|
Kinda hard to take seriously someone who wants to investigate all Democratic Congressional members for their loyalty to America... |
|
|
All you Obamanistas marching in lock step to change the country? Sorry, can't do it. Broke. |
|
|
with the damage to the country democrats have made with entitlements they should be investigated ,their loyalty is suspect. |
|
|
This story and others on government budget projections remind me of Russian 5 year plans. How do our government officials projections line up with actual compared to what Russia used to do? Are optimistic plans in the face of reality a trap that utopian dreamers cannot resist. |
|
|
For a long time (every sinced I started working)that this Act needed to be sunseted. It might have worked if the Johnson Administration and the Tax and Spend Congress had kept their hands off of it. |
|
The wasting of the surplus was Bush's. So was the trillion for the lied-into Iraq War, not to mention the useless sacrificing of 5,000 troops' lives. So were the bailouts of Bear Stearns in spring, 2008, and the 700 billion for the other financials the following fall.
How exactly has Obama "damaged" the country? Aren't jobless rates falling? Market improving?
Do you want Joseph McCarthy back? Do you despise the Constitution that much? |
|
Jobless rates aren't falling. Jobs are though (still). Don't be disillusioned by that fact the people are giving up the search and don't get counted as unemployed.
You pinhead, We don't don't depise the Constitution. We want to rescue it from Obamination.
Are you the new Acorn/Soros poster getting paid to be here? Seems like a new one shows up every couple months. Same stupidity, different name.
|
|
|
What surplus? That prediction was made in 1998/1999, and was a paper surplus. I predicted that on January 1, 2000, the U.S.of A. and the rest of the world would enter a recession, and guess what happened? The money used to make the whole world Y2K ready was all used up, everything was new and nobody needed anything. And much of it was much ado about nothing. So there was NO SURPLUS. |
|
"Do you despise the Constitution that much?"
Despise the Constitution? What part of "enumerated powers" don't you understand? |
|
Michele, I applaud your efforts, but we all know that Congress is going to work everyone to the grave so they don't have to pay SS and Medicare benefits. That's part of what Obamacare is all about. They most definitely want to unplug Granny. It's a two-fer. No more Medicare and no more SS benefits paid out. We aren't stupid.
Those not retired now will all be worked to death, unless, of course, there is a violent revolution. Which in my opinion is becoming a more real possibility with every passing day. I am stunned at things I read and hear since TARP passed. People feel like if they are going to die anyway, they want some payback against the scum (Michele and a handful of others excepted) who have robbed them of their future and their freedom. Glad I won't live to see it- I hope. |
|
It's going broke next year.
Raise taxes? Yes.
Reduce spending? No.
Print more money? Probably.
Borrow? Heh. The Chinese know that our debt is unsustainable.
Are you worried yet, Democrats? No.
|
|
"Social Security is Broke"
Social Security is "broke" in the same sense that you'd say a family is broke if:
1. They had enough money in savings to survive for FOUR YEARS with no income whatsoever.
2. They had a GUARANTEED INCOME every year for the foreseeable future so high that they won't run out of money for THIRTY YEARS.
3. If they adjust their income very slightly, maybe have on of the kids get a weekend job, they'll NEVER RUN OUT OF MONEY.
Is that family "broke?" I don't think so. |
|
equals less revenue. They will do what all politicians before them have done.
1) Raise taxes
2) Increase tax limit
3) Raise the age of regular retirement
4) Raise the age or eliminate early retirement
5) Reduce benefits
Welcome to the golden age of retirement! |
|
there are seniors out there who are collecting more than they paid into the system PLUS interest while sitting on millions in the bank. Why?
After you have been repaid for your contribution plus interest you should have to prove need.
Otherwise you are taking from workers. Hey you rich old folks. You are going to meet your maker some day and be judged. Maybe sooner than later. Do you want the sin of greedily taking from the working lower classes while sitting on piles of money? Think about it.
|
|
"After you have been repaid for your contribution plus interest you should have to prove need."
That's not the way it works. I was taxed for my entire working life to provide SS etc. FOR OTHER PEOPLE. The money wasn't going into any account for my future, it was going to pay benefits to people who qualified for them at the time. It happens that I paid the maximum FICA contribution in every year from 1966 to 2007, but it isn't my money. I shouldn't get any more because I paid way, way more than the amount needed to qualify.
Should there be needs testing for SS? Sure, I'd accept that, and it would probably greatly reduce or completely eliminate the benefits I receive. Still, I'd vote for politicians who proposed and passed such a law.
"Otherwise you are taking from workers. Hey you rich old folks. You are going to meet your maker some day and be judged."
It's not that simple. First, no "maker," no judgment. When I die, I cease to exist, just like you. Also when I die, all of my remaining money goes to charity, charities of my choosing. So am I stealing from the working poor? Nope. |
|
Spendthrift Prez., and his Minions, spend our taxes like there's no tomorrow! Just think about all the unnecessary self indulgences the Obamas have enjoyed at tax payers expense. Perks for a President is fine but not during a recession, possible depression! How many hurting people and needed improvements could have benefited from the quarter of a million dollars spent for pleasure on DATE night. Obamas have enough big bucks, let them pay for the fuel cost etc,. Live the good life on your dime, don't keep wasting our hard earned tax dollars. Michelle are you finally happy with your Country now that your every desire etc., is fullfilled? How many expensive aids have you employed now, at the White House, just to groom you and make every wish come true! Palin was faulted for her rich VP wardrobe,(loaned'to campaign in) what about your lavish clothes/shoes etc,? King & Queen Obama, perhaps now you won't resent our great America so much? Oh thats right Michelle you referred to our Country as a MEAN one!
|
|
shut your yapper. you are a disgrace to the GOP, much less our country.
saving social security is a piece of cake: just make the eligibility age 75 instead of 65. it recognizes actuarial realities and it would be a long overdue service from this generation to the country. problem solved. next?! |
|
"make the eligibility age 75 instead of 65."
I suggest that you call your Congressman. |
|
|
|
there are seniors out there who are collecting more than they paid into the system PLUS interest while sitting on millions in the bank. Why?
_________________________________________________
I'd venture to guess that most people recieve more than they paid into the system. Unless you die early!
Let's understand the system we have...it's a ponzi scheme...pyramid system. People work and get taxed to pay for the previous generation and so on and so on.
Is it right..probably not the way it has been abused but it's what we have. Now let's see what politician will come along and say.."We broke and can't pay no more". Anybody? Anybody? |
|
"saving social security is a piece of cake: just make the eligibility age 75 instead of 65."
I have to disagree with that. There are jobs in which working past 65 is close to impossible -- outdoor jobs, hard physical labor, etc. A much higher percentage of jobs were of that kind back in 1937 when they came up the the retire-at-65 rule, but they still exist, and for some of them even 65 is too high. Maybe we need some kind of physical capabilities test, but what rules would we use and who would create and enforce them?
I'd rather just remove the cap on FICA-taxable earnings. That solves the whole problem forever. |
|
"W" attempted to fix Social Security four years ago but the Dems told the country the program was sound. Do you mean the Democrats lied to us?
Seriously have the Dems ever been truthful about anything? |
|
"Should there be needs testing for SS? Sure, I'd accept that,"
"I'd rather just remove the cap on FICA-taxable earnings. That solves the whole problem forever"
Like a true statist Bob. Take more from others and give them back less.
Rig the redistribution machine.
And you wonder why you had to change your name to get back on this site.
Your vision has made you so popular!
|
|
|
with dems and congress.Now the ANSWER to the healthcare problem is to make INSURANCE a law with a $3,800 fine, and this will help us HOW.They dont want to fix healthcare, they want to use it to grab power and money from us ALL. Throw them all out with the garbage next election, and finish them off the following one as well.I have watched as every part of the constitution I fought for by serving in the army, has been sidestepped and ignored by OUR CONGRESS, who have only worked for themselves and ruined everything they put their hands on, and I am sick of this and hope most americans are finally fed up with it and ready to take control back from them and exercize our right to SELF GOVERNMENT without interferance from the federal government who has gone outside the constitution and needs to be repealed along with all the LAWS they have forced upon us to remake this country in their warped mind. |
|
"Take more from others and give them back less."
Social Security doesn't give anything "back." Your FICA taxes go to pay current benefits, not your future benefits.
"And you wonder why you had to change your name to get back on this site."
What do you mean by that? |
|
Michelle is a true genius..
did she just wake from another coma?
Palin?Bachmann 2012
DREAM TEAM! |
|
|
Well what is that statement I get in the mail from the social security administration every year or so telling me how much I am going to get someday? |
|
You are like.....Star Trek cool......
I would call you Spock but you can't bring any logic to the table.
Put in more, get out less. And everybody will be happy!!
That's sounds more like Klingon #5.
Same old Bob!
|
|
|
|
"Well what is that statement I get in the mail from the social security administration every year or so telling me how much I am going to get someday?"
Your benefit is based on the average of the highest 35 years of your income, up to the cutoff and indexed by wage inflation. That number is likely to change every year, so they keep you up to date on what it is.
Jeez, don't you even know basic facts like this? How can you say anything about SS if you're ignorant of it? |
|
I'm very impressed with that little smoke and mirror name gag you pulled.
First it reads one thing. The next second.......
Poof!
It reads something different.
Did you teach that trick to the Social Security Administration or did they teach it to you? |
|
|
|
Yeah I saw that when you first posted it.
BFD
Here's a tip, focus a little more on making sense in your posts and a litle less time on the cool tech stuff.
Then you maybe you wouldn't have to slum it up with the comments about.........well you and everyone else here know how pathetic you can be.
There's no sense in repeating it now.
|
|
"Yeah I saw that when you first posted it."
Then why were you impressed by it now? |
|
Nice try Bob!
No wonder you think you can get people to put more money in SS and get less out.
And that all will be well!!!
Same type of trick.
With you guys more money from others backed by promises you can't keep is always the solution!
It never ends............
|
|
"No wonder you think you can get people to put more money in SS and get less out."
As I explained to poor, ignorant Dose of Reality above, benefits are based on your average income up to the FICA cap. If the cap is eliminated, those above the current cap will pay more in taxes AND RECEIVE MORE IN BENEFITS. I would have thought that was pretty obvious. |
|
Robert (Bob) Munck
"The Pit Bull of the Non Sequitur"
Bites down and holds on for dear life!
I get how it works Bob. Do you?
Cuz' no matter how you say it......
We're all getting schtuped!
And your solution is to schtup some more.
|
|
Bob Munck writes: Tuesday, September, 08, 2009 11:40 PM
Eugene 11:26 PM
"No wonder you think you can get people to put more money in SS and get less out."
As I explained to poor, ignorant Dose of Reality above, benefits are based on your average income up to the FICA cap. If the cap is eliminated, those above the current cap will pay more in taxes AND RECEIVE MORE IN BENEFITS. I would have thought that was pretty obvious.
Arch says
It is only obvious to a fool. SS is going bankrupt as more take out than pay. Where is the money coming from Bob? Who will pay for my benefits as the money dwindles to Zero?
Tell us how you will justify that! |
|
"Where is the money coming from Bob?"
FICA taxes. Didn't you know that?
"Who will pay for my benefits as the money dwindles to Zero?"
Workers and employers who pay FICA taxes, just like now. And there will always be several hundred million of them. |
|
"The Pit Bull of the Non Sequitur"
What did I say that you think is a non sequitur? You seem to be unable to follow very simple chains of logic. |
|
Am I Abbott or Costello this time?
|
|
Bob Munck writes: Wednesday, September, 09, 2009 12:32 AM
arch 12:16 AM
"Where is the money coming from Bob?"
FICA taxes. Didn't you know that?
"Who will pay for my benefits as the money dwindles to Zero?"
Workers and employers who pay FICA taxes, just like now. And there will always be several hundred million of them.
Arch says
How will they be able to make mortgage payments and grocery bills if they have to pay 75% of their earnings to support Fica? Why not tax people 100% to pay for all your goodies?
You are economically and socially retarded Bob.
You do not understand human nature. People will not work if they can not reap the fruits of their labors. Only in the libtard mind is somebody elses money not theirs! |
|
"How will they be able to make mortgage payments and grocery bills if they have to pay 75% of their earnings to support Fica?"
The SS portion of the FICA tax is 6.2% up to the cap of $102,000. If the cap were removed, that percentage would go down a bit.
"People will not work if they can not reap the fruits of their labors."
The marginal tax rate was above 70% -- as high as 95% -- from 1937 to 1982. During that time some of the great American fortunes were laid down; people got rich and paid their taxes. Since 1987 the marginal rate has been below 40%, and rich people have been moving their money overseas at an alarming rate to avoid the much lower taxes. |
|
You bang on munck for a while........
I have to go to work to pay for someone to sit on their a@@ with a promise from Barry that someday, I'll get to do the same.
And Munck's ( and to be fair to Bob, a lot of other's) solution is for everybody to pony up more!!!!!
How much longer do you think they'll be able to keep this scam going before everybody working goes 'Eff' this and stays home?
|
|
"And Munck's ... solution is for everybody to pony up more!!!!!"
Only 20% of taxpayers earn above the FICA cap; it's hardly "everybody." If the rate goes down, 80% would pay less. |
|
Eugene writes: Wednesday, September, 09, 2009 1:19 AM
Arch
You bang on munck for a while........
I have to go to work to pay for someone to sit on their a@@ with a promise from Barry that someday, I'll get to do the same.
And Munck's ( and to be fair to Bob, a lot of other's) solution is for everybody to pony up more!!!!!
How much longer do you think they'll be able to keep this scam going before everybody working goes 'Eff' this and stays home?
Arch says.
Eugene. That is the leftist plan. Ruin the liberty and freedom of the individual. They don't think. They feel. As long as the right to bear arms and freedom of speech is unimpaired, human nature will prevail. Look what happened to the USSR! The great experiment failed precisely because of the disregard for human nature. Millions died and were enslaved as the central government became omnipotent over them by denying them their guns and liberty! The libtards are going down the same road like lemmings. Fools and idiots! I have no respect for them. What have they ever contributed to the well being of humanity ever in the history of the world? Nothing but misery and suffering. A plague upon the earth and humanity. Lying, cheating, and deceit are the main mode of operation for the leftist. Vlad and others exhibit them here. I do not ever succumb to their sympathies. They would never to ours! If I had my way, I would rid the world of them and their philosophy! I would die in peace instead of shame. So it goes for all the evils of humanity. You cannot get rid of a virus by being nice to it! |
|
|
Well at least there's one congress person out there that's actually paying attention to real issues, and concern about our current obligations, instead of trying to make more, via a new health care entitlement....http://cooperscopy.blogspot.com/ |
|
"Only 20% of taxpayers earn above the FICA cap; it's hardly "everybody." If the rate goes down, 80% would pay less."
Geez Bob, you are correct!
This is what I mean by the non seq comment.
When you are in the top 20%, as I am, it might as well be everybody!
As it stands right now the 80% still get nothing when the thing goes BK......
And they don't have my sense of humor Bob........ |
|
Bob Munck writes: Wednesday, September, 09, 2009 1:09 AM
arch 12:51 AM
"How will they be able to make mortgage payments and grocery bills if they have to pay 75% of their earnings to support Fica?"
The SS portion of the FICA tax is 6.2% up to the cap of $102,000. If the cap were removed, that percentage would go down a bit.
"People will not work if they can not reap the fruits of their labors."
The marginal tax rate was above 70% -- as high as 95% -- from 1937 to 1982. During that time some of the great American fortunes were laid down; people got rich and paid their taxes. Since 1987 the marginal rate has been below 40%, and rich people have been moving their money overseas at an alarming rate to avoid the much lower taxes.
Arch says
Munck. And why would that be?
If they wouldn't be raped of their earnings, they would still be here. If you earn a dollar, then that dollar should be yours. Right? How do you justify taking it away by government edict?
I guess you have never had to earn a buck! |
|
Social Security until we're blue in the face but odds are that the system will NOT change. Yes they may tax people who make more money higher but then that leads to treating people differently. Then what defines what's different?
Government systems are primarily set up as "one size fits all". They are not equiped to handle differences in circumstances...and they want to run healthcare? They can't even account for some $8 billion dollars in medicaid fraud in New York alone.
I think that Social Security should have been modified over the last 8 years when it was proposed to allow younger people to set aside some of their taxes for their own private plan.
Don't forget, Social Security was NEVER meant to be a stand alone retirement system. It is what it is and we got it....let's try something else that would coincide this. Reagan tried it with the IRA's and it was successful. |
|
"This is what I mean by the non seq comment."
Apparently the problem is that you don't know what the phrase "non sequitur" means.
"When you are in the top 20%, as I am, it might as well be everybody!"
Sure you are. I thought McDonalds pays people in your position (standing in front of the fry machine) minimum wage.
"As it stands right now the 80% still get nothing when the thing goes BK."
Social Security cannot "go broke." From my comment at 7:14 PM above:
Social Security is "broke" in the same sense that you'd say a family is broke if:
1. They had enough money in savings to survive for FOUR YEARS with no income whatsoever.
2. They had a GUARANTEED INCOME every year for the foreseeable future so high that they won't run out of money for THIRTY YEARS.
3. If they adjust their income very slightly, maybe have one of the kids get a weekend job, they'll NEVER RUN OUT OF MONEY.
Is that family "broke?" I don't think so. |
|
Want to come over here and bang you head against this wall with me? Or you can have that one over there.
Town Hall headlines:
"Social Security is Broke"
"Eugene and Arch have discovered a second brain cell"
"Santa Claus is coming" |
|
If you were on the Titanic Bob, you would be standing on the deck telling the captain how he could avoid the iceberg the next time!
Now that's a non sequitur Bob.
|
|
"Santa Claus is coming"
Especially for those who thinkg that taking more and giving less is not the same as taking more and giving less.
And Oh yeah!. "I can't be overdrawn!! I still have checks left!!!"
And the best one yet, "Social Security is going to be OK. Bob Munck said so!!!" |
|
"Now that's a non sequitur"
You really need to look that phrase up in a dictionary. |
|
I was being nice and just giving you the benefit of the doubt.
You are right. Non Seqitur is not the correct phrase.
I should have said left wing lies and flawed reasoning only a lunatic could come up with.
I was much more accurate with the Titanic example than I thought.
Sorry. My bad.
Let me correct.
BOB MUNCK:
The Pit Bull of Left Wing Lies and Flawed Reasoning only a Lunatic Could Come Up With!
Yes. It is better!! |
|
Since you are such a fan of the dictionary.
Look up bankrupt, insolvent and most importantly....... Ponzi.
And explain how none of that applies to SS.
|
|
|
Social security is not broke. Neither is is bankrupt or insolvent. Bachmann's headline is a lie. |
|
Credit where credit is due Vlad.
You think it's a lie. Props for just coming out and saying so.
I don't agree of course, but props none the less.
|
|
|
The moon isn't made of green cheese. Do I get props for that? |
|
vladimir estragon writes: Wednesday, September, 09, 2009 1:07 PM
LOL
The moon isn't made of green cheese. Do I get props for that?
Arch says.
Think you are funny Vlad? You are sick! You are not decent by any moral standards including cannibals. You proudly display your intent of politics to take away liberty and freedom from your fellow citizens. That is evil plain and simple. You are evil and a liar. How do you have the nads to claim anyone is a liar when you are the convicted king of lies!
I proved that! Kaboom is better than you
Now live with your life choices! |
|
tat ain't chicken feed....
http://mwhodges.home.att.net/cur-year-deficit-trusts.htm |
|
The age has already been pushed back to 67 and will go move to 69 depending on the year you were born.
The Social Security Trust Fund has been raided by congress for years, the main reason there is no money left.
The Public Health Trust Fund to be set up by this bill will have the ‘taxes’ deposited into it and money from the ‘general fund’ of $2-4 billion for start up plus an amount equal to 90 days of anticipated payouts.
In the first year of the Massachusetts plan with the deposits they made the plot still came up over $6 billion short. The ERs are more crowded than ever, the wait times for care are getting longer (months) and doctors are leaving the state. No tort reform was in their plan either and the insurance rates for all insurance in MA is higher than almost any other state if not still the highest.
So adding a few trillion more to the deficit will help this problem? |
|
SEC. 1222. DEMONSTRATION TO PROMOTE ACCESS FOR MEDICARE BENEFICIARIES WITH LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENCY BY PROVIDING REIMBURSEMENT FOR CULTURALLY AND LINGUISTICALLY APPROPRIATE SERVICES.
Secretary, acting through the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, shall carry out a demonstration program under which the Secretary shall award not fewer than 24 3-year grants
What will this cost? |
|
ACCOUNTABLE CARE ORGANIZATION PILOT PROGRAM
A) IN GENERAL- A qualifying ACO qualifies to receive an incentive payment if expenditures for applicable beneficiaries are less than a target spending level or a target rate of growth. The incentive payment shall be made only if savings are greater than would result from normal variation in expenditures for items and services covered under parts A and B.
|
|
"The moon isn't made of green cheese. Do I get props for that"
The moon is to made of green cheese. That's why we faked the moon landings.
NASA discovered that the LEM's rocket boosters would turn the moon's surface into fondue.
Don't believe me?
Goggle Neil Armstrong, Green Fondue......... |
|
Where is this money coming from? TAXES- TAXES- TAXES
SEC. 9511. HEALTH CARE COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH TRUST FUND.
`(a) Creation of Trust Fund- There is established in the Treasury of the United States a trust fund to be known as the `Health Care Comparative Effectiveness Research Trust Fund' (hereinafter in this section referred to as the `CERTF'), consisting of such amounts as may be appropriated or credited to such Trust Fund as provided in this section and section 9602(b).
(b) Transfers to Fund- There are hereby appropriated to the Trust Fund the following:
(1) For fiscal year 2010, $90,000,000.
2) For fiscal year 2011, $100,000,000.
(3) For fiscal year 2012, $110,000,000.
(4) For each fiscal year beginning with fiscal year 2013--
(A) an amount equivalent to the net revenues received in the Treasury from
(2) ALLOCATION FOR COMMISSION- Not less than the following amounts in the CERTF for a fiscal year shall be available to carry out the activities of the Comparative Effectiveness Research Commission established under section 1181(b) of the Social Security Act for such fiscal year:
`(A) For fiscal year 2010, $7,000,000.
`(B) For fiscal year 2011, $9,000,000.
C) For each fiscal year beginning with 2012, $10,000,000.
|
|
Why doesn't Congress liquidate their sweetheart retirement plan and join the rest of us with Social security, IRAs and 401ks? Because those plans suck and they want their own deal. So they voted that for themselves. Just like their health insurance and other perks. Aren't they a special group?
What is good enough for us is never good enough for them. TERM LIMITS might get their attention when they actually had to earn a living some day.
Every year some genious notes that Soc. Security, Medicare, etc are broke. And every year nothing gets done. The idea that private accounts will solve the problem id ridiculous. If 80% put in under $6000/year. Even if they could put 1/2 into a private account, in forty years they would only have $120,000. As unpredictable as the market is (unless all that could be bought were index funds) investore might have their original investment to fall back on. It is just insignificant in the long run.
There are two options, raise the tax or reduce the benefits. |
|