In response to:

Social Security Cliff in Sight

canetoad Wrote: Jan 18, 2013 7:21 PM
It is not that there is no money in America, it is because all the money has mysteriously been filtered upwards and is currently lining the pockets of just a few. As of 2010, the top 1% of households (the upper class) owned 35.4% of all privately held wealth, and the next 19% (the managerial, professional, and small business stratum) had 53.5%, which means that just 20% of the people owned a remarkable 89%, leaving only 11% of the wealth for the bottom 80% (wage and salary workers). And you still want to give these guys a tax break an a cut of social security............give me a break instead.
alopekos teumesios Wrote: Jan 19, 2013 10:58 AM
High end consumers have high end income and assets that can leave the country. Forget it! The established, entrenched government is NEVER, I repeat NEVER going to penalize the wealthy enough to satisfy your spending urges for the poor and downtrodden. Just get it out of your little OWS mind. They control the guns and have plenty of sycophantic bullies who can't wait to beat you to a pulp when you act up. Unless you want to engage in armed revolution.. but wait, you already said that you're afraid of guns being in the hands of "common" citizens, so it ain't gonna happen your way.
canetoad Wrote: Jan 18, 2013 10:00 PM
The current public debt stands at around $16 trillion. That is a long way from $100 trillion.
canetoad Wrote: Jan 18, 2013 9:57 PM
High end consumers would just take their consumption overseas while the poor old farm worker, maid, k-mart employee and other low paid workers would be asked to foot the bill for providing the education for a skilled workforce, the roads that get products to market, the security to ship oil from overseas and many other services that wealthy Americans rely on to conduct their business. A progressive tax is the only fair tax.
alopekos teumesios Wrote: Jan 18, 2013 8:35 PM
Toad,

I'll give everyone who works a break. How about no income tax, a national sales tax and higher tariffs, especially on imported luxuries? Costs to high-end consumers will go up, but maybe we won't have such a materialistic, consumption driven, wasteful society. Maybe we could actually become self-sufficient, but community oriented, instead of socializing via shopping malls and electronic media. How about keeping our wealth at home and minding our own business? The current state of affairs sure as hell isn't working out well.
MoreFreedom Wrote: Jan 18, 2013 8:04 PM
It's no mystery why just a few are getting richer. The more power government has to pick winners/losers, the more power the rich will have relative to the rest of us. And government has been getting more power to choose winners.

There is money in the USA, but our government has obligations that exceed $100 trillion dollars, and that's worth more than everything in the USA, both public and privately owned. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704288304576170974226083178.html

Government has promised everything you own to others (others including you if you live to retirement).

In response to my post Making Social Security Actuarially Sound in a Business-Friendly Manner I have been exchanging emails and phone conversations with Jed Graham at Investor's Business Daily.

Jed thinks benefit cuts will happen, and I agree. However, Social Security cuts are considered the "third rail" in politics.

If you are not familiar with the term, it means anyone espousing cuts cannot be elected.

Retirees Will Outlive Trust Fund

Graham's current position on the viability of Social...