FTA: "They are dusting off their old playbook, rehashing the policies that the American people have rejected in the past," said House Democratic Caucus Chair John Larson (D-CT). "They want to privatize Social Security. They want to turn Medicare into a voucher program. And they're providing tax breaks for the wealthy while they raise taxes on the middle class."

Both sides are corporately overly-beholden whores but the equivilancy argument falls down at times like these.

The Republicans are obviously still trying to destroy the middle class at a faster rate than the Dems by deliberately widening the wealth equity gap through more tax breaks to the folks who never pay their fair share due to the lobbied loopholes that currently exist.

The party of No when pushed to prove their ability to offer solutions becomes the party of No good ideas.

Be Well.

the party of No good ideas.

LOL!

Drops in the DOW like yesterday will ensure that any attempt to privatize SS will be doomed.

Medicare today has an unfunded liability of $73 trillion dollars.

Social Security today has an unfunded liability of $107 trillion.

The Democrat approach has certainly been effective: 'Invest' in U.S. Treasury Bills! Essentially lending money for Congressional earmarks.

The alternative would allow people to truly invest their money into the productive part of America, which creates jobs and prosperity. But that terrifies Liberals who think they know best how to spend other peoples' money.

Christ, talk about grasping for straws.

so let me guess, that would be Halliburtin with a 200 year no bid contract

What are the libs' ideas to keep entitlement spending from bankrupting the country? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

what do you call entitlement? define your BS

Define your BS. Well, Medicare and Social Security are entitlements. Both are insolvent.

Lemme guess: you're one of these Baby Boomer liberals who know that it's unsustainable, but because the country isn't scheduled to go broke until just after you're dead, you don't care.

I do. Move up the retirement age to 70, and slash spending across the board.

are you going to address the entitlements of the FAA and the aiport system in this country? The federal highway system? Military retirement? military free insurance for life? Congressional and presidential pensions and medical care Funny how you point only to the poor, the folks that cant defend themselves. You use of the word entitlement is simply more pointed emotional BS from the party of lies hate and fear

I didn't notice the deductions on my paycheck for airports, Federal highways, etc. shit for brains. But S.S. is on it.

Party of lies hate and fear. Your party is full of the douchebags who believe in sending trillions of dollars to the third world to prevent so-called climate change. The sky is falling! If we don't pass this stimulus, unemployment will go over 8%!

How stale. Now I learn you've never heard the word "entitlement" spending before, as it relates to budgets. Do yourself a favor, switch off MSNBC for a few days, pick up a friggin' book, and grow a brain.

what country got trillions for climate change? name it mouth. How much did iraq and afganistan waste for a no war hate mission? lets see the numbers. Funny how you dont understand the english language as it relates to the definition of words. I can only hope that you death panels reviews you because of a lack of brain matter

you know wis. maybe,m just maybe you need to take a course on finding oout what isnt on your paycheck stub as it relates to federal spending. your stub, you small brained idiot simply represents your deductions. go back to sleep

The Government wants handle everyone's retirement because only "they' can be trusted.

you know wis. maybe,m just maybe you need to take a course on finding oout what isnt on your paycheck stub as it relates to federal spending. your stub, you small brained idiot simply represents your deductions. go back to sleep

#13 | Posted by Georgeisadrunk

I will if you pull your head out of your ass long enough to look at the thread title, 80 proof.

i looked at the thread title, now, go take your course on understanding your pay check stub. it may just amaze you, but probably not

George is one of those Obama supporters I've read about. The 26 percenters who blindingly give him "strong support". You know, the stupid ones, who keep Jaywalking segments some of the most entertaining in all of television.

Jay: "What is 'entitlement spending'?"

George: "Hmmm. I dunno. Like airports and highways, I guess. Is that right? Things that have titles, like O'Hare Airport and Ventura Boulevard?"

(Laughter)

r is r stop the continued BS explain what an entitlement is. or are you not able to? Why do you need to show hate and lies to the world? ruff childhood?

also, what country is it that the U S gave trillions to for global warming? Back up your statements or are you just a liar? hmmm hard choice.

Cap and trade legislation would have done exactly that.

Entitlement spending is any budget item that is determined by the number of eligible recipients, not appropriated by Congress. Medicare, Social Security, veterans' benefits, federal pensions. This is Civics 101, actually.

Cap and trade legislation would have done exactly that.

#20 | Posted by rightisright

Please explain how cap and trade would cause the US government to give trillions of dollars to other nations.

"Medicare and Social Security are entitlements. Both are insolvent."

SS is insolvent? While taking in billions more annually than it pays out?

SS is insolvent? While taking in billions more annually than it pays out?

#22 | Posted by Danforth

Link with projections of the next 10 years?

Hello? Danforth?

Danforth, come on. why argue that?

Don't touch my negative interest in my S.S Lock Box.

That said the Seniors will vote out anyone who messes with S.S.

That said the Seniors will vote out anyone who messes with S.S.

and that includes a growing number of babyboomers approaching retirement who are broke.

"Hello? Danforth?"

Sorry...I was busy billing @$75/hr.

Sorry...I was busy billing @$75/hr.

#29 | Posted by Danforth at 2010-02-05 12:04 PM | Reply

A drastic pay cut. The Obama Economy hasn't been too good for you I see.

Sorry...I was busy billing @$75/hr.

as a member of one of those 3 unions?

"Danforth, come on. why argue that?"

Gee...because it's true? SS is currently a cash cow, and will remain so for a few more years.

A lot of things, unfixed, are insolvent a long time down the road. In the last decade, health costs outpaced inflation by 4-1, while Medicare tax rates went up ZERO. Underfunding a program leading to a crisis, and then pointing to the crisis as proof the program was bad to begin with, seems to be the R's SOP.

Sorry...I was busy billing @$75/hr.

#29 | Posted by Danforth

Cheap date.

"as a member of one of those 3 unions?"

Nah. For one (AEA) that's a day's pay, and for the others (AFTRA, SAG), less than an hour.

"A drastic pay cut."

Not to worry. That's only because it's the first week, and he came in person. $90/hr if you drop it off or mail it.

It'll be up to $125/hr before long. And I'll have folks lined up.

A lot of things, unfixed, are insolvent a long time down the road. In the last decade, health costs outpaced inflation by 4-1, while Medicare tax rates went up ZERO. Underfunding a program leading to a crisis, and then pointing to the crisis as proof the program was bad to begin with, seems to be the R's SOP.

Is there a plan from the dems to increase the "tax rate" on either SS or medicare?

Gee...because it's true? SS is currently a cash cow, and will remain so for a few more years.

so noted.

This just in.......the environment is doing just fine. no problems TODAY.

"Link with projections of the next 10 years?"

Why? What do projections have to do with today's solvency?

It'll be up to $125/hr before long. And I'll have folks lined up.

why?

"Is there a plan from the dems to increase the "tax rate" on either SS or medicare?"

I don't know; I doubt they have that much spine. Although if so, I can guarantee you the Rs are against paying for what we're getting. SS is not far off being fixed. Medicare is a much bigger problem.

"This just in.......the environment is doing just fine. no problems TODAY."

So noted. So should we stop addressing the problems, or just say the problems are too big, so we're going to ignore and exacerbate them?

"why?"

My price increases as tax season progresses, and with 300 clients, I'll be working until late on April 15th. About half my clients come after March 15th.

Why? What do projections have to do with today's solvency?

#37 | Posted by Danforth

You're thinking just like Obama and his Budget.

Well, you could take Van Hollen's word or you can read it for yourself.

"You're thinking just like Obama and his Budget."

Look, if you want to argue we need to change course, you won't get any disagreement from me. If, however, someone today claims SS is insolvent, they're making up new definitions to fit their agenda.

Insolvent already has a meaning, and SS doesn't yet fit the bill. Unfixed, it will, soon, but with a few minor tweaks -- say, increasing the amount a half-point for both employer and employee -- it's solvent for another three generations. Medicare, OTOH, is the 800 lb. gorilla.

I don't know; I doubt they have that much spine. Although if so, I can guarantee you the Rs are against paying for what we're getting.

you slay me danforth. both parties have fucked up SS and medicare forever and you still have to insist that some of the pigs at the trough are different from others.

in your twisted world, you think you can pick out the democrat pigs rooting around in their own shit and believe they are a better breed of pig than others.

Look, if you want to argue we need to change course, you won't get any disagreement from me. If, however, someone today claims SS is insolvent, they're making up new definitions to fit their agenda.

lets stop this please. I don't even know who said "insolvency" but perhaps it should have been called "projected involvency".

I don't wish for danforth to be grouped in the class of Woke and Buffalobob whereby the discussion is always over something like this.

"both parties have fucked up SS and medicare forever and you still have to insist that some of the pigs at the trough are different from others."

Are you really pretending that if the Dems suggest taxes to ameliorate the problems, the Rs are going to agree that at least has to be a spoke in the wheel?

Get real. The Rs have proven they'd cut taxes in every situation: bad economy? Tax cuts to turn it around. Great economy? Tax cuts to keep it going. War? Tax cuts to coddle the wealthiest. And all the while, taking the highest percentage of income in taxes from guys like YOU.

Danforth, all I'm saying is they can project what and when to money is going to owed. By not addressing it, they are ignoring the reality of what they should know will happen. I understand your point.

Are you really pretending that if the Dems suggest taxes to ameliorate the problems, the Rs are going to agree that at least has to be a spoke in the wheel?

don't tell me to get real. if you need to play games with yourself like "what if" so you can pretend that dems are any different then you are the one who needs to "get real".

you are pissing about a position the repubs have NOT taken on a bill or issue the dems HAVE NOT even suggested(seriously).

you might as well accuse the repubs of voting against healthcare rights for illegal aliens from outerspace (if the the dems were to propose it)

geez

Please explain how cap and trade would cause the US government to give trillions of dollars to other nations.

#21 | Posted by DARTHCHENEY
* * * *

Because as US companies pay for their emissions, they have to be invested in "offsets" in third world countries. The UN at first insisted on $100 billion a year from the United States, and now it's up to $300 billion.

Why do you think the Dems from the industrialized states are running away from it? Is it because they hate the planet? Or even Dums can't stomach the idea of putting big taxes on Ford, and zipping it over to the Congo?

Make no mistake about it, if the Republicans ever get the chance they will privatize SS and end Medicare as we know it. At the same time they whine about increasing liabilities we have more concentration of wealth than any time in our history. As the rich get richer and the working class gets poorer arguments against allowing tax increases for the rich are going to be shouted down more and more often. We need to take our country back alright, we need to start taking back the money that is needed to pay for the wars started by Republicans, to pay down the debt run up by Republicans. This country simply can't ever afford another Republican majority or another cynical bastard who want to be (and said so before he was elected) a war time president.

"Medicare, OTOH, is the 800 lb. gorilla."

Gee, whodathunk that creating a program to take care of the people private insurance companies don't want to insure would cause a problem.
Hey, let's let the private insurers keep all the younger, healthier folks and then when they become disabled or elderly us taxpayers will take the load after those insurance companies have profited for decades on that same person. Gee, what a great deal...for the insurance companies.
It's plain stupid.
We need to make one health care system for everyone and pay for it either through taxes or premiums on working people.
It would insure everyone, lower costs and dramatically improve our economy by taking away the burden of health care from our industries. BTW, I always hear the righties wanting to help business until the biggest burden they have to bear comes up, then they are surprisingly silent.

We have been down this road!! Does everyone have memory loss?

About 15 years ago they tried to privatize Medicare. Aetna, the Blues, Prudential all jumped in...less than 6 months later they dumped everyone back on MCARE!!

Did they really think elderly care would be a profit industry??

HEALTH CARE CANNOT BE QUALITY CARE AND A PROFIT INDUSTRY!

Make no mistake about it, if the Republicans ever get the chance they will privatize SS and end Medicare as we know it.

you're a loon.

Gee, what a great deal...for the insurance companies.
It's plain stupid.

you're a loon.

It would insure everyone, lower costs and dramatically improve our economy by taking away the burden of health care from our industries.

you're a loon.

My price increases as tax season progresses, and with 300 clients, I'll be working until late on April 15th. About half my clients come after March 15th.

#40 | Posted by Danforth at 2010-02-05 12:21 PM | Reply

Never thought of that. I just bill a flat $250 per hour all year long.

I usually knock off at noon on April 15th, close the office and take the staff out for dinner and drinks.

"Medicare, OTOH, is the 800 lb. gorilla."

Well maybe the Republicans should not have passed a drug program that was not paid for.

Of all the fauxrage I hear these days, the fauxrage over health care is the funniest. Suddenly paying for things are a priority when for the previous two terms it wasn't. Just another example of deficits don't matter.

Never thought of that. I just bill a flat $250 per hour all year long.

Shit, why not just say $500 per hour while you are going to lie?

I usually knock off at noon on April 15th, close the office and take the staff out for dinner and drinks.

5 value meals might run him $35 when he is done.

Of all the fauxrage I hear these days, the fauxrage over health care is the funniest. Suddenly paying for things are a priority when for the previous two terms it wasn't. Just another example of deficits don't matter.

you have no argument then.

got it.

I have been harsh on this thread because of the pissing and moaning over this stupid subject.

There is no fucking way the repubs could ever successfully pull this off.

When they had the WH, and both houses of congress this issue went NOWHERE.

why on earth would you idiots think this has any merit?

Oh, I know.....because you are bottom feeding partisan pigs who would rather jump in the pigpen and play with shit than just walk away and let the pigs play with themselves.

I just bill a flat $250 per hour all year long.

While there are many people in the world who bill at that rate, there is a 0% chance that someone as stupid as you is one of them.

and how about this obama plan

"I will double our trade exports'

anyone REALLY believe that one?????

"When they had the WH, and both houses of congress this issue went NOWHERE."

Nowhere?!? It went to every dog-and-pony Republican outpost in the country. Weren't you watching as, again and again, preselected questioners asked preselected questions?

The reason it ultimately failed wasn't for lack of Rs trying; Bush wasted a year, and lost a lot of steam when he had to admit his proposals wouldn't address the problems. Well, that, and his cockamamie plan of no new taxes, no later retirement dates, and no way to pay for it, all during a time of falling birth rates, something no respected economist ever endorsed.

As a sidelight, I believe we should privatize SS, ultimately. And you'll probably hear an even greater cry in a few years as it turns from a cash cow to an albatross...and, yes, becomes insolvent. But whoever does it will impose a double burden on that generation, paying for their parents' SS along with their own, to the tune of about $2 trillion in today's dollars...

...about the same amount pissed away in Iraq.

Drops in the DOW like yesterday will ensure that any attempt to privatize SS will be doomed.

Yes. It is more likely a collapse in the Dow will give the Dems (or Repubs) an excuse to nationalize private pensions. It's a $15 trillion market they would love to have to sop up treasuries to keep interest rates down.

Nowhere?!? It went to every dog-and-pony Republican outpost in the country. Weren't you watching as, again and again, preselected questioners asked preselected questions?

I know that Rs tried to push it but they knew it would go nowhere.....just like a lot of issues. It gathers favor with their base but you don't really have to deliver.

Kind of like the way abortion is used by both parties.

As a sidelight, I believe we should privatize SS, ultimately

why?

"why?"

I believe borrowing against the future for something like that is ultimately a bad idea. There are also HUGE problems that aren't addressed, like the baby boomers' ratio to the rest of the workers, or increases in human longevity. Current SS recipients should be paid from their contributions, not yours & mine. Unfortunately, it'll take $2 trillion to get out from behind that 8-ball. Bush could've chosen that over, say, tax cuts, or Iraq, but it seems we had to invade, and slash taxes on the wealthiest instead.

"I know that Rs tried to push it but they knew it would go nowhere"

I disagree. Had support swelled, it would have happened. Instead, every time Bush opened his mouth and started to explain it, approval dropped a point. By the end, even the Rs were racing toward the exits. And admitting his ideas wouldn't address the problems was the death knell.

#68 | Posted by Danforth at 2010-02-05 03:19 PM | Reply | Flag:

Sounds like healthcare....

Unfortunately, it'll take $2 trillion to get out from behind that 8-ball.

I thought you said this just a few posts ago....

Unfixed, it will, soon, but with a few minor tweaks -- say, increasing the amount a half-point for both employer and employee -- it's solvent for another three generations.

that seems contradictory to me. It appears you first thought it was a quick fix and now you think it is impossible.

I disagree. Had support swelled, it would have happened. Instead, every time Bush opened his mouth and started to explain it, approval dropped a point. By the end, even the Rs were racing toward the exits. And admitting his ideas wouldn't address the problems was the death knell.

hogwash. all of that was pandering to their base.

Lets see if I get this straight.

Democrats create social security.
Democrats force everyone into system paying 12.2% of income up to $95,000.
Democrats steal money from the system and leave an IOU note.
Democrats promise to repay money into system.
How do you ask?
By taking more money in taxes from those same people who put money into the social security system in the first place.

It seems to me I would rather have a bunch of greedy slimeball Wallstreet fatcats manage my money than the democrat party through social security.

Do the math: An average person paying 12.2% of their income into an IRA from the time they are 18 to 65 which is 47 years at just 5% interest compounded annually would have approximately 1 million dollars. They would have more income off of the interest of the money than social security pays and still get to keep the entire million dollar principal to leave to their kids.

No wonder democrats are so stupid they think that social security actually works.

"Lets see if I get this straight."

You didn't.

You got the income figure wrong, you got the "promise" wrong, and you conveniently left out the fact Rs have done all you're accusing Ds of doing.

"Do the math: An average person paying 12.2% of their income into an IRA from the time they are 18 to 65 which is 47 years at just 5% interest compounded annually would have approximately 1 million dollars. "

And you flunk math.

If you can find a 5% passbook savings rate, you might have a point. Impossible.

The stock market has cost millions much of their 401K's and put pension plans in jeopardy too.

Americanundies, I am referring to the stock market which has historically given about a 9% return. 5% is playing it safe.

Don't you guys ever question why your money was stolen from the trust fund or why the government doesn't pay interest?

Oh, thats right they would have to tax us more to pay the interest. So we would be paying ourselves back the money they taxed in the first place and then stole and then taxed us again to pay ourselves back later.

Yep, with logic like that the democrat sheeple will just keep drinking the kool-aid.

Average yearly wages for today's 65 year old (men) when they began work at 18? $4291. SS witholding rate in 1962? 6%

People who begin posts with insults don't really have a point, BUZKILLER

Today's holders of 401K plans are doing backflips because they've lost so much of their retirement thanks to the stock market? Pension plans got hit big time too.

"I am referring to the stock market which has historically given about a 9% return."

Of course, you'd better be born on the right date:

"From 1900 to 1943, the DJIA only increased at a rate of return of 2.3% per year. Another stagnant and long duration was from about 1962 to 1982 (20 years), when the DJIA only increased at a rate of 2.4% per year."

So it seems history proves the exact opposite of your point: regardless the "historic" returns, it ebbs and flows, so having it in a larger general fund over a longer time allows for the natural ups and downs of the economy, without subjecting recipients to roller-coaster rides.

"Average yearly wages for today's 65 year old (men) when they began work at 18? $4291. SS witholding rate in 1962? 6%"

There you go again, AU...you and your pesky "facts".

DANFORTH

Facts are way too inconvenient to the wacko right. Also seems they've lost 8 whole years (2001-2009) in a black hole. And, despite bringing up Carter and Clinton any chance they got when Bush was President, mention Bush and the spendthrift, irresponsible GOP who created this mess when they left office a YEAR ago?:

Waaaaaa! Waaaaaa! Get out of the paaaaaaaaast! Waaaaaaaa!

#79 | Posted by Danforth
So it seems history proves the exact opposite of your point: regardless the "historic" returns, it ebbs and flows, so having it in a larger general fund over a longer time allows for the natural ups and downs of the economy, without subjecting recipients to roller-coaster rides.
--------------------
I'm no Warren Buffet, but I'm doing quite well in the market and will retire early fat and happy thanks to Wall Street.

An inflation adjusted bond fund is safe, and gives you a better rate of return than what I get in S.S which returns negative interest for me.

I take Wall Street over Social Security any day.

That said I agree with some of the posters comments that trying to privatize S.S. will get the seniors nervous, and your pay at the polls.

privatizing a portion of social security - -
here is hoping the the repubs can clearly explain it this time

also . . . REAL Dems would NOT oppose it - -
the BIG GVT PROGRESSIVE LEFT would oppose it

simple reason

VERY DIFFERENT FROM CURRENT SS . . . where they basicly STOP paying after death . . .

whatever wealth is accumulated in the PRIVATE account would stay with surviving family - - -

THAT WOULD BE A HUGE-HUGE WEALTH INFLUX TO LOWER & MIDDLE CLASS FAMILIES

I dunno Danforth. $10.8 trillion over 11 years is pretty close to a trillion a year. Are you saying that I'm lying, because it's actually "only" $981 billion?

Okay. Hope and change. So it's not 2.5 times as bad as Bush, but 2.45 times. Us lying bastards on the right! We should be ashamed of ourselves!

Keep believin'.

And, despite bringing up Carter and Clinton any chance they got when Bush was President, mention Bush and the spendthrift, irresponsible GOP who created this mess when they left office a YEAR ago?:
* * * *

And--Obama's more than twice is bad.

Can you imagine the deficits he's going to be leaving to HIS successor? But that's okay. He's black, you know. Nothing is his fault. Senate and House majorities, even after eight years of optimistic projections, he's ringing up debt at more than twice the rate Bush ever did.

But AmUnity--he's love the Dems. So nothing wrong with those debts.

"But that's okay. He's black, you know. Nothing is his fault."

Is it difficult for you to type through those white sheets?

He was elected because he's black. That's how he won the primary. The only demographic that gives him high approval ratings right now are the minorities.

No. I'm just trying to see the world through their eyes. You know, apathy and all that. It's the lefties, and their belief that minorities can't possibly compete absent the AA bennies that liberals--out of the goodness of their bottomless souls--give them. Bill Clinton managed to get a lot done despite having hostile majorities of the other party. Barack Obama can't get anything done, despite huge majorities of his own party, but still manages to get away with blaming everyone else.

We'll see how many go along with that.