Author | Thread |
|
10/08/2013 07:23:16 PM · #526 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music: Originally posted by Kelli: Social Security has nothing to do with the debt. It shouldn't even be in the equation or a part of any negotiation. Period. It's not an "entitlement". It is earned through a lifetime of working. And if the cap was lifted, and the wealthy paid into it for their full pay, it would not run out of money. Ever. The working poor pay on their whole income. Why are the rich exempted from that? |
And in any case Social Security currently sports a healthy surplus. Unfortunately SS funds collected are shoved (illegally?) into the operating funds and replaced with interest-bearing T-bills, which is why it's possible SS could run out of assets to pay with until this is cleared up. It's all BS. A shell game. |
Exactly. |
|
|
10/08/2013 07:39:26 PM · #527 |
One would assume that if the rich put "more" into it they would, likewise, get "more" out of it. I think the assumption is the rich can take care of themselves. Social security was never meant as a progressive, redistribution scheme. One gets out what one puts in, theoretically.
I can agree with you though that social security should be considered as self-contained. However, because of the baby-boom generation we know the system is not going to be able to meet its social security obligations at some point. Either the government says that's ok (ie. benefits are reduced) or the government pays for it (ie. the debt goes up or we raise taxes). |
|
|
10/08/2013 09:01:59 PM · #528 |
|
|
10/08/2013 10:40:01 PM · #529 |
seeing where this conversation has gone I just want to throw out the 9 - 9 -9 plan....That is 9% income...9% sales and 9% corporate tax...no deductions. There would be increased revenue
|
|
|
10/08/2013 10:56:24 PM · #530 |
Originally posted by cowboy221977: seeing where this conversation has gone I just want to throw out the 9 - 9 -9 plan....That is 9% income...9% sales and 9% corporate tax...no deductions. There would be increased revenue |
You're in favor of taxing corporations 9% on the cash that comes over the transom? That's what "no deductions" means, ya know? 9% on gross income. Just as one example, I don't think there's any grocery store that makes even a 9% profit on total sales. I'd love to see that one in action :-)
Message edited by author 2013-10-08 22:57:17. |
|
|
10/09/2013 03:34:45 AM · #531 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music: Just as one example, I don't think there's any grocery store that makes even a 9% profit on total sales. I'd love to see that one in action :-) |
A few years ago I know the big grocery chains cleared between 7 and 4 percent profit on their gross; A 9% tax on the gross would be a massive multiplier of taxation on guys like them; and builders, who make a few percent on the stuff that passes through their hands would be in the same boat. It would be pretty inflationary. |
|
|
10/09/2013 01:38:36 PM · #532 |
House and Senate gyms considered essential and not shut down. phew! Thank goodness cooler heads prevailed... |
|
|
10/09/2013 02:10:18 PM · #533 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo: House and Senate gyms considered essential and not shut down. phew! Thank goodness cooler heads prevailed... |
All work and no play - ya know. Frankly, I think they all need to take a break and fly away to an exotic island for a team building seminar. I'll spring for the one-way tickets. |
|
|
10/09/2013 03:02:51 PM · #534 |
Originally posted by Art Roflmao: Frankly, I think they all need to take a break and fly away to an exotic island for a team building seminar. I'll spring for the one-way tickets. |
I suggest The Maldives ... or the Juno satellite is swinging by Earth today on its way to Jupiter -- maybe it can pick up a few passengers. FWIW NPR reports that in accordance with "the laws of orbital mechanics, Juno will arrive at Jupiter on July 4, 2016, whether the government has re-opened or not ..."
And John Hockenberry has just suggested sending them to the otherwise-closed research station in Antarctica to huddle together like penguins ...
Message edited by author 2013-10-09 15:08:43. |
|
|
10/09/2013 03:15:43 PM · #535 |
Originally posted by GeneralE: And John Hockenberry has just suggested sending them to the otherwise-closed research station in Antarctica to huddle together like penguins ... |
Yes! Then... "Release the Leopard Seals!" >:) |
|
|
10/09/2013 05:10:27 PM · #536 |
Can't say I'm super-duper thrilled about Yellen as the choice for the Fed. I think we should be prepared for the government to suckle at the teat of quantitative easing for some time in the future. I'd have preferred someone with a little more backbone and willingness to make the hard choice.
Message edited by author 2013-10-09 17:10:59. |
|
|
10/10/2013 10:30:22 AM · #537 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo: ... I think we should be prepared for the government to suckle at the teat of quantitative easing for some time in the future. I'd have preferred someone with a little more backbone and willingness to make the hard choice. |
While I fully agree that drastic cuts are needed, I can hear the collective howls of indignation from all concerned if indeed this was the approach taken.
My father never purchased anything he could not pay for in cash or that he could not repair... guess who didn't have any new fangled things in their house eh?
Seriously though, I have always strived to pay cash for most things including cars and paid homes within 10 years... sure helped keep me away from fancy toys and bars.
As I look at a great number of people and view their buying habits, I am reminded of something my dad used to say: " Pretty hard to pay as you go when you are still paying for where you been at"
Makes perfect sense don't it.
Ray |
|
|
10/10/2013 10:57:11 AM · #538 |
Originally posted by RayEthier: Originally posted by DrAchoo: ... I think we should be prepared for the government to suckle at the teat of quantitative easing for some time in the future. I'd have preferred someone with a little more backbone and willingness to make the hard choice. |
While I fully agree that drastic cuts are needed, I can hear the collective howls of indignation from all concerned if indeed this was the approach taken.
My father never purchased anything he could not pay for in cash or that he could not repair... guess who didn't have any new fangled things in their house eh?
Seriously though, I have always strived to pay cash for most things including cars and paid homes within 10 years... sure helped keep me away from fancy toys and bars.
As I look at a great number of people and view their buying habits, I am reminded of something my dad used to say: " Pretty hard to pay as you go when you are still paying for where you been at"
Makes perfect sense don't it.
Ray |
We share these habits. I owe no-one. |
|
|
10/10/2013 01:25:10 PM · #539 |
Originally posted by Cory: I owe no-one. |
Correction: I believe your share of the national debt is in the thousands. :P |
|
|
10/10/2013 01:43:50 PM · #540 |
Originally posted by Art Roflmao: Originally posted by Cory: I owe no-one. |
Correction: I believe your share of the national debt is in the thousands. :P |
And if it'd do a damned bit of good I'd pay what I 'owe'. |
|
|
10/10/2013 02:01:40 PM · #541 |
Originally posted by Cory: Originally posted by Art Roflmao: Originally posted by Cory: I owe no-one. |
Correction: I believe your share of the national debt is in the thousands. :P |
And if it'd do a damned bit of good I'd pay what I 'owe'. |
There's a line on Form 1040 you can use to make a "voluntary" payment toward reducing the national debt.
I wonder how many of those conservatives who say the debt is the biggest problem we face have ever used it ... |
|
|
10/10/2013 03:51:54 PM · #542 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music: Originally posted by Kelli: Social Security has nothing to do with the debt. It shouldn't even be in the equation or a part of any negotiation. Period. It's not an "entitlement". It is earned through a lifetime of working. And if the cap was lifted, and the wealthy paid into it for their full pay, it would not run out of money. Ever. The working poor pay on their whole income. Why are the rich exempted from that? |
And in any case Social Security currently sports a healthy surplus. Unfortunately SS funds collected are shoved (illegally?) into the operating funds and replaced with interest-bearing T-bills, which is why it's possible SS could run out of assets to pay with until this is cleared up. It's all BS. A shell game. |
It's not illegal to invest the Social Security Trust Fund assets in Treasury securities. In fact, it makes sense to do so, if you think about it. But the government since 1969 and the introduction of the Unified Budget (which I think was introduced to mask the deficit caused by the Vietnam War) has been playing games with whether those funds are considered on-budget or off-budget. There's a fascinating history here. |
|
|
10/10/2013 06:09:01 PM · #543 |
Cracks in the ice. I'm curious if we manage to put this off for six or eight weeks if there would be actual "negotiation" on the budget. Not Obamacare. Not the debt limit. I'm talking taxes and cuts. Odds on that? |
|
|
10/10/2013 06:15:13 PM · #544 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo: Cracks in the ice. I'm curious if we manage to put this off for six or eight weeks if there would be actual "negotiation" on the budget. Not Obamacare. Not the debt limit. I'm talking taxes and cuts. Odds on that? |
Not likely to happen... both parties are too entrenched and no one wants to make any concessions that will have a negative impact on whatever group they represent.
Ray
|
|
|
10/10/2013 06:19:53 PM · #545 |
Well, we'll see everybody in December then. Judith? Paul? Can you guys make it, say, the 5th?
Message edited by author 2013-10-10 18:20:09. |
|
|
10/10/2013 07:27:52 PM · #546 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo: Cracks in the ice. I'm curious if we manage to put this off for six or eight weeks if there would be actual "negotiation" on the budget. Not Obamacare. Not the debt limit. I'm talking taxes and cuts. Odds on that? |
Remember the threat of sequestration ? The bill that was so bad and cut so much stuff so randomly that it was going to force the two sides to come together ? Well It looks like that is as close to a negotiation as we will be likely to come. "The continuing resolution that the White House and congressional Democrats have agreed to funds the government at sequestration levels. " In short the hack and slash reduction of the Federal Government that was supposed to scare them into behaving is now the best possible plan.
Given that the Republican strategy for the last few years has been to oppose Obama in every action he takes, and Obama so often caves to big money, staying opposed to him is a very tiring dance. |
|
|
10/10/2013 08:07:38 PM · #547 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music: Unfortunately SS funds collected are shoved (illegally?) into the operating funds and replaced with interest-bearing T-bills, which is why it's possible SS could run out of assets to pay with until this is cleared up. |
It's actually a legal REQUIREMENT for SS funds to be invested in U.S. securities backed by the "full faith and credit" of the federal government.
Originally posted by DrAchoo: Cracks in the ice. I'm curious if we manage to put this off for six or eight weeks if there would be actual "negotiation" on the budget. |
The only cracks have been within the Republican party. Today's short term debt limit "offer" was precisely nothing. According to Re. John Fleming, "All we're doing is saying the president hasn't come toward us, we'll just move the deadline out and offer it again. We haven't changed our position, only the timeline." As long as the House continues to insist on getting something in return for upholding the Constitution they swore to uphold, which states that the debt is non-negotiable, this will go nowhere. |
|
|
10/10/2013 08:18:24 PM · #548 |
Originally posted by GeneralE: Originally posted by Cory: Originally posted by Art Roflmao: Originally posted by Cory: I owe no-one. |
Correction: I believe your share of the national debt is in the thousands. :P |
And if it'd do a damned bit of good I'd pay what I 'owe'. |
There's a line on Form 1040 you can use to make a "voluntary" payment toward reducing the national debt.
I wonder how many of those conservatives who say the debt is the biggest problem we face have ever used it ... |
Have you???????
|
|
|
10/10/2013 08:19:35 PM · #549 |
Since there seems to be a bit of a pause.... here are a couple of questions.
If you think the Federal government is too big, and "non-essential", who would you cut, and why? How would you propose replacing those services, if at all? What should those Americans who have been doing those jobs do instead? In other words, where should America grow its labor force? |
|
|
10/10/2013 08:45:14 PM · #550 |
Originally posted by cowboy221977: Originally posted by GeneralE: I wonder how many of those conservatives who say the debt is the biggest problem we face have ever used it ... |
Have you??????? |
Did he ever say debt was the biggest problem, thereby making it likely that he'd want to donate to the cause? |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/05/2025 03:17:12 PM EDT.