"Few politicians are willing to risk their careers alienating today's senior citizens for the benefit of Americans in 2040. "

Oh God, here we go again!

When are you people going to come to the realization that an Insurance Policy doesn't return Dividends!
If you want to invest then do so --- I encourage it! Stop trying to make America into a place where you have to step over the hapless and homeless ageing whenever you go out just so you can have an extra penny to waste in your pursuit of plastic garbage!

Do you know why I don't worry about this and don't buy into this right wing Cassandra?

Because I'm planning so I won't need it and You should do the same!

Perhaps you are too poor to do this, maybe undereducated or just inept, I don't know.
But if you are, then you should be thanking the stars we will cover your slack because if you aren't currently planning for your own retirement above a beyond what miniscule amount you pay into this insurance policy then you are in realty already dependant on it!

This shit just kills me. It is not an investment. It was never meant to be. It is insurance. Old age insurance. Just like your car insurance. You pay your premiums and if you never ever ever get into an accident... you don't get them back with interest. Same with health insurance..... you subsidize the sick.

Why is it so goddammed hard to understand?

These are the same fools that think the "Fair Tax" is a viable and better option.

Ahhhhhhhhhh..the Fair Tax.....call me a fool!
There are quite a few economists that are fools along with me.
The only thing foolish is thinking the parasites in DC would relinquish their ability to buy power and prosperity for themselves but redistributing the WORKING peoples money.

As for SSI...there are a lot of people banking on collecting it and collecting enough to live on.
A meager living at best !

We are not counting on it being there at all.

But it would be nice to opt out and put that extra 12% into our retirement funds....and be able pass it along to the kids when we check out.
Govco confiscates a hell of a lot of money from us every year.

"As for SSI...there are a lot of people banking on collecting it and collecting enough to live on"

And you spend energy worring about these people?
You need a better hobby!

Anyway, 12% of Anything doesnt break my bank, and its worth every penny when I dont have to explain to kids why that old couple is laying on the street and eating Dog Food in the Great US of A!

If an old couple is eating dog food on the street it is because either they like it or they didn't plan for retirement. Diversify you porfolio and stop buying depreciating assets.

Well that is so simple!

Maybe you can tell that to the seniors that got fucked out of their pensions when the PBGC took them over.

How dare they fail to plan for the PBGC to cut their pension payment to 1/3 of what the company guaranteed them!

Those goddammed fools!

Ahhhhhhhhhh..the Fair Tax.....call me a fool!

You are a fool.

Bring on the fair tax. Sure. My house is paid for. My cars are new. I tell you I would go out right before it was enacted and replace any appliance over five years old.

Would love to see the price of everything go up 30% overnight with a corresponding bump of 0% in wages. That will do wonders for the economy.

And what about the states that still rely on income taxes? What are they gonna do?

When the pushers of this tax scheme have to lie about the rate being 23% instead of 30% you know the rest of the shitpie is just as flawed.

Hey, I got a great idea how to fix social security. We'll invest our contributions into the stock market and make big $$$$!!!

"There are quite a few economists that are fools along with me."

Sure there are but then there were economists who put together the Bush economic plan too.
That didn't work out so well.

Someone needs to make up their mind...

Is it an investment for old people to keep from eating dog food, or is it an insurance policy to supplement your portfolio? There appears to be a bit of conflicting analysis.

"Is it an investment for old people to keep from eating dog food, or is it an insurance policy to supplement your portfolio?"

You can't pass on your contributions to heirs so it isn't really an investment. If you are disabled long before retirement you collect disability benefits so it is insurance.

Sec. 201. [42 U.S.C. 401] (a) There is hereby created on the books of the Treasury of the United States a trust fund to be known as the "Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund".

-------------

It is old age insurance.

"As for SSI...there are a lot of people banking on collecting it and collecting enough to live on.
A meager living at best !"

Social Security was not meant as your sole source of income to live on in retirement. Basically, if was to be an addition to your savings and any pension you earned. A supplement.

" A supplement."

No shit ...Sherlock. Tell that to all the people whining about it being their only source of income. Then tell the people failing to set up retirement accounts how they will be paying more over their lifetime and collecting less.

I do think you either did not read the article or did not get Prof. Williams point.

Kerrin, go easy buddy. You misunderstood him.

Just had to look at who posted the thread and first Jeff J. came to mind but saw Kerrin and know the thread is worthless.

There will be nothing but SLANTED one sided point of view disguised good for everyone when in reality it is for well taken care of rich.

Just bull shit from kerrin and these righties on a daily basis now.

It is getting tough to come here anymore, too too much rightie bull shit.

"It is getting tough to come here anymore, too too much rightie bull shit."

can barely type...mind is going to explode ...aghhhh!

"$2.2 trillion ...Congress spends it...."special issue government securities" that are simply bookkeeping entries that are IOUs."
"Each year the situation will get worse since the number of retirees is predicted to increase relative to the number in the work force paying taxes."

"n 1940, there were 42 workers per retiree, in 1950 there were 16, today there are three and in 20 or 30 years there will be two or fewer workers per retiree."

Bull shit? Not a problem?

Kerrin-
re: "special issue government securities" that are simply bookkeeping entries that are IOUs."

Those are also known as Treasury Bills. They are solvent as long as the US Treasury is solvent.

We honor our debts, and ultimately that's the only thing that gives our currency, currency.

It is getting tough to come here anymore,

"They are solvent as long as the US Treasury is solvent."

Keep your fingers crossed.

Now while you are educating little ole me...tell us where all that thar money is going to come from to make good on the T-Bills.

From our word.

More like...
From our children, our grandchildren, and our great- grandchildren...and our great-great-grandchildren.

Bull shit? Not a problem?

#17 | Posted by kerrin57

If it's not bullshit then we should be providing fertility treatments for all women of child bearing age. Special prize if they can break the record for most delivered.

Seriously, we should grant amnesty to all the Mexicans and issue them a valid SS # and a passport. Since they're all Catholic let's encourage more immigration and adherence to the Papal decrees on birth control. And let's require all kids 16 or older to have at least a part-time job. Can't get hired for money, intern or volunteer.

We Can Do This - Yes We Can !!!

You people,"i only pay cash" I do this ,I do that, your life could change tomorrow no matter how much you think you prepared.best of luck for everyone

There will be nothing but SLANTED one sided point of view disguised good for everyone when in reality it is for well taken care of rich.

Just bull shit from kerrin and these righties on a daily basis now.

It is getting tough to come here anymore, too too much rightie bull shit.

#15 | Posted by moneywar

Yeah, Kerrin!

How dare you have the temerity to post an article that doesn't perfectly conform with Moneywar's leftist ideology. I think DH should adminster a good spanking to you.

Moneywar,

Are you actually coming to a liberal blog and bitching about the fact that the conservative minority on this site actually have the audacity to post articles and make comments that are in conflict with your leftist beliefs?

What a whiney little bitch you are.

Are you actually coming to a liberal blog and bitching about the fact that the conservative minority on this site actually have the audacity to post articles and make comments that are in conflict with your leftist beliefs?

What a whiney little bitch you are.

Posted by JeffJ at 2009-02-04 05:25 AM | Reply

Funny the WSAME argument can be and should be made about the Fairness Doctrine. How dare the Minority Liberals want equal footing with regards to airing their viewpoint upon Public Airwaves. Oh and before someone says You don't have a right to be heard what do You think Freedom of the Press is all about. You can't have Free to speak Your mind without Freedom to be heard. I find it very peculiar that there are those who RIGHTFULLY scream the victims of crimes have a right to be heard during sentencing but Oh talk about being heard on other matters of great importance such as Political speech and other contriversial subjects they declare the public doesn't have a right to be heard. Totally amazing how that all works out.

Larry

Funny the WSAME argument can be and should be made about the Fairness Doctrine.

Your analogy is WAY off the reservation, Larry.

Rcade's management of this site is the complete antithesis to the 'Fairness Doctrine'.

He doesn't 'mandate' that conservative opinion be given equal representation and the conservatives who come to this site don't look to the federal government to 'force' Rcade to give an equal voice.

Oh talk about being heard on other matters of great importance such as Political speech and other contriversial subjects they declare the public doesn't have a right to be heard.

You are confusing a right to speak with a right to be heard. HUGE difference.

You are confusing a right to speak with a right to be heard. HUGE difference.

Posted by JeffJ at 2009-02-04 05:54 AM | Reply

Absolutely NOT. Please do try again JeffJ.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

ALL are a two way street. You can't have one without the other.

Larry

abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Precisely.

The government has no business dictating what can and can't be said. The 'Fairness Doctrine' does just that - it dictates what can and can't be said in a public forum.

Thanks for proving my point for me.

Rcade's management of this site is the complete antithesis to the 'Fairness Doctrine'.

He doesn't 'mandate' that conservative opinion be given equal representation and the conservatives who come to this site don't look to the federal government to 'force' Rcade to give an equal voice.

#27 | Posted by JeffJ at 2009-02-04 05:52 AM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

Huge difference. This isn't using Public airwaves. But Your bitching that Moneywar is bitching about a certain segment of the Drudge Retort population voicing their case. IS the same argument Many on the Left make towards those such as Yourself who do not want fairness in broadcasting on Public airwaves.

Larry

The government has no business dictating what can and can't be said. The 'Fairness Doctrine' does just that - it dictates what can and can't be said in a public forum.

Thanks for proving my point for me.

#30 | Posted by JeffJ at 2009-02-04 06:02 AM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

YESS they most certainly DO since the Public airwaves are involved. When You use public airwaves that are owned by the public at large both sides must have equal claim to those airwaves. If one side is being denied then it is the responsibility of the Federal Government to demand those who use public airwaves to air the opposing viewpoints.

Larry

So Larry, do you think public libraries should carry equal numbers of left and right books? If there are more right leaning books, should we go burn sufficient numbers until they equal the leftist books?

And what about the middle of the roaders? Why do you hate them? Why do we exclude them from the airwaves? The libertarian and green parties -- shouldn't they get their fair share of the airwaves?

Why do You always issue bullshit strawmen Goatman?? It never fails with You.

Larry

Why do You always issue bullshit strawmen Goatman??

What strawman? Why is it whenever I ask hard, yet valid questions you say strawman?

Or do you honestly feel that only the democrats and republicans have rights to the airwaves?

Many on the Left make towards those such as Yourself who do not want fairness in broadcasting on Public airwaves.

I am fully for fairness in broadcasting. I don't want the government to shut-down money-holes like Air America.

By all means, purchase air time. Compete. If you are talented, thought-provoking and successful; you'll acquire more and more airwave access. This is how it should be - it's how it currently is.

The 'Fairness Doctrine' eschews this - the government gets to decide what is and isn't suitable regarding the expression of political opinion.

When You use public airwaves that are owned by the public at large both sides must have equal claim to those airwaves. If one side is being denied then it is the responsibility of the Federal Government to demand those who use public airwaves to air the opposing viewpoints.

Nobody is being denied anything. This is a capitalistic model in the purest sense. Rush Limbaugh didn't try and nudge president Bush and a Republican-controlled Congress to censor Air America. He competed with them for listenership and kicked the shit out of them.

Deal with it.

Yep figures it's all about the Money with You and not about what is right nor proper for Public Discourse over PUBLICALLY OWNED airwaves. I see where You stand JeffJ. Sighhhhhhhhhhhh

Larry

No, Larry.

It's all about utilizing the public airwaves to please as many people as possible.

This isn't limited to political opinion.

Sports talk thrives because that is what a majority of people want to listen to.

Opera talk fails because it doesn't generate listenership.

Rock music thrives on the FM bandwidth because that is what a majority of people want to listen to.

Polka music fails because it doesn't generate listenership.

When it comes to political opinion...

Conservative talk opinion shows thrive because that is what a majority of people, within that demographic, want to listen to.

Liberal talk opinion fails because it doesn't generate listenership.

Deal with it.

You still don't get it which isn't surprizing. Oh well soimeday you MIGHT just get why the Fairness DOctrine is needed. How would You feel if the situation were reversed. I am sure You would be scre4aming mad about it. And if You weren't then I'd wonder what was wrong with You. Sighhhhhhhhhhh

Larry

LAR...this is interesting to read....with an open mind.

Five Reasons Why the Government Should Privatize AM and FM Frequencies

How would You feel if the situation were reversed

I'd be cool with it.

Look, much of the media is biased left - a fact that I point out with considerable frequency. I attack this, mock this and deride this. Having said that, I have NEVER advocated any form of government intervention to 'ensure fairness' within any given medium.

I don't advovate the government censorship of the expression of political opinion, Larry.

1/2 inches of snow and school is cancelled?? WTF?? Hell it has to at least reach about 4 or 5 inches here before they contemplate closing schools. My God are they pussified kids?? Hell when it was a half inch of snow when I was growing up I was always disapointed because I knew we were having school. First they take away corporal punishments now they stop school for a half inch accumilations. Unbelievable. As to privatization of AM and FM bands. How crazy is that. Making something Public a private entity is nutzoidals.

Larry

Local Radio Station WLAV plays Classic Rock Music.
I demand that they give equal time to Country Music.
Why do they have the right to prevent me from listening to the music I prefer. While they are it they should add Harry Chapin to their playlist I don't hear Old Harry as often as I would like. By the way where the hell are Sarah Vaughn, Nancy Wilson, and Billie Holliday? I haven't heard them on LAV in years. The government should do something about that.

"Conservative talk opinion shows thrive because that is what a majority of people, within that demographic, want to listen to."

Riight, it as nothing to do with corporations putting conservatives like Glenn Beck on 300 stations....and don't even try to pretend he built that audience, it was just handed to the hate monger. It's time to force corporations to sell off stations and allow a more diverse group of owenrship and views to be presented.
Andy your statement that the news is liberal biased is flat out ridiculous. Lately, it has been analysed, twice as many Republicans have been interviewed on various programs as Democrats even in this year when a new Democratic administration takes over.
But do continue to repeat talking points instead of thinking for yourself.

Look, much of the media is biased left - a fact that I point out with considerable frequency.

And again, I trump you with these facts:

Most of the journalists and reporters identify themselves as dems.

Most of the news owners and editors and paper owners identify themselves as reps.

All of radio and television, and most of the magazine media, is owned by 5 companies. Not democratic party companies mind you...

You do the math.

When the "liberal" paper like the New York Times allows Judith Miller to make them a mouth piece for white house propaganda...

For every war protester on tv there were 10 retired generals hawking the invasion....

"Liberal media" my white ass.

twice as many Republicans have been interviewed on various programs as Democrats even in this year when a new Democratic administration takes over.

I read that study. Oddly enough, the closest "fair and balanced" network was fox news. They still had more republicans on panel than democrats, though.

CNN was the worst. The "clinton news network" of the "liberal media" had many many more conservatives in interviews and panels than anyone else.

The liberal media is a myth. Krystol even admitted it.

school is cancelled?? WTF??

LAR...I grew up east of Buffalo...between the lakes.

LOL....Tell me about snow.

I do love the south!

us where all that thar money is going to come from to make good on the T-Bills.

#20 | Posted by kerrin57

Taxes.

726 "taxes"...no...really HIGH taxes...go figure.

726...think quick.

Which red and/or purple daylilly is a good repeat bloomer.

I am going to place my order soon.

Riight, it as nothing to do with corporations putting conservatives like Glenn Beck on 300 stations....and don't even try to pretend he built that audience, it was just handed to the hate monger.

Some venues succeed and some venues fail, Danni.

TV is no different. I absolutely loved the show called Threat Matrix. Regrettably, I was about the only person who loved it because it only lasted about 10 episodes.

Same will hold true with your whipping post - Glenn Beck. I acknowledge that he may be a bit priveleged in terms of the opportunity he's been given, but if he doesn't bring in the audience he will be shit-canned just like Threat Matrix.

That's how it works and is how it should work.

Most of the journalists and reporters identify themselves as dems.

Most of the news owners and editors and paper owners identify themselves as reps.

All of radio and television, and most of the magazine media, is owned by 5 companies. Not democratic party companies mind you...

You do the math.

Get off your lazy white ass and do the math yourself. Why don't you start with the recent campaign coverage. Go ahead. Make a case that the media wasn't biased in favor of Obama. Please! I'd love to see you make that argument. While you are at it, throw in the media's coverage of Sarah Palin.

Well, it was an actuarially based program, but then some President decided to minimize apparent deficits by engaging in voodoo accounting to mask his expenditures. So, rather than reporting the Social Security fund separately, he made it a part of the overall budget, and voila ... magic. Who was that President. Why Lyndon Baines Johnson.

So, who pillaged the Social Security fund? A Democrat politician to support a war that the Democrats initiated. Hmm.

In a sense it was a realistic move, since there is no storehouse of value in government securities.

And with the current "massacre" of the finances of this country, the transfer of funds to pirates and to the masses to amass political capital, bread and circuses, well, the Social Security fund won't matter, since the economy will be destroyed. So, ease up.

As the misogynist said to the rape victim, "Relax and enjoy it." We're being raped financially, and are unable to prevent ourselves from being ravished as the rapists have all the power.

Don't be bitter. Don't be pissed. Reposition yourself to survive and possibly prosper by adapting to the new situation. What formerly was lawlessness is redefined and institutionalized.

But it would be nice to opt out and put that extra 12% into our retirement funds....and be able pass it along to the kids when we check out.
Govco confiscates a hell of a lot of money from us every year.

#3 | Posted by kerrin57 at 2009-02-03 04:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

But year in and year out you probably vote for same political party never kicking them out for stealing your money.

You post indicates the lack of confidence that the money will be there when you retire, well what have you done with those who represent you.........VOTED FOR THEM and never showing disdain for the bad policy behavior.

Which red and/or purple daylilly is a good repeat bloomer.

I am going to place my order soon.

#49 | Posted by kerrin57

. So, rather than reporting the Social Security fund separately, he made it a part of the overall budget, and voila ... magic. Who was that President. Why Lyndon Baines Johnson.

And Richard Nixon, Gerry Ford, Jimmy Carter, Ronnie Raygun, HW Bush, Clinton and Dumbya all failed to reverse that policy.

I have heard that when Social Security was created, the average life expectancy was three years after retirement age. So the pool didn't HAVE to be as big as it has become, now that average life expectancy about 17 years later than the earliest retirement age. But there certainly was a reliance on a couple of assumptions as Social Security grew -- more and more contributors and a ever growing economy. Unfortunately, we damn Boomers stopped adding sufficiently to the population pool, and as we age, we're not as damn good at helping the economy grow -- More like pre-retirees enjoying 3rd World goods in our "consumer-based", "service-economy", or something like that.