percent of your money for your working life and had instead had that money go to a charity to an individual account with pretty conservative investments in American companies, you would have a lot more money in retirement and, when you passed on, would have more than $1,000,000 to leave to your kids, grandkids, or anyone or cause you wished. I am sorry that your government failed you. We really should change our system so that your government does not fail your grandchildren and great grandchildren as well.
Come on, that doesnt solve the policy issue. The vast majority would have other uses for that 13% for health, education, transportation..
There has to be some type of working solution, a model closer to a 401k, individual accounts with options? I am open to a real discussion, what are the alternatives.
Of course it solves the "policy issue." Money goes to individual retirement accounts instead of to the general fund of the Federal government. It works for the people who earned it instead of vanishing into the black hole of the Federal budget. It creates generational wealth and goes a long way to ending "systemic racism," too. Of course, you have to introduce it in a graduated way based on age.
"what are the alternatives"
That's the rub. Believe it or not, there is a school of thought which claims that because the government can print money, they quite literally can and should spend their way out of debt. A substantial portion of the Democrats really do subscribe to that thought, which is why they expect the debt ceiling raised as a precursor to anything else.
Those Democrats see 'negotiation' as giving Republicans some spending for their projects, in exchange for even more spending by the Democrats. They quite seriously do not believe the Republicans really want a reduced budget.
Sadly, a lot of Republicans play the same game, in that they are willing to give the Democrats more spending in order to get what they want, projects which help them get re-elected. They understand that the debt is beyond sane levels, but by now they think the postponement of the reckoning can be put off indefinitely.
Maybe about 35% of Republicans and 2% of Democrats would be interested in trying to work out a long-term plan to address the matter.
So the only way to move forward is to elect more people who understand the explosive nature of the crisis, and who will work out a long-term solution.
Social Security and Medicare are held as sacred, untouchable. In real terms that means any changes would have to be planned to begin at least ten to twelve years in the future, and - like it or not - there will need to be an interim program for that generation who are depending on assistance in their declining years.
Not everyone can make fortunes off anonymous art deals and book contracts, as the Bidens and Obamas did.
That's the rub. Believe it or not, there is a school of thought which claims that because the government can print money, they quite literally can and should spend their way out of debt. A substantial portion of the Democrats really do subscribe to that thought, which is why they expect the debt ceiling raised as a precursor to anything else.
Those Democrats see 'negotiation' as giving Republicans some spending for their projects, in exchange for even more spending by the Democrats. They quite seriously do not believe the Republicans really want a reduced budget.
Sadly, a lot of Republicans play the same game, in that they are willing to give the Democrats more spending in order to get what they want, projects which help them get re-elected. They understand that the debt is beyond sane levels, but by now they think the postponement of the reckoning can be put off indefinitely.
Maybe about 35% of Republicans and 2% of Democrats would be interested in trying to work out a long-term plan to address the matter.
So the only way to move forward is to elect more people who understand the explosive nature of the crisis, and who will work out a long-term solution.
Social Security and Medicare are held as sacred, untouchable. In real terms that means any changes would have to be planned to begin at least ten to twelve years in the future, and - like it or not - there will need to be an interim program for that generation who are depending on assistance in their declining years.
Not everyone can make fortunes off anonymous art deals and book contracts, as the Bidens and Obamas did.
Its not that I'm against welfare. I'm against failed entitlement programs that don't deliver.RMF5630 said:Doc Holliday said:Social security and Medicare are garbage.RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:Forest Bueller_bf said:Of all the things that should be cut, why would we cut the one thing that we actually have to pay for.Jack Bauer said:
Everyone is for spending cuts up to the point it impacts them.
I am convinced that SS/Medicare will NEVER EVER get cut due to scare tactics and that seniors get out to vote.
If they will lump sum me the over $400,000 that myself and employer have had to pay into these the last 40 years, if they will also accounting for inflation and a modest 5% interest return, I will take that $2.2 million dollar check and call it even.
There is no difference in money paid to Social Security and Medicare and money paid in income taxes, and we also actually have to pay income taxes. Social Security is simply a flat tax on income (up to a certain amount) and a welfare program.
Why pick the programs the vast majority of Americans have no problem with the Govt providing?
How about raising the taxes to Eisenhower levels, problem solved. The financially well off can continue to crow about how financially disciplined they are, progressives get Govt programs and actual working class workers who irresponsibly took their kids on a vacation can live their lives. All the whole touting the fiscally conservative virtues of Ike. What is more American than that?
When the social security program started the ratio between worker and retiree was 159 workers to 1 retiree. Today the ratio is 2.8 workers to 1 retiree.
It's spending more than its bringing in. Either the government will have to pay us less or raise taxes...maybe both. Even if it was an efficient entitlement program, it would still fail because it doesn't deliver enough money to support retirement. It will deliver poverty to those that solely rely on it.
An entitlement/welfare program costing 46% of the budget that delivers garbage is pointless. We'd be better off saving those tax dollars or using it to curb inflation by not having to print so much damn money.
A major problem with how we view welfare is we think entitlement programs are the answer instead of reduction toward the cost of living.
To a large part of the population they rely on Medicare, just because you are one that doesn't need it does not minimize the value it has for many. I know, you are supremely talented, disciplined and business savvy that you could do better. Says the people on the Baylor Message Board. We are talking public policy, not your portfolio. The middle class, working class and working poor rely on these garage programs. Twirl some more $100 a bottle Scotch and tell us how we should cut SS and Medicare.
The same amount of money going toward Medicare could be used for a system that actually delivers.
BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:Fre3dombear said:RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:EatMoreSalmon said:Medicare is expected to go under in the not so distant future. My own retirement will be affected, and I'm not retired yet. It will most definitely have to be scaled back or funded more (higher payroll tax). Third option would be to redo the system, which won't happen unless dire circumstances force the issue.RMF5630 said:Doc Holliday said:Social security and Medicare are garbage.RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:Forest Bueller_bf said:Of all the things that should be cut, why would we cut the one thing that we actually have to pay for.Jack Bauer said:
Everyone is for spending cuts up to the point it impacts them.
I am convinced that SS/Medicare will NEVER EVER get cut due to scare tactics and that seniors get out to vote.
If they will lump sum me the over $400,000 that myself and employer have had to pay into these the last 40 years, if they will also accounting for inflation and a modest 5% interest return, I will take that $2.2 million dollar check and call it even.
There is no difference in money paid to Social Security and Medicare and money paid in income taxes, and we also actually have to pay income taxes. Social Security is simply a flat tax on income (up to a certain amount) and a welfare program.
Why pick the programs the vast majority of Americans have no problem with the Govt providing?
How about raising the taxes to Eisenhower levels, problem solved. The financially well off can continue to crow about how financially disciplined they are, progressives get Govt programs and actual working class workers who irresponsibly took their kids on a vacation can live their lives. All the whole touting the fiscally conservative virtues of Ike. What is more American than that?
When the social security program started the ratio between worker and retiree was 159 workers to 1 retiree. Today the ratio is 2.8 workers to 1 retiree.
It's spending more than its bringing in. Either the government will have to pay us less or raise taxes...maybe both. Even if it was an efficient entitlement program, it would still fail because it doesn't deliver enough money to support retirement. It will deliver poverty to those that solely rely on it.
An entitlement/welfare program costing 46% of the budget that delivers garbage is pointless. We'd be better off saving those tax dollars or using it to curb inflation by not having to print so much damn money.
A major problem with how we view welfare is we think entitlement programs are the answer instead of reduction toward the cost of living.
To a large part of the population they rely on Medicare, just because you are one that doesn't need it does not minimize the value it has for many. I know, you are supremely talented, disciplined and business savvy that you could do better. Says the people on the Baylor Message Board. We are talking public policy, not your portfolio. The middle class, working class and working poor rely on these garage programs. Twirl some more $100 a bottle Scotch and tell us how we should cut SS and Medicare.
Same here. It needs to funded properly and not raided. Same with SS and Highway Trust Fund. Needs dedicated funding.
I truly believe if people know what they are finding, get good service and the funding is tied to service they will not have a problem with tax. I am a huge fan of dedicated funding and user fees.
I am not a fan of General Revenue and discretionary spending.
Social security is a joke with a terrible return for the majority of people and has become an incentive for huge numbers of people to not save a dollar for retirement.
70%+ of government spending comes from SS, Medicare, servicing the debt and defense. Unless significant reductions are made in those, nothing else will matter.
The debt is the problem, not the couple of social programs that the majority of Americans count on in old age. You cut those programs, you are hurting alot of people, mostly working class people.
I am all for fiscal conservatism, but it can't be at the expense the elderly.
I know you and the others were born poor, never took a vacation, lived in a shack for 49 years, paid for Baylor with returnable bottles and if you can do it everyone can do it. Great, yay you. You are a Financial God looking down at the stupid poor who brought it down on themselves by getting cable r a phone when they can't afford it. Pat yourself on the back your special. I get it.
Slash defense, increase corporate taxes, buy you can't do it on the back of the fixed income elderly and elderly medical care. SS and Medicare are relied on by too many to target that as the answer. How about raising capital gains...
Jesus you certainly are not for fiscal conservatism. Or math. Or responsibility.
SS should at the bare minimum be raised to age 70. Life expectancy has increased. People are spending 15 years plus drawing SS checks now. I'll split the difference with you and erase the cap on SS contributions.
SS is an outdated idea that will crash and burn in its current iteration. Shaking your hand at me about being a "financial god" won't change that fact.
SS was never intended to be "the" answer to compete with pensions. It was a safety net, in case. You want to raise it to 70 due to changes in life expectancy. No issues here. You want to raise the amount contributed, no issues. Do away with it or reduce it during in a 7%CPI environment? No way, too many will be hurt. That type of change is a 30 to 50 year phased change.
Fiscal conservatism is not cutting everything to the bone, low bid wins, and all the other reduce costs schemes we see. Too many come in cut the hell out of everything, with no regard for function or ability to provide services, then turn that into a bigger job on the back of "I cut cost by 22%, what an effective manager I am" logic. Leaving a non-functioning unit that can't do the job and is a shell of what it should be.
So sorry, I have heard and seen too much of your brand of fiscal conservatism at cities around the nation. Transit agencies that can't provide service, highway departments that can't resurface roads, all in the name of what you people consider fiscal conservatism when you never have to provide a damn thing, just complain and tell them what lazy Govt workers they are when in reality you have no idea what it costs to provide services. Just continue to ***** you don't want to pay and know better
Confiscating 13 percent of everyone's income up to whatever the current limits are is not good "safety net." It is and has been a financial disaster for individual Americans and their families since it was created.
Tell that to the fixed income part of our Nation. We have a huge population of fixed income in Florida. You guys whose biggest concern is calling Schwab to check rates spout the strict fiscal conservative at all costs policies and these people pay the price. A 4% decrease is real dollars to these people. I know they are not the "winners" the Baylor MBA people are, they just served your meals and maintained you lawns. Should have made better decisions, right. Give up cable. Not buy a cup of coffee or have a phone. Right
It's funny the math people like this point to while completely ignoring the debacle financially they explicitly and full throatedly vote for overwhelmingly
They hatewe $1.69'gasoljne
They hated a fast food mean for $5
They hated a $300,000 house that was affordable with a reasonable mortgage
They hated college tuition that wasn't over $100 / hour
They voted Democrat and destroyed all the above and so much more
And then complain about what they themselves forced in everyone else through their own willful ignorance
They then move to Texas or Florida to "escape" the hell holes they've created pooped and sat in
It's amazing. Democrats.
Who the hell voted Democrat? SS is a success, Medicare is a success. Compared to what was in place before, they are serving the intended purpose. Medicare is in trouble because of price gouging corporations and doctors. Not the 78 year old former butcher on a fixed income who added HBO last month that pushes his budget. Irresponsible fool .
SS is and has always been pay as you go. Do a little research on its funding, it has shallow points and then rebounds. Always will. It goes through a slim period and rebounds as next generations pay in. Only way to kill it is to not pay. I am sure you and broker are trying how to save that small amount as you ride Teachers Union retirement based hedge funds.
You guys throw out lines that anyone can be a millionaire on a rich boys College message board. I would venture that less than 1% of BU actually ever went to bed hungry or relied on a public service. Hardship at BU is cable is out. Or have to drink well brand whiskey. Yet you want to balance the budget on the backs and medical treatment of fixed income elderly. What a guy.
Drives me nuts when people who never provided a public service or infrastructure think they are experts because they ran a real estate office or Company. It is not the same and shouldn't be.Even worse as you and your cronies play every rule in the book to avoid taxes, jack up prices to record profits and ridiculous bonuses, blame the two programs that actually help people as the cause of the economic mess. You guys play your role... Try building a road, you are the first one jacking up Right of Way cost to get yours
I've gone through struggles financially and otherwise that you couldn't fathom.
If you invest $250 a month for 40 years, you would have more than $1.2M at an 9% interest rate. The average American making $50k is sending $250 to the government for SS every month. And they have to work 40 years to get it as well.
Sorry if you made some bad financial decisions and are bitter about it.
We are not talking investment strategy. I am not bitter, I am literally sitting in Kona drinking Margaritas eating Calamari.
We are talking public policy, which is not as straight forward as investments.
RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:Fre3dombear said:RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:EatMoreSalmon said:Medicare is expected to go under in the not so distant future. My own retirement will be affected, and I'm not retired yet. It will most definitely have to be scaled back or funded more (higher payroll tax). Third option would be to redo the system, which won't happen unless dire circumstances force the issue.RMF5630 said:Doc Holliday said:Social security and Medicare are garbage.RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:Forest Bueller_bf said:Of all the things that should be cut, why would we cut the one thing that we actually have to pay for.Jack Bauer said:
Everyone is for spending cuts up to the point it impacts them.
I am convinced that SS/Medicare will NEVER EVER get cut due to scare tactics and that seniors get out to vote.
If they will lump sum me the over $400,000 that myself and employer have had to pay into these the last 40 years, if they will also accounting for inflation and a modest 5% interest return, I will take that $2.2 million dollar check and call it even.
There is no difference in money paid to Social Security and Medicare and money paid in income taxes, and we also actually have to pay income taxes. Social Security is simply a flat tax on income (up to a certain amount) and a welfare program.
Why pick the programs the vast majority of Americans have no problem with the Govt providing?
How about raising the taxes to Eisenhower levels, problem solved. The financially well off can continue to crow about how financially disciplined they are, progressives get Govt programs and actual working class workers who irresponsibly took their kids on a vacation can live their lives. All the whole touting the fiscally conservative virtues of Ike. What is more American than that?
When the social security program started the ratio between worker and retiree was 159 workers to 1 retiree. Today the ratio is 2.8 workers to 1 retiree.
It's spending more than its bringing in. Either the government will have to pay us less or raise taxes...maybe both. Even if it was an efficient entitlement program, it would still fail because it doesn't deliver enough money to support retirement. It will deliver poverty to those that solely rely on it.
An entitlement/welfare program costing 46% of the budget that delivers garbage is pointless. We'd be better off saving those tax dollars or using it to curb inflation by not having to print so much damn money.
A major problem with how we view welfare is we think entitlement programs are the answer instead of reduction toward the cost of living.
To a large part of the population they rely on Medicare, just because you are one that doesn't need it does not minimize the value it has for many. I know, you are supremely talented, disciplined and business savvy that you could do better. Says the people on the Baylor Message Board. We are talking public policy, not your portfolio. The middle class, working class and working poor rely on these garage programs. Twirl some more $100 a bottle Scotch and tell us how we should cut SS and Medicare.
Same here. It needs to funded properly and not raided. Same with SS and Highway Trust Fund. Needs dedicated funding.
I truly believe if people know what they are finding, get good service and the funding is tied to service they will not have a problem with tax. I am a huge fan of dedicated funding and user fees.
I am not a fan of General Revenue and discretionary spending.
Social security is a joke with a terrible return for the majority of people and has become an incentive for huge numbers of people to not save a dollar for retirement.
70%+ of government spending comes from SS, Medicare, servicing the debt and defense. Unless significant reductions are made in those, nothing else will matter.
The debt is the problem, not the couple of social programs that the majority of Americans count on in old age. You cut those programs, you are hurting alot of people, mostly working class people.
I am all for fiscal conservatism, but it can't be at the expense the elderly.
I know you and the others were born poor, never took a vacation, lived in a shack for 49 years, paid for Baylor with returnable bottles and if you can do it everyone can do it. Great, yay you. You are a Financial God looking down at the stupid poor who brought it down on themselves by getting cable r a phone when they can't afford it. Pat yourself on the back your special. I get it.
Slash defense, increase corporate taxes, buy you can't do it on the back of the fixed income elderly and elderly medical care. SS and Medicare are relied on by too many to target that as the answer. How about raising capital gains...
Jesus you certainly are not for fiscal conservatism. Or math. Or responsibility.
SS should at the bare minimum be raised to age 70. Life expectancy has increased. People are spending 15 years plus drawing SS checks now. I'll split the difference with you and erase the cap on SS contributions.
SS is an outdated idea that will crash and burn in its current iteration. Shaking your hand at me about being a "financial god" won't change that fact.
SS was never intended to be "the" answer to compete with pensions. It was a safety net, in case. You want to raise it to 70 due to changes in life expectancy. No issues here. You want to raise the amount contributed, no issues. Do away with it or reduce it during in a 7%CPI environment? No way, too many will be hurt. That type of change is a 30 to 50 year phased change.
Fiscal conservatism is not cutting everything to the bone, low bid wins, and all the other reduce costs schemes we see. Too many come in cut the hell out of everything, with no regard for function or ability to provide services, then turn that into a bigger job on the back of "I cut cost by 22%, what an effective manager I am" logic. Leaving a non-functioning unit that can't do the job and is a shell of what it should be.
So sorry, I have heard and seen too much of your brand of fiscal conservatism at cities around the nation. Transit agencies that can't provide service, highway departments that can't resurface roads, all in the name of what you people consider fiscal conservatism when you never have to provide a damn thing, just complain and tell them what lazy Govt workers they are when in reality you have no idea what it costs to provide services. Just continue to ***** you don't want to pay and know better
Confiscating 13 percent of everyone's income up to whatever the current limits are is not good "safety net." It is and has been a financial disaster for individual Americans and their families since it was created.
Tell that to the fixed income part of our Nation. We have a huge population of fixed income in Florida. You guys whose biggest concern is calling Schwab to check rates spout the strict fiscal conservative at all costs policies and these people pay the price. A 4% decrease is real dollars to these people. I know they are not the "winners" the Baylor MBA people are, they just served your meals and maintained you lawns. Should have made better decisions, right. Give up cable. Not buy a cup of coffee or have a phone. Right
It's funny the math people like this point to while completely ignoring the debacle financially they explicitly and full throatedly vote for overwhelmingly
They hatewe $1.69'gasoljne
They hated a fast food mean for $5
They hated a $300,000 house that was affordable with a reasonable mortgage
They hated college tuition that wasn't over $100 / hour
They voted Democrat and destroyed all the above and so much more
And then complain about what they themselves forced in everyone else through their own willful ignorance
They then move to Texas or Florida to "escape" the hell holes they've created pooped and sat in
It's amazing. Democrats.
Who the hell voted Democrat? SS is a success, Medicare is a success. Compared to what was in place before, they are serving the intended purpose. Medicare is in trouble because of price gouging corporations and doctors. Not the 78 year old former butcher on a fixed income who added HBO last month that pushes his budget. Irresponsible fool .
SS is and has always been pay as you go. Do a little research on its funding, it has shallow points and then rebounds. Always will. It goes through a slim period and rebounds as next generations pay in. Only way to kill it is to not pay. I am sure you and broker are trying how to save that small amount as you ride Teachers Union retirement based hedge funds.
You guys throw out lines that anyone can be a millionaire on a rich boys College message board. I would venture that less than 1% of BU actually ever went to bed hungry or relied on a public service. Hardship at BU is cable is out. Or have to drink well brand whiskey. Yet you want to balance the budget on the backs and medical treatment of fixed income elderly. What a guy.
Drives me nuts when people who never provided a public service or infrastructure think they are experts because they ran a real estate office or Company. It is not the same and shouldn't be.Even worse as you and your cronies play every rule in the book to avoid taxes, jack up prices to record profits and ridiculous bonuses, blame the two programs that actually help people as the cause of the economic mess. You guys play your role... Try building a road, you are the first one jacking up Right of Way cost to get yours
I've gone through struggles financially and otherwise that you couldn't fathom.
If you invest $250 a month for 40 years, you would have more than $1.2M at an 9% interest rate. The average American making $50k is sending $250 to the government for SS every month. And they have to work 40 years to get it as well.
Sorry if you made some bad financial decisions and are bitter about it.
We are not talking investment strategy. I am not bitter, I am literally sitting in Kona drinking Margaritas eating Calamari.
We are talking public policy, which is not as straight forward as investments.
Getting a long term return for individuals for investing a significant portion of their earnings is better public policy than a flat tax coupled with a welfare program.
D. C. Bear said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:Fre3dombear said:RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:EatMoreSalmon said:Medicare is expected to go under in the not so distant future. My own retirement will be affected, and I'm not retired yet. It will most definitely have to be scaled back or funded more (higher payroll tax). Third option would be to redo the system, which won't happen unless dire circumstances force the issue.RMF5630 said:Doc Holliday said:Social security and Medicare are garbage.RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:Forest Bueller_bf said:Of all the things that should be cut, why would we cut the one thing that we actually have to pay for.Jack Bauer said:
Everyone is for spending cuts up to the point it impacts them.
I am convinced that SS/Medicare will NEVER EVER get cut due to scare tactics and that seniors get out to vote.
If they will lump sum me the over $400,000 that myself and employer have had to pay into these the last 40 years, if they will also accounting for inflation and a modest 5% interest return, I will take that $2.2 million dollar check and call it even.
There is no difference in money paid to Social Security and Medicare and money paid in income taxes, and we also actually have to pay income taxes. Social Security is simply a flat tax on income (up to a certain amount) and a welfare program.
Why pick the programs the vast majority of Americans have no problem with the Govt providing?
How about raising the taxes to Eisenhower levels, problem solved. The financially well off can continue to crow about how financially disciplined they are, progressives get Govt programs and actual working class workers who irresponsibly took their kids on a vacation can live their lives. All the whole touting the fiscally conservative virtues of Ike. What is more American than that?
When the social security program started the ratio between worker and retiree was 159 workers to 1 retiree. Today the ratio is 2.8 workers to 1 retiree.
It's spending more than its bringing in. Either the government will have to pay us less or raise taxes...maybe both. Even if it was an efficient entitlement program, it would still fail because it doesn't deliver enough money to support retirement. It will deliver poverty to those that solely rely on it.
An entitlement/welfare program costing 46% of the budget that delivers garbage is pointless. We'd be better off saving those tax dollars or using it to curb inflation by not having to print so much damn money.
A major problem with how we view welfare is we think entitlement programs are the answer instead of reduction toward the cost of living.
To a large part of the population they rely on Medicare, just because you are one that doesn't need it does not minimize the value it has for many. I know, you are supremely talented, disciplined and business savvy that you could do better. Says the people on the Baylor Message Board. We are talking public policy, not your portfolio. The middle class, working class and working poor rely on these garage programs. Twirl some more $100 a bottle Scotch and tell us how we should cut SS and Medicare.
Same here. It needs to funded properly and not raided. Same with SS and Highway Trust Fund. Needs dedicated funding.
I truly believe if people know what they are finding, get good service and the funding is tied to service they will not have a problem with tax. I am a huge fan of dedicated funding and user fees.
I am not a fan of General Revenue and discretionary spending.
Social security is a joke with a terrible return for the majority of people and has become an incentive for huge numbers of people to not save a dollar for retirement.
70%+ of government spending comes from SS, Medicare, servicing the debt and defense. Unless significant reductions are made in those, nothing else will matter.
The debt is the problem, not the couple of social programs that the majority of Americans count on in old age. You cut those programs, you are hurting alot of people, mostly working class people.
I am all for fiscal conservatism, but it can't be at the expense the elderly.
I know you and the others were born poor, never took a vacation, lived in a shack for 49 years, paid for Baylor with returnable bottles and if you can do it everyone can do it. Great, yay you. You are a Financial God looking down at the stupid poor who brought it down on themselves by getting cable r a phone when they can't afford it. Pat yourself on the back your special. I get it.
Slash defense, increase corporate taxes, buy you can't do it on the back of the fixed income elderly and elderly medical care. SS and Medicare are relied on by too many to target that as the answer. How about raising capital gains...
Jesus you certainly are not for fiscal conservatism. Or math. Or responsibility.
SS should at the bare minimum be raised to age 70. Life expectancy has increased. People are spending 15 years plus drawing SS checks now. I'll split the difference with you and erase the cap on SS contributions.
SS is an outdated idea that will crash and burn in its current iteration. Shaking your hand at me about being a "financial god" won't change that fact.
SS was never intended to be "the" answer to compete with pensions. It was a safety net, in case. You want to raise it to 70 due to changes in life expectancy. No issues here. You want to raise the amount contributed, no issues. Do away with it or reduce it during in a 7%CPI environment? No way, too many will be hurt. That type of change is a 30 to 50 year phased change.
Fiscal conservatism is not cutting everything to the bone, low bid wins, and all the other reduce costs schemes we see. Too many come in cut the hell out of everything, with no regard for function or ability to provide services, then turn that into a bigger job on the back of "I cut cost by 22%, what an effective manager I am" logic. Leaving a non-functioning unit that can't do the job and is a shell of what it should be.
So sorry, I have heard and seen too much of your brand of fiscal conservatism at cities around the nation. Transit agencies that can't provide service, highway departments that can't resurface roads, all in the name of what you people consider fiscal conservatism when you never have to provide a damn thing, just complain and tell them what lazy Govt workers they are when in reality you have no idea what it costs to provide services. Just continue to ***** you don't want to pay and know better
Confiscating 13 percent of everyone's income up to whatever the current limits are is not good "safety net." It is and has been a financial disaster for individual Americans and their families since it was created.
Tell that to the fixed income part of our Nation. We have a huge population of fixed income in Florida. You guys whose biggest concern is calling Schwab to check rates spout the strict fiscal conservative at all costs policies and these people pay the price. A 4% decrease is real dollars to these people. I know they are not the "winners" the Baylor MBA people are, they just served your meals and maintained you lawns. Should have made better decisions, right. Give up cable. Not buy a cup of coffee or have a phone. Right
It's funny the math people like this point to while completely ignoring the debacle financially they explicitly and full throatedly vote for overwhelmingly
They hatewe $1.69'gasoljne
They hated a fast food mean for $5
They hated a $300,000 house that was affordable with a reasonable mortgage
They hated college tuition that wasn't over $100 / hour
They voted Democrat and destroyed all the above and so much more
And then complain about what they themselves forced in everyone else through their own willful ignorance
They then move to Texas or Florida to "escape" the hell holes they've created pooped and sat in
It's amazing. Democrats.
Who the hell voted Democrat? SS is a success, Medicare is a success. Compared to what was in place before, they are serving the intended purpose. Medicare is in trouble because of price gouging corporations and doctors. Not the 78 year old former butcher on a fixed income who added HBO last month that pushes his budget. Irresponsible fool .
SS is and has always been pay as you go. Do a little research on its funding, it has shallow points and then rebounds. Always will. It goes through a slim period and rebounds as next generations pay in. Only way to kill it is to not pay. I am sure you and broker are trying how to save that small amount as you ride Teachers Union retirement based hedge funds.
You guys throw out lines that anyone can be a millionaire on a rich boys College message board. I would venture that less than 1% of BU actually ever went to bed hungry or relied on a public service. Hardship at BU is cable is out. Or have to drink well brand whiskey. Yet you want to balance the budget on the backs and medical treatment of fixed income elderly. What a guy.
Drives me nuts when people who never provided a public service or infrastructure think they are experts because they ran a real estate office or Company. It is not the same and shouldn't be.Even worse as you and your cronies play every rule in the book to avoid taxes, jack up prices to record profits and ridiculous bonuses, blame the two programs that actually help people as the cause of the economic mess. You guys play your role... Try building a road, you are the first one jacking up Right of Way cost to get yours
I've gone through struggles financially and otherwise that you couldn't fathom.
If you invest $250 a month for 40 years, you would have more than $1.2M at an 9% interest rate. The average American making $50k is sending $250 to the government for SS every month. And they have to work 40 years to get it as well.
Sorry if you made some bad financial decisions and are bitter about it.
We are not talking investment strategy. I am not bitter, I am literally sitting in Kona drinking Margaritas eating Calamari.
We are talking public policy, which is not as straight forward as investments.
Getting a long term return for individuals for investing a significant portion of their earnings is better public policy than a flat tax coupled with a welfare program.
How do you implement it, manage it and won't the size of Govt grow even more? The other thing is tying SS to stock market and impact that amount of investment will have on markets, talk about being able to influence returns!
Personally, in theory I like the idea and feel about it the same as school choice vouchers, the more control a person has the better. In practice will it become another Student Loan bureaucracy?
RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:Fre3dombear said:RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:EatMoreSalmon said:Medicare is expected to go under in the not so distant future. My own retirement will be affected, and I'm not retired yet. It will most definitely have to be scaled back or funded more (higher payroll tax). Third option would be to redo the system, which won't happen unless dire circumstances force the issue.RMF5630 said:Doc Holliday said:Social security and Medicare are garbage.RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:Forest Bueller_bf said:Of all the things that should be cut, why would we cut the one thing that we actually have to pay for.Jack Bauer said:
Everyone is for spending cuts up to the point it impacts them.
I am convinced that SS/Medicare will NEVER EVER get cut due to scare tactics and that seniors get out to vote.
If they will lump sum me the over $400,000 that myself and employer have had to pay into these the last 40 years, if they will also accounting for inflation and a modest 5% interest return, I will take that $2.2 million dollar check and call it even.
There is no difference in money paid to Social Security and Medicare and money paid in income taxes, and we also actually have to pay income taxes. Social Security is simply a flat tax on income (up to a certain amount) and a welfare program.
Why pick the programs the vast majority of Americans have no problem with the Govt providing?
How about raising the taxes to Eisenhower levels, problem solved. The financially well off can continue to crow about how financially disciplined they are, progressives get Govt programs and actual working class workers who irresponsibly took their kids on a vacation can live their lives. All the whole touting the fiscally conservative virtues of Ike. What is more American than that?
When the social security program started the ratio between worker and retiree was 159 workers to 1 retiree. Today the ratio is 2.8 workers to 1 retiree.
It's spending more than its bringing in. Either the government will have to pay us less or raise taxes...maybe both. Even if it was an efficient entitlement program, it would still fail because it doesn't deliver enough money to support retirement. It will deliver poverty to those that solely rely on it.
An entitlement/welfare program costing 46% of the budget that delivers garbage is pointless. We'd be better off saving those tax dollars or using it to curb inflation by not having to print so much damn money.
A major problem with how we view welfare is we think entitlement programs are the answer instead of reduction toward the cost of living.
To a large part of the population they rely on Medicare, just because you are one that doesn't need it does not minimize the value it has for many. I know, you are supremely talented, disciplined and business savvy that you could do better. Says the people on the Baylor Message Board. We are talking public policy, not your portfolio. The middle class, working class and working poor rely on these garage programs. Twirl some more $100 a bottle Scotch and tell us how we should cut SS and Medicare.
Same here. It needs to funded properly and not raided. Same with SS and Highway Trust Fund. Needs dedicated funding.
I truly believe if people know what they are finding, get good service and the funding is tied to service they will not have a problem with tax. I am a huge fan of dedicated funding and user fees.
I am not a fan of General Revenue and discretionary spending.
Social security is a joke with a terrible return for the majority of people and has become an incentive for huge numbers of people to not save a dollar for retirement.
70%+ of government spending comes from SS, Medicare, servicing the debt and defense. Unless significant reductions are made in those, nothing else will matter.
The debt is the problem, not the couple of social programs that the majority of Americans count on in old age. You cut those programs, you are hurting alot of people, mostly working class people.
I am all for fiscal conservatism, but it can't be at the expense the elderly.
I know you and the others were born poor, never took a vacation, lived in a shack for 49 years, paid for Baylor with returnable bottles and if you can do it everyone can do it. Great, yay you. You are a Financial God looking down at the stupid poor who brought it down on themselves by getting cable r a phone when they can't afford it. Pat yourself on the back your special. I get it.
Slash defense, increase corporate taxes, buy you can't do it on the back of the fixed income elderly and elderly medical care. SS and Medicare are relied on by too many to target that as the answer. How about raising capital gains...
Jesus you certainly are not for fiscal conservatism. Or math. Or responsibility.
SS should at the bare minimum be raised to age 70. Life expectancy has increased. People are spending 15 years plus drawing SS checks now. I'll split the difference with you and erase the cap on SS contributions.
SS is an outdated idea that will crash and burn in its current iteration. Shaking your hand at me about being a "financial god" won't change that fact.
SS was never intended to be "the" answer to compete with pensions. It was a safety net, in case. You want to raise it to 70 due to changes in life expectancy. No issues here. You want to raise the amount contributed, no issues. Do away with it or reduce it during in a 7%CPI environment? No way, too many will be hurt. That type of change is a 30 to 50 year phased change.
Fiscal conservatism is not cutting everything to the bone, low bid wins, and all the other reduce costs schemes we see. Too many come in cut the hell out of everything, with no regard for function or ability to provide services, then turn that into a bigger job on the back of "I cut cost by 22%, what an effective manager I am" logic. Leaving a non-functioning unit that can't do the job and is a shell of what it should be.
So sorry, I have heard and seen too much of your brand of fiscal conservatism at cities around the nation. Transit agencies that can't provide service, highway departments that can't resurface roads, all in the name of what you people consider fiscal conservatism when you never have to provide a damn thing, just complain and tell them what lazy Govt workers they are when in reality you have no idea what it costs to provide services. Just continue to ***** you don't want to pay and know better
Confiscating 13 percent of everyone's income up to whatever the current limits are is not good "safety net." It is and has been a financial disaster for individual Americans and their families since it was created.
Tell that to the fixed income part of our Nation. We have a huge population of fixed income in Florida. You guys whose biggest concern is calling Schwab to check rates spout the strict fiscal conservative at all costs policies and these people pay the price. A 4% decrease is real dollars to these people. I know they are not the "winners" the Baylor MBA people are, they just served your meals and maintained you lawns. Should have made better decisions, right. Give up cable. Not buy a cup of coffee or have a phone. Right
It's funny the math people like this point to while completely ignoring the debacle financially they explicitly and full throatedly vote for overwhelmingly
They hatewe $1.69'gasoljne
They hated a fast food mean for $5
They hated a $300,000 house that was affordable with a reasonable mortgage
They hated college tuition that wasn't over $100 / hour
They voted Democrat and destroyed all the above and so much more
And then complain about what they themselves forced in everyone else through their own willful ignorance
They then move to Texas or Florida to "escape" the hell holes they've created pooped and sat in
It's amazing. Democrats.
Who the hell voted Democrat? SS is a success, Medicare is a success. Compared to what was in place before, they are serving the intended purpose. Medicare is in trouble because of price gouging corporations and doctors. Not the 78 year old former butcher on a fixed income who added HBO last month that pushes his budget. Irresponsible fool .
SS is and has always been pay as you go. Do a little research on its funding, it has shallow points and then rebounds. Always will. It goes through a slim period and rebounds as next generations pay in. Only way to kill it is to not pay. I am sure you and broker are trying how to save that small amount as you ride Teachers Union retirement based hedge funds.
You guys throw out lines that anyone can be a millionaire on a rich boys College message board. I would venture that less than 1% of BU actually ever went to bed hungry or relied on a public service. Hardship at BU is cable is out. Or have to drink well brand whiskey. Yet you want to balance the budget on the backs and medical treatment of fixed income elderly. What a guy.
Drives me nuts when people who never provided a public service or infrastructure think they are experts because they ran a real estate office or Company. It is not the same and shouldn't be.Even worse as you and your cronies play every rule in the book to avoid taxes, jack up prices to record profits and ridiculous bonuses, blame the two programs that actually help people as the cause of the economic mess. You guys play your role... Try building a road, you are the first one jacking up Right of Way cost to get yours
I've gone through struggles financially and otherwise that you couldn't fathom.
If you invest $250 a month for 40 years, you would have more than $1.2M at an 9% interest rate. The average American making $50k is sending $250 to the government for SS every month. And they have to work 40 years to get it as well.
Sorry if you made some bad financial decisions and are bitter about it.
We are not talking investment strategy. I am not bitter, I am literally sitting in Kona drinking Margaritas eating Calamari.
We are talking public policy, which is not as straight forward as investments.
Getting a long term return for individuals for investing a significant portion of their earnings is better public policy than a flat tax coupled with a welfare program.
How do you implement it, manage it and won't the size of Govt grow even more? The other thing is tying SS to stock market and impact that amount of investment will have on markets, talk about being able to influence returns!
Personally, in theory I like the idea and feel about it the same as school choice vouchers, the more control a person has the better. In practice will it become another Student Loan bureaucracy?
We have 401Ks and IRAs so the infrastructure already exists to manage individual accounts. It will not increase the "size of government" to eliminate most of the 60,000 jobs that work to administer the system currently.
401Ks and IRA's are already tied to the stock market. This is no different, it just makes it where people who make less money are able to, and, frankly, forced to, participate in making their own future and that of their children and grandchildren, much more secure. Had we started this process 40 or 50 years ago, we would be in a much better place, but it is not to late to do the right thing.
There is a bipartisan solution. Unfortunately, it is a political suicide pill for both sides. Modest controls on Medicare, Raise the retirement age for Social Security one year, plus a return to 2016 individual and family tax rates, and a 2-3 point increase in the corporate rate, gets you pretty much all the way to balanced budget. Not happening though. Likely they do the continuing resolution to kick the can down the road another few months.Guy Noir said:
The raising of the USA Debt Limit has become a common activity the last several years such that it is no big deal to many Americans. Every dollar borrowed weakens the economic base of the US dollar just a little more.
If one assumes that thee USA will pay 2% interest on this debt, then at $30 trillion (rough current debt level) is $600 million. If the debt goes up to $50 trillion (this is forecast for the next 10-17 years) then we will be paying $1 trillion a year in interest payments. The USA will not be able to function very well when debt service is this high.
We need to cut federal spending and attempt to pay down the debt to $25 trillion to be able keep fiscal control of our country's business. Domestic spending vs defense spending will continue, but both will need to be cut in the future.
“No eye has seen, no ear has heard, and no mind has imagined what God has prepared for those who love Him.” 1 Corinthians 2:9
As I said, I am all for providing options for people to manage their lives.D. C. Bear said:RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:Fre3dombear said:RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:EatMoreSalmon said:Medicare is expected to go under in the not so distant future. My own retirement will be affected, and I'm not retired yet. It will most definitely have to be scaled back or funded more (higher payroll tax). Third option would be to redo the system, which won't happen unless dire circumstances force the issue.RMF5630 said:Doc Holliday said:Social security and Medicare are garbage.RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:Forest Bueller_bf said:Of all the things that should be cut, why would we cut the one thing that we actually have to pay for.Jack Bauer said:
Everyone is for spending cuts up to the point it impacts them.
I am convinced that SS/Medicare will NEVER EVER get cut due to scare tactics and that seniors get out to vote.
If they will lump sum me the over $400,000 that myself and employer have had to pay into these the last 40 years, if they will also accounting for inflation and a modest 5% interest return, I will take that $2.2 million dollar check and call it even.
There is no difference in money paid to Social Security and Medicare and money paid in income taxes, and we also actually have to pay income taxes. Social Security is simply a flat tax on income (up to a certain amount) and a welfare program.
Why pick the programs the vast majority of Americans have no problem with the Govt providing?
How about raising the taxes to Eisenhower levels, problem solved. The financially well off can continue to crow about how financially disciplined they are, progressives get Govt programs and actual working class workers who irresponsibly took their kids on a vacation can live their lives. All the whole touting the fiscally conservative virtues of Ike. What is more American than that?
When the social security program started the ratio between worker and retiree was 159 workers to 1 retiree. Today the ratio is 2.8 workers to 1 retiree.
It's spending more than its bringing in. Either the government will have to pay us less or raise taxes...maybe both. Even if it was an efficient entitlement program, it would still fail because it doesn't deliver enough money to support retirement. It will deliver poverty to those that solely rely on it.
An entitlement/welfare program costing 46% of the budget that delivers garbage is pointless. We'd be better off saving those tax dollars or using it to curb inflation by not having to print so much damn money.
A major problem with how we view welfare is we think entitlement programs are the answer instead of reduction toward the cost of living.
To a large part of the population they rely on Medicare, just because you are one that doesn't need it does not minimize the value it has for many. I know, you are supremely talented, disciplined and business savvy that you could do better. Says the people on the Baylor Message Board. We are talking public policy, not your portfolio. The middle class, working class and working poor rely on these garage programs. Twirl some more $100 a bottle Scotch and tell us how we should cut SS and Medicare.
Same here. It needs to funded properly and not raided. Same with SS and Highway Trust Fund. Needs dedicated funding.
I truly believe if people know what they are finding, get good service and the funding is tied to service they will not have a problem with tax. I am a huge fan of dedicated funding and user fees.
I am not a fan of General Revenue and discretionary spending.
Social security is a joke with a terrible return for the majority of people and has become an incentive for huge numbers of people to not save a dollar for retirement.
70%+ of government spending comes from SS, Medicare, servicing the debt and defense. Unless significant reductions are made in those, nothing else will matter.
The debt is the problem, not the couple of social programs that the majority of Americans count on in old age. You cut those programs, you are hurting alot of people, mostly working class people.
I am all for fiscal conservatism, but it can't be at the expense the elderly.
I know you and the others were born poor, never took a vacation, lived in a shack for 49 years, paid for Baylor with returnable bottles and if you can do it everyone can do it. Great, yay you. You are a Financial God looking down at the stupid poor who brought it down on themselves by getting cable r a phone when they can't afford it. Pat yourself on the back your special. I get it.
Slash defense, increase corporate taxes, buy you can't do it on the back of the fixed income elderly and elderly medical care. SS and Medicare are relied on by too many to target that as the answer. How about raising capital gains...
Jesus you certainly are not for fiscal conservatism. Or math. Or responsibility.
SS should at the bare minimum be raised to age 70. Life expectancy has increased. People are spending 15 years plus drawing SS checks now. I'll split the difference with you and erase the cap on SS contributions.
SS is an outdated idea that will crash and burn in its current iteration. Shaking your hand at me about being a "financial god" won't change that fact.
SS was never intended to be "the" answer to compete with pensions. It was a safety net, in case. You want to raise it to 70 due to changes in life expectancy. No issues here. You want to raise the amount contributed, no issues. Do away with it or reduce it during in a 7%CPI environment? No way, too many will be hurt. That type of change is a 30 to 50 year phased change.
Fiscal conservatism is not cutting everything to the bone, low bid wins, and all the other reduce costs schemes we see. Too many come in cut the hell out of everything, with no regard for function or ability to provide services, then turn that into a bigger job on the back of "I cut cost by 22%, what an effective manager I am" logic. Leaving a non-functioning unit that can't do the job and is a shell of what it should be.
So sorry, I have heard and seen too much of your brand of fiscal conservatism at cities around the nation. Transit agencies that can't provide service, highway departments that can't resurface roads, all in the name of what you people consider fiscal conservatism when you never have to provide a damn thing, just complain and tell them what lazy Govt workers they are when in reality you have no idea what it costs to provide services. Just continue to ***** you don't want to pay and know better
Confiscating 13 percent of everyone's income up to whatever the current limits are is not good "safety net." It is and has been a financial disaster for individual Americans and their families since it was created.
Tell that to the fixed income part of our Nation. We have a huge population of fixed income in Florida. You guys whose biggest concern is calling Schwab to check rates spout the strict fiscal conservative at all costs policies and these people pay the price. A 4% decrease is real dollars to these people. I know they are not the "winners" the Baylor MBA people are, they just served your meals and maintained you lawns. Should have made better decisions, right. Give up cable. Not buy a cup of coffee or have a phone. Right
It's funny the math people like this point to while completely ignoring the debacle financially they explicitly and full throatedly vote for overwhelmingly
They hatewe $1.69'gasoljne
They hated a fast food mean for $5
They hated a $300,000 house that was affordable with a reasonable mortgage
They hated college tuition that wasn't over $100 / hour
They voted Democrat and destroyed all the above and so much more
And then complain about what they themselves forced in everyone else through their own willful ignorance
They then move to Texas or Florida to "escape" the hell holes they've created pooped and sat in
It's amazing. Democrats.
Who the hell voted Democrat? SS is a success, Medicare is a success. Compared to what was in place before, they are serving the intended purpose. Medicare is in trouble because of price gouging corporations and doctors. Not the 78 year old former butcher on a fixed income who added HBO last month that pushes his budget. Irresponsible fool .
SS is and has always been pay as you go. Do a little research on its funding, it has shallow points and then rebounds. Always will. It goes through a slim period and rebounds as next generations pay in. Only way to kill it is to not pay. I am sure you and broker are trying how to save that small amount as you ride Teachers Union retirement based hedge funds.
You guys throw out lines that anyone can be a millionaire on a rich boys College message board. I would venture that less than 1% of BU actually ever went to bed hungry or relied on a public service. Hardship at BU is cable is out. Or have to drink well brand whiskey. Yet you want to balance the budget on the backs and medical treatment of fixed income elderly. What a guy.
Drives me nuts when people who never provided a public service or infrastructure think they are experts because they ran a real estate office or Company. It is not the same and shouldn't be.Even worse as you and your cronies play every rule in the book to avoid taxes, jack up prices to record profits and ridiculous bonuses, blame the two programs that actually help people as the cause of the economic mess. You guys play your role... Try building a road, you are the first one jacking up Right of Way cost to get yours
I've gone through struggles financially and otherwise that you couldn't fathom.
If you invest $250 a month for 40 years, you would have more than $1.2M at an 9% interest rate. The average American making $50k is sending $250 to the government for SS every month. And they have to work 40 years to get it as well.
Sorry if you made some bad financial decisions and are bitter about it.
We are not talking investment strategy. I am not bitter, I am literally sitting in Kona drinking Margaritas eating Calamari.
We are talking public policy, which is not as straight forward as investments.
Getting a long term return for individuals for investing a significant portion of their earnings is better public policy than a flat tax coupled with a welfare program.
How do you implement it, manage it and won't the size of Govt grow even more? The other thing is tying SS to stock market and impact that amount of investment will have on markets, talk about being able to influence returns!
Personally, in theory I like the idea and feel about it the same as school choice vouchers, the more control a person has the better. In practice will it become another Student Loan bureaucracy?
We have 401Ks and IRAs so the infrastructure already exists to manage individual accounts. It will not increase the "size of government" to eliminate most of the 60,000 jobs that work to administer the system currently.
401Ks and IRA's are already tied to the stock market. This is no different, it just makes it where people who make less money are able to, and, frankly, forced to, participate in making their own future and that of their children and grandchildren, much more secure. Had we started this process 40 or 50 years ago, we would be in a much better place, but it is not to late to do the right thing.
As for eliminating Govt jobs, this isn't eliminating anything. It would transfer the management from a Govt managed Agency to 200k contractors! As a Finance Professional, I can see you wanting it shifted to the "private sector", you will be the one getting the Govt check. Let's not act like it is cutting anything, the cost to manage will be just as high with much more difficult oversight. Just like defense contractors, medical, transportation, and finance lining up at the govt trough is not going away.
I do love Fiscal Conservatives, get rid of Govt Agencies and let me do it for a price... Like the "private sector" finance professionals will do it for free to keep the cost of Govt down, right?
I care about the debt. I believe we have tipped and there is no going back. Compounding interest is impossible now. I see nothing but trillion dollar deficits far into the future. Neither party will or can do anything.RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:Fre3dombear said:RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:EatMoreSalmon said:Medicare is expected to go under in the not so distant future. My own retirement will be affected, and I'm not retired yet. It will most definitely have to be scaled back or funded more (higher payroll tax). Third option would be to redo the system, which won't happen unless dire circumstances force the issue.RMF5630 said:Doc Holliday said:Social security and Medicare are garbage.RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:Forest Bueller_bf said:Of all the things that should be cut, why would we cut the one thing that we actually have to pay for.Jack Bauer said:
Everyone is for spending cuts up to the point it impacts them.
I am convinced that SS/Medicare will NEVER EVER get cut due to scare tactics and that seniors get out to vote.
If they will lump sum me the over $400,000 that myself and employer have had to pay into these the last 40 years, if they will also accounting for inflation and a modest 5% interest return, I will take that $2.2 million dollar check and call it even.
There is no difference in money paid to Social Security and Medicare and money paid in income taxes, and we also actually have to pay income taxes. Social Security is simply a flat tax on income (up to a certain amount) and a welfare program.
Why pick the programs the vast majority of Americans have no problem with the Govt providing?
How about raising the taxes to Eisenhower levels, problem solved. The financially well off can continue to crow about how financially disciplined they are, progressives get Govt programs and actual working class workers who irresponsibly took their kids on a vacation can live their lives. All the whole touting the fiscally conservative virtues of Ike. What is more American than that?
When the social security program started the ratio between worker and retiree was 159 workers to 1 retiree. Today the ratio is 2.8 workers to 1 retiree.
It's spending more than its bringing in. Either the government will have to pay us less or raise taxes...maybe both. Even if it was an efficient entitlement program, it would still fail because it doesn't deliver enough money to support retirement. It will deliver poverty to those that solely rely on it.
An entitlement/welfare program costing 46% of the budget that delivers garbage is pointless. We'd be better off saving those tax dollars or using it to curb inflation by not having to print so much damn money.
A major problem with how we view welfare is we think entitlement programs are the answer instead of reduction toward the cost of living.
To a large part of the population they rely on Medicare, just because you are one that doesn't need it does not minimize the value it has for many. I know, you are supremely talented, disciplined and business savvy that you could do better. Says the people on the Baylor Message Board. We are talking public policy, not your portfolio. The middle class, working class and working poor rely on these garage programs. Twirl some more $100 a bottle Scotch and tell us how we should cut SS and Medicare.
Same here. It needs to funded properly and not raided. Same with SS and Highway Trust Fund. Needs dedicated funding.
I truly believe if people know what they are finding, get good service and the funding is tied to service they will not have a problem with tax. I am a huge fan of dedicated funding and user fees.
I am not a fan of General Revenue and discretionary spending.
Social security is a joke with a terrible return for the majority of people and has become an incentive for huge numbers of people to not save a dollar for retirement.
70%+ of government spending comes from SS, Medicare, servicing the debt and defense. Unless significant reductions are made in those, nothing else will matter.
The debt is the problem, not the couple of social programs that the majority of Americans count on in old age. You cut those programs, you are hurting alot of people, mostly working class people.
I am all for fiscal conservatism, but it can't be at the expense the elderly.
I know you and the others were born poor, never took a vacation, lived in a shack for 49 years, paid for Baylor with returnable bottles and if you can do it everyone can do it. Great, yay you. You are a Financial God looking down at the stupid poor who brought it down on themselves by getting cable r a phone when they can't afford it. Pat yourself on the back your special. I get it.
Slash defense, increase corporate taxes, buy you can't do it on the back of the fixed income elderly and elderly medical care. SS and Medicare are relied on by too many to target that as the answer. How about raising capital gains...
Jesus you certainly are not for fiscal conservatism. Or math. Or responsibility.
SS should at the bare minimum be raised to age 70. Life expectancy has increased. People are spending 15 years plus drawing SS checks now. I'll split the difference with you and erase the cap on SS contributions.
SS is an outdated idea that will crash and burn in its current iteration. Shaking your hand at me about being a "financial god" won't change that fact.
SS was never intended to be "the" answer to compete with pensions. It was a safety net, in case. You want to raise it to 70 due to changes in life expectancy. No issues here. You want to raise the amount contributed, no issues. Do away with it or reduce it during in a 7%CPI environment? No way, too many will be hurt. That type of change is a 30 to 50 year phased change.
Fiscal conservatism is not cutting everything to the bone, low bid wins, and all the other reduce costs schemes we see. Too many come in cut the hell out of everything, with no regard for function or ability to provide services, then turn that into a bigger job on the back of "I cut cost by 22%, what an effective manager I am" logic. Leaving a non-functioning unit that can't do the job and is a shell of what it should be.
So sorry, I have heard and seen too much of your brand of fiscal conservatism at cities around the nation. Transit agencies that can't provide service, highway departments that can't resurface roads, all in the name of what you people consider fiscal conservatism when you never have to provide a damn thing, just complain and tell them what lazy Govt workers they are when in reality you have no idea what it costs to provide services. Just continue to ***** you don't want to pay and know better
Confiscating 13 percent of everyone's income up to whatever the current limits are is not good "safety net." It is and has been a financial disaster for individual Americans and their families since it was created.
Tell that to the fixed income part of our Nation. We have a huge population of fixed income in Florida. You guys whose biggest concern is calling Schwab to check rates spout the strict fiscal conservative at all costs policies and these people pay the price. A 4% decrease is real dollars to these people. I know they are not the "winners" the Baylor MBA people are, they just served your meals and maintained you lawns. Should have made better decisions, right. Give up cable. Not buy a cup of coffee or have a phone. Right
It's funny the math people like this point to while completely ignoring the debacle financially they explicitly and full throatedly vote for overwhelmingly
They hatewe $1.69'gasoljne
They hated a fast food mean for $5
They hated a $300,000 house that was affordable with a reasonable mortgage
They hated college tuition that wasn't over $100 / hour
They voted Democrat and destroyed all the above and so much more
And then complain about what they themselves forced in everyone else through their own willful ignorance
They then move to Texas or Florida to "escape" the hell holes they've created pooped and sat in
It's amazing. Democrats.
Who the hell voted Democrat? SS is a success, Medicare is a success. Compared to what was in place before, they are serving the intended purpose. Medicare is in trouble because of price gouging corporations and doctors. Not the 78 year old former butcher on a fixed income who added HBO last month that pushes his budget. Irresponsible fool .
SS is and has always been pay as you go. Do a little research on its funding, it has shallow points and then rebounds. Always will. It goes through a slim period and rebounds as next generations pay in. Only way to kill it is to not pay. I am sure you and broker are trying how to save that small amount as you ride Teachers Union retirement based hedge funds.
You guys throw out lines that anyone can be a millionaire on a rich boys College message board. I would venture that less than 1% of BU actually ever went to bed hungry or relied on a public service. Hardship at BU is cable is out. Or have to drink well brand whiskey. Yet you want to balance the budget on the backs and medical treatment of fixed income elderly. What a guy.
Drives me nuts when people who never provided a public service or infrastructure think they are experts because they ran a real estate office or Company. It is not the same and shouldn't be.Even worse as you and your cronies play every rule in the book to avoid taxes, jack up prices to record profits and ridiculous bonuses, blame the two programs that actually help people as the cause of the economic mess. You guys play your role... Try building a road, you are the first one jacking up Right of Way cost to get yours
I've gone through struggles financially and otherwise that you couldn't fathom.
If you invest $250 a month for 40 years, you would have more than $1.2M at an 9% interest rate. The average American making $50k is sending $250 to the government for SS every month. And they have to work 40 years to get it as well.
Sorry if you made some bad financial decisions and are bitter about it.
We are not talking investment strategy. I am not bitter, I am literally sitting in Kona drinking Margaritas eating Calamari.
We are talking public policy, which is not as straight forward as investments.
Getting a long term return for individuals for investing a significant portion of their earnings is better public policy than a flat tax coupled with a welfare program.
How do you implement it, manage it and won't the size of Govt grow even more? The other thing is tying SS to stock market and impact that amount of investment will have on markets, talk about being able to influence returns!
Personally, in theory I like the idea and feel about it the same as school choice vouchers, the more control a person has the better. In practice will it become another Student Loan bureaucracy?
We've tipped. We're into a Ponzi unit model.
Minsky model Progression
1. Hedge unit the investment is its own source of repayment
2. Speculative unit the investment only pays the interest on the loan (some rent property). Firm must get new loan (refinance) to pay all or part of the maturing loan.
3. Ponzi unit the only way to repay the debt is for the value of the investment to increase (housing bubble) or the amount borrowed to increase. To get the cash necessary the firm must increase its indebtedness, a non-sustainable pattern of finance. This requires a continuous injection of new money and works as long as withdrawals are less than the inflow of new money.
I don't disagree. Adding new money is the only way to pay it down, which with China in a similar position puts us in direct competition. This creates either a push for new money to be created or a Reaganish model where the deficit doesn't matter. I do agree that the interest is a huge problem, along with the cultural attitude of getting free money with no work being the goal. That to me is the bigger problem because without an attitude of constantly adding value to the Nation, we do not have the gumption to solve it.Osodecentx said:I care about the debt. I believe we have tipped and there is no going back. Compounding interest is impossible now. I see nothing but trillion dollar deficits far into the future. Neither party will or can do anything.RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:Fre3dombear said:RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:EatMoreSalmon said:Medicare is expected to go under in the not so distant future. My own retirement will be affected, and I'm not retired yet. It will most definitely have to be scaled back or funded more (higher payroll tax). Third option would be to redo the system, which won't happen unless dire circumstances force the issue.RMF5630 said:Doc Holliday said:Social security and Medicare are garbage.RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:Forest Bueller_bf said:Of all the things that should be cut, why would we cut the one thing that we actually have to pay for.Jack Bauer said:
Everyone is for spending cuts up to the point it impacts them.
I am convinced that SS/Medicare will NEVER EVER get cut due to scare tactics and that seniors get out to vote.
If they will lump sum me the over $400,000 that myself and employer have had to pay into these the last 40 years, if they will also accounting for inflation and a modest 5% interest return, I will take that $2.2 million dollar check and call it even.
There is no difference in money paid to Social Security and Medicare and money paid in income taxes, and we also actually have to pay income taxes. Social Security is simply a flat tax on income (up to a certain amount) and a welfare program.
Why pick the programs the vast majority of Americans have no problem with the Govt providing?
How about raising the taxes to Eisenhower levels, problem solved. The financially well off can continue to crow about how financially disciplined they are, progressives get Govt programs and actual working class workers who irresponsibly took their kids on a vacation can live their lives. All the whole touting the fiscally conservative virtues of Ike. What is more American than that?
When the social security program started the ratio between worker and retiree was 159 workers to 1 retiree. Today the ratio is 2.8 workers to 1 retiree.
It's spending more than its bringing in. Either the government will have to pay us less or raise taxes...maybe both. Even if it was an efficient entitlement program, it would still fail because it doesn't deliver enough money to support retirement. It will deliver poverty to those that solely rely on it.
An entitlement/welfare program costing 46% of the budget that delivers garbage is pointless. We'd be better off saving those tax dollars or using it to curb inflation by not having to print so much damn money.
A major problem with how we view welfare is we think entitlement programs are the answer instead of reduction toward the cost of living.
To a large part of the population they rely on Medicare, just because you are one that doesn't need it does not minimize the value it has for many. I know, you are supremely talented, disciplined and business savvy that you could do better. Says the people on the Baylor Message Board. We are talking public policy, not your portfolio. The middle class, working class and working poor rely on these garage programs. Twirl some more $100 a bottle Scotch and tell us how we should cut SS and Medicare.
Same here. It needs to funded properly and not raided. Same with SS and Highway Trust Fund. Needs dedicated funding.
I truly believe if people know what they are finding, get good service and the funding is tied to service they will not have a problem with tax. I am a huge fan of dedicated funding and user fees.
I am not a fan of General Revenue and discretionary spending.
Social security is a joke with a terrible return for the majority of people and has become an incentive for huge numbers of people to not save a dollar for retirement.
70%+ of government spending comes from SS, Medicare, servicing the debt and defense. Unless significant reductions are made in those, nothing else will matter.
The debt is the problem, not the couple of social programs that the majority of Americans count on in old age. You cut those programs, you are hurting alot of people, mostly working class people.
I am all for fiscal conservatism, but it can't be at the expense the elderly.
I know you and the others were born poor, never took a vacation, lived in a shack for 49 years, paid for Baylor with returnable bottles and if you can do it everyone can do it. Great, yay you. You are a Financial God looking down at the stupid poor who brought it down on themselves by getting cable r a phone when they can't afford it. Pat yourself on the back your special. I get it.
Slash defense, increase corporate taxes, buy you can't do it on the back of the fixed income elderly and elderly medical care. SS and Medicare are relied on by too many to target that as the answer. How about raising capital gains...
Jesus you certainly are not for fiscal conservatism. Or math. Or responsibility.
SS should at the bare minimum be raised to age 70. Life expectancy has increased. People are spending 15 years plus drawing SS checks now. I'll split the difference with you and erase the cap on SS contributions.
SS is an outdated idea that will crash and burn in its current iteration. Shaking your hand at me about being a "financial god" won't change that fact.
SS was never intended to be "the" answer to compete with pensions. It was a safety net, in case. You want to raise it to 70 due to changes in life expectancy. No issues here. You want to raise the amount contributed, no issues. Do away with it or reduce it during in a 7%CPI environment? No way, too many will be hurt. That type of change is a 30 to 50 year phased change.
Fiscal conservatism is not cutting everything to the bone, low bid wins, and all the other reduce costs schemes we see. Too many come in cut the hell out of everything, with no regard for function or ability to provide services, then turn that into a bigger job on the back of "I cut cost by 22%, what an effective manager I am" logic. Leaving a non-functioning unit that can't do the job and is a shell of what it should be.
So sorry, I have heard and seen too much of your brand of fiscal conservatism at cities around the nation. Transit agencies that can't provide service, highway departments that can't resurface roads, all in the name of what you people consider fiscal conservatism when you never have to provide a damn thing, just complain and tell them what lazy Govt workers they are when in reality you have no idea what it costs to provide services. Just continue to ***** you don't want to pay and know better
Confiscating 13 percent of everyone's income up to whatever the current limits are is not good "safety net." It is and has been a financial disaster for individual Americans and their families since it was created.
Tell that to the fixed income part of our Nation. We have a huge population of fixed income in Florida. You guys whose biggest concern is calling Schwab to check rates spout the strict fiscal conservative at all costs policies and these people pay the price. A 4% decrease is real dollars to these people. I know they are not the "winners" the Baylor MBA people are, they just served your meals and maintained you lawns. Should have made better decisions, right. Give up cable. Not buy a cup of coffee or have a phone. Right
It's funny the math people like this point to while completely ignoring the debacle financially they explicitly and full throatedly vote for overwhelmingly
They hatewe $1.69'gasoljne
They hated a fast food mean for $5
They hated a $300,000 house that was affordable with a reasonable mortgage
They hated college tuition that wasn't over $100 / hour
They voted Democrat and destroyed all the above and so much more
And then complain about what they themselves forced in everyone else through their own willful ignorance
They then move to Texas or Florida to "escape" the hell holes they've created pooped and sat in
It's amazing. Democrats.
Who the hell voted Democrat? SS is a success, Medicare is a success. Compared to what was in place before, they are serving the intended purpose. Medicare is in trouble because of price gouging corporations and doctors. Not the 78 year old former butcher on a fixed income who added HBO last month that pushes his budget. Irresponsible fool .
SS is and has always been pay as you go. Do a little research on its funding, it has shallow points and then rebounds. Always will. It goes through a slim period and rebounds as next generations pay in. Only way to kill it is to not pay. I am sure you and broker are trying how to save that small amount as you ride Teachers Union retirement based hedge funds.
You guys throw out lines that anyone can be a millionaire on a rich boys College message board. I would venture that less than 1% of BU actually ever went to bed hungry or relied on a public service. Hardship at BU is cable is out. Or have to drink well brand whiskey. Yet you want to balance the budget on the backs and medical treatment of fixed income elderly. What a guy.
Drives me nuts when people who never provided a public service or infrastructure think they are experts because they ran a real estate office or Company. It is not the same and shouldn't be.Even worse as you and your cronies play every rule in the book to avoid taxes, jack up prices to record profits and ridiculous bonuses, blame the two programs that actually help people as the cause of the economic mess. You guys play your role... Try building a road, you are the first one jacking up Right of Way cost to get yours
I've gone through struggles financially and otherwise that you couldn't fathom.
If you invest $250 a month for 40 years, you would have more than $1.2M at an 9% interest rate. The average American making $50k is sending $250 to the government for SS every month. And they have to work 40 years to get it as well.
Sorry if you made some bad financial decisions and are bitter about it.
We are not talking investment strategy. I am not bitter, I am literally sitting in Kona drinking Margaritas eating Calamari.
We are talking public policy, which is not as straight forward as investments.
Getting a long term return for individuals for investing a significant portion of their earnings is better public policy than a flat tax coupled with a welfare program.
How do you implement it, manage it and won't the size of Govt grow even more? The other thing is tying SS to stock market and impact that amount of investment will have on markets, talk about being able to influence returns!
Personally, in theory I like the idea and feel about it the same as school choice vouchers, the more control a person has the better. In practice will it become another Student Loan bureaucracy?
We've tipped. We're into a Ponzi unit model.
Minsky model Progression
1. Hedge unit the investment is its own source of repayment
2. Speculative unit the investment only pays the interest on the loan (some rent property). Firm must get new loan (refinance) to pay all or part of the maturing loan.
3. Ponzi unit the only way to repay the debt is for the value of the investment to increase (housing bubble) or the amount borrowed to increase. To get the cash necessary the firm must increase its indebtedness, a non-sustainable pattern of finance. This requires a continuous injection of new money and works as long as withdrawals are less than the inflow of new money.
RMF5630 said:As I said, I am all for providing options for people to manage their lives.D. C. Bear said:RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:Fre3dombear said:RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:BearTruth13 said:RMF5630 said:EatMoreSalmon said:Medicare is expected to go under in the not so distant future. My own retirement will be affected, and I'm not retired yet. It will most definitely have to be scaled back or funded more (higher payroll tax). Third option would be to redo the system, which won't happen unless dire circumstances force the issue.RMF5630 said:Doc Holliday said:Social security and Medicare are garbage.RMF5630 said:D. C. Bear said:Forest Bueller_bf said:Of all the things that should be cut, why would we cut the one thing that we actually have to pay for.Jack Bauer said:
Everyone is for spending cuts up to the point it impacts them.
I am convinced that SS/Medicare will NEVER EVER get cut due to scare tactics and that seniors get out to vote.
If they will lump sum me the over $400,000 that myself and employer have had to pay into these the last 40 years, if they will also accounting for inflation and a modest 5% interest return, I will take that $2.2 million dollar check and call it even.
There is no difference in money paid to Social Security and Medicare and money paid in income taxes, and we also actually have to pay income taxes. Social Security is simply a flat tax on income (up to a certain amount) and a welfare program.
Why pick the programs the vast majority of Americans have no problem with the Govt providing?
How about raising the taxes to Eisenhower levels, problem solved. The financially well off can continue to crow about how financially disciplined they are, progressives get Govt programs and actual working class workers who irresponsibly took their kids on a vacation can live their lives. All the whole touting the fiscally conservative virtues of Ike. What is more American than that?
When the social security program started the ratio between worker and retiree was 159 workers to 1 retiree. Today the ratio is 2.8 workers to 1 retiree.
It's spending more than its bringing in. Either the government will have to pay us less or raise taxes...maybe both. Even if it was an efficient entitlement program, it would still fail because it doesn't deliver enough money to support retirement. It will deliver poverty to those that solely rely on it.
An entitlement/welfare program costing 46% of the budget that delivers garbage is pointless. We'd be better off saving those tax dollars or using it to curb inflation by not having to print so much damn money.
A major problem with how we view welfare is we think entitlement programs are the answer instead of reduction toward the cost of living.
To a large part of the population they rely on Medicare, just because you are one that doesn't need it does not minimize the value it has for many. I know, you are supremely talented, disciplined and business savvy that you could do better. Says the people on the Baylor Message Board. We are talking public policy, not your portfolio. The middle class, working class and working poor rely on these garage programs. Twirl some more $100 a bottle Scotch and tell us how we should cut SS and Medicare.
Same here. It needs to funded properly and not raided. Same with SS and Highway Trust Fund. Needs dedicated funding.
I truly believe if people know what they are finding, get good service and the funding is tied to service they will not have a problem with tax. I am a huge fan of dedicated funding and user fees.
I am not a fan of General Revenue and discretionary spending.
Social security is a joke with a terrible return for the majority of people and has become an incentive for huge numbers of people to not save a dollar for retirement.
70%+ of government spending comes from SS, Medicare, servicing the debt and defense. Unless significant reductions are made in those, nothing else will matter.
The debt is the problem, not the couple of social programs that the majority of Americans count on in old age. You cut those programs, you are hurting alot of people, mostly working class people.
I am all for fiscal conservatism, but it can't be at the expense the elderly.
I know you and the others were born poor, never took a vacation, lived in a shack for 49 years, paid for Baylor with returnable bottles and if you can do it everyone can do it. Great, yay you. You are a Financial God looking down at the stupid poor who brought it down on themselves by getting cable r a phone when they can't afford it. Pat yourself on the back your special. I get it.
Slash defense, increase corporate taxes, buy you can't do it on the back of the fixed income elderly and elderly medical care. SS and Medicare are relied on by too many to target that as the answer. How about raising capital gains...
Jesus you certainly are not for fiscal conservatism. Or math. Or responsibility.
SS should at the bare minimum be raised to age 70. Life expectancy has increased. People are spending 15 years plus drawing SS checks now. I'll split the difference with you and erase the cap on SS contributions.
SS is an outdated idea that will crash and burn in its current iteration. Shaking your hand at me about being a "financial god" won't change that fact.
SS was never intended to be "the" answer to compete with pensions. It was a safety net, in case. You want to raise it to 70 due to changes in life expectancy. No issues here. You want to raise the amount contributed, no issues. Do away with it or reduce it during in a 7%CPI environment? No way, too many will be hurt. That type of change is a 30 to 50 year phased change.
Fiscal conservatism is not cutting everything to the bone, low bid wins, and all the other reduce costs schemes we see. Too many come in cut the hell out of everything, with no regard for function or ability to provide services, then turn that into a bigger job on the back of "I cut cost by 22%, what an effective manager I am" logic. Leaving a non-functioning unit that can't do the job and is a shell of what it should be.
So sorry, I have heard and seen too much of your brand of fiscal conservatism at cities around the nation. Transit agencies that can't provide service, highway departments that can't resurface roads, all in the name of what you people consider fiscal conservatism when you never have to provide a damn thing, just complain and tell them what lazy Govt workers they are when in reality you have no idea what it costs to provide services. Just continue to ***** you don't want to pay and know better
Confiscating 13 percent of everyone's income up to whatever the current limits are is not good "safety net." It is and has been a financial disaster for individual Americans and their families since it was created.
Tell that to the fixed income part of our Nation. We have a huge population of fixed income in Florida. You guys whose biggest concern is calling Schwab to check rates spout the strict fiscal conservative at all costs policies and these people pay the price. A 4% decrease is real dollars to these people. I know they are not the "winners" the Baylor MBA people are, they just served your meals and maintained you lawns. Should have made better decisions, right. Give up cable. Not buy a cup of coffee or have a phone. Right
It's funny the math people like this point to while completely ignoring the debacle financially they explicitly and full throatedly vote for overwhelmingly
They hatewe $1.69'gasoljne
They hated a fast food mean for $5
They hated a $300,000 house that was affordable with a reasonable mortgage
They hated college tuition that wasn't over $100 / hour
They voted Democrat and destroyed all the above and so much more
And then complain about what they themselves forced in everyone else through their own willful ignorance
They then move to Texas or Florida to "escape" the hell holes they've created pooped and sat in
It's amazing. Democrats.
Who the hell voted Democrat? SS is a success, Medicare is a success. Compared to what was in place before, they are serving the intended purpose. Medicare is in trouble because of price gouging corporations and doctors. Not the 78 year old former butcher on a fixed income who added HBO last month that pushes his budget. Irresponsible fool .
SS is and has always been pay as you go. Do a little research on its funding, it has shallow points and then rebounds. Always will. It goes through a slim period and rebounds as next generations pay in. Only way to kill it is to not pay. I am sure you and broker are trying how to save that small amount as you ride Teachers Union retirement based hedge funds.
You guys throw out lines that anyone can be a millionaire on a rich boys College message board. I would venture that less than 1% of BU actually ever went to bed hungry or relied on a public service. Hardship at BU is cable is out. Or have to drink well brand whiskey. Yet you want to balance the budget on the backs and medical treatment of fixed income elderly. What a guy.
Drives me nuts when people who never provided a public service or infrastructure think they are experts because they ran a real estate office or Company. It is not the same and shouldn't be.Even worse as you and your cronies play every rule in the book to avoid taxes, jack up prices to record profits and ridiculous bonuses, blame the two programs that actually help people as the cause of the economic mess. You guys play your role... Try building a road, you are the first one jacking up Right of Way cost to get yours
I've gone through struggles financially and otherwise that you couldn't fathom.
If you invest $250 a month for 40 years, you would have more than $1.2M at an 9% interest rate. The average American making $50k is sending $250 to the government for SS every month. And they have to work 40 years to get it as well.
Sorry if you made some bad financial decisions and are bitter about it.
We are not talking investment strategy. I am not bitter, I am literally sitting in Kona drinking Margaritas eating Calamari.
We are talking public policy, which is not as straight forward as investments.
Getting a long term return for individuals for investing a significant portion of their earnings is better public policy than a flat tax coupled with a welfare program.
How do you implement it, manage it and won't the size of Govt grow even more? The other thing is tying SS to stock market and impact that amount of investment will have on markets, talk about being able to influence returns!
Personally, in theory I like the idea and feel about it the same as school choice vouchers, the more control a person has the better. In practice will it become another Student Loan bureaucracy?
We have 401Ks and IRAs so the infrastructure already exists to manage individual accounts. It will not increase the "size of government" to eliminate most of the 60,000 jobs that work to administer the system currently.
401Ks and IRA's are already tied to the stock market. This is no different, it just makes it where people who make less money are able to, and, frankly, forced to, participate in making their own future and that of their children and grandchildren, much more secure. Had we started this process 40 or 50 years ago, we would be in a much better place, but it is not to late to do the right thing.
As for eliminating Govt jobs, this isn't eliminating anything. It would transfer the management from a Govt managed Agency to 200k contractors! As a Finance Professional, I can see you wanting it shifted to the "private sector", you will be the one getting the Govt check. Let's not act like it is cutting anything, the cost to manage will be just as high with much more difficult oversight. Just like defense contractors, medical, transportation, and finance lining up at the govt trough is not going away.
I do love Fiscal Conservatives, get rid of Govt Agencies and let me do it for a price... Like the "private sector" finance professionals will do it for free to keep the cost of Govt down, right?
Your emotion-driven ad hominem attacks are not based in reality. I have never worked as a "Financial Professional." You should look at the issues and not attack the people you falsely believe are motivated by self interest.
Getting rid of Social Security as we know it would shrink the size of government, but even if it increased the size of government, having mandatory individual retirement accounts would be much more preferable to the flat tax and welfare program that most Americans get with Social Security today.
It is May 24th and there is still no budget agreement. I do not understand why they cannot just freeze the budget. Eliminate all the covid spending and then do a 1-2% flat cut across the board to cover the interest payment increases. They should be able to leave SS out of the across the board cuts. If that does not the cover the budget deficit then increase taxes a bit. Congress has spent itself into a corner so we all will hurt us all a bit due to budget cuts and possible tax increases. It is better to take the medicine now rather than kicking the can down the road.