You mean to the right of Kent Conrad?

Standard from the liar in chief.

There are no words. What an asshole of a President.

So this is Obama’s reaction to Paul Ryan’s budget. “Thanks, Paul! But I’ll do you one better. I’ll see your Medicare cuts and raise you Social Security.”

edit: And yeah, typo – clearly you meant to write to the right of Kent Conrad.

Don’t you mean Barack Obama is officially to the RIGHT of Kent Conrad?

WRITE IN BERNIE SANDERS FOR 2012

Bernie Sanders tweets: On SS surplus
http://twitter.com/#!/SenatorSanders
Social Security has a $2.6 trillion surplus and hasn’t contributed 1 cent to our deficit.

Fuck Obama. Think I’ll write in Mother Jones next year. Even the socialists here have their heads up their asses.

Yeah, sadlyyes, Bernie would be a good write in.

I’m thinking I might write in this dude…

Obama’s stalking horse — The GOP and the GOP-right (Tea Baggers).

Fuck Obama.

With a football.

Sideways.

Yes, fixed.

Senate Democrats “Fuming” at White House Over Social Security Trial Balloon

I thought this was a trial balloon but the Senate Dems are not on board that is surprising?

“Progressive” radio talk show hosts still loves their Obama, especially Bill Press, Ed Schultz and Thom Hartmann. The voice of progressives? Not!!!

I really like that pick…got the right Attitooood….no worries at all. Thanks

What “socialists” are you talking about. SD?

Ahahahahahahahhaah! rotflmfao!

Poor Dems. Poor Babies.

Welcome to *OUR* world.

The senate Ds’ “fume” is all just part of the kabuki.

Obama and Biden can go to Hell.

Any Rat that votes to kill seniors with denial of health care (high Pharma-priced drugs and Medicare cuts so doctors won’t treat seniors) and kill seniors by cutting their Social Security benefits can go to Hell, too.

We need a party that represents the interests of the people. Rats and Rethugs are killers, plain and simple.

Conrad has long argued that Social Security reform should be kept separate from a deficit reduction package.

Debt reduction is a joke the Ryan budget was cuts for us to give tax breaks for the rich. Do we have any numbers saying Obama is doing different?

I think so — I would think most of the Senate Democrats would go along with some “Grand Bargain.” They probably will, too — they’re just pissed they weren’t told.

Social Security is nothing more than a wealth redistribution tool that has proven not to work for the past 40 years. The faster that it is done away with the quicker citizens will start taking saving for their own retirement seriously instead of sucking off the hard work of others.

The image of a WB cartoon with steam coming out of Porkies ears comes to mind

Belive it or not I was undecided on Obama until now. I was trying very hard to figure out what he was all about, assuming he was in fact working from a plan. So I am making it official now – I just plain hate the guy and I wish he were gone. I am truly sick of his pattern of waffling, indecisiveness, absenteeism, lofty speeches and finally – complete capitulation. In that order. I was convinced he was a genius. Now I see he must be very stupid and delusional. He is a very weak president and the GOP owns him.

Wow. Obama seems to have no soul, no conscience, no heart.

Scary.

“Progressive” is the new “Liberal”, which equates with being a partisan Democratic Party loyalist. 5 years ago “progressive” was used for those who were the left of Democrats, but were’t quite full on socialist or anarchist. A person would be considered progressive based on their stance on issues and support for grassroots activism. It had nothing to do with the Democratic Party.

Bernie voted for Obamacare, which is Deathcare. Bernie is a sellout, no thanks.

Beat me to it, eCAHN. My immediate reaction when I read the headline??

Cue the Kabuki Show.

That’s it. Nothing to see here, folks, move along now… Purported “Democrats” will strut on the stage & play their appoint roles, and then they’ll fold like deck chairs running for cover to hide behind the skirts of mean mean mean nasty WeePublicans. boo hooo, they *made* me do it; not my faaauullltt…

What a load of crap.

And that bit of messaging is so beautifully perfect and *true* (what a concept for messaging) I may just start believing in Bernie again.

Lame ass FL socialist party.

Grover? Is that you?

Little was it realized that when the right began calling Obama the “anti-Christ” they were in fact right but for the wrong reasons.

Has somebody been sucking off your hard work lately?

I think if you got your hard work sucked off more often you wouldn’t be such a crotchety asshole.

… clearly a trial balloon intended for Rs consumption. Not Ds. Ds don’t count. rotflmfao.

What is YOUR bank account number?? I’d like to have it now so that it can be “done away with,” so that YOU can “figure out” how to stand on your two feet, for a change. (not snark)

Social Security is nothing more than a wealth redistribution tool that has proven not to work for the past 40 years. The faster that it is done away with the quicker citizens will start taking saving for their own retirement seriously instead of sucking off the hard work of others.

Allow me a few corrections:

SS is a retirement annuity program just like thousands of others.
SS is self funding with tax money paid by people who WORK for a living
SS has been perhaps THE most succesful government program ever
SS is NOT an entitlement – people pay into it with their hard EARNED money

The DNC called this morning looking for money for the congressional campaign. I’m afraid I was not too nice to her, saying if they cut SS, medicare or medicaid they can forget any money or votes from me. Enough bullshit is enough.

Shorter HeadedWest – “Hey you kids! Get offa my lawn!”

Shorter HeadedWest – “I LIE for a living.”

And got money for his state’s clinics. That’s who he represents. If I wait for Mr(s) or Mz Perfect to come along I’ll have long joined my tigers at the Rainbow Bridge.

More likely a lackey for some rich asshole.

You are not alone … on either side of that divide. Welcome to the firebaggers circle.

be merciful this fool only makes 7.25 an hr

I’ve been mailing back their snail-mail donation requests with some pretty sharply worded – but very clear – language about “Democrats” selling out the middle/working class’s hard earned money that has been deposited into the Soc Sec annuity account & Medicare.

They have the nerve to send me snail mail attempting to LIE to me that so-called “Democrats” are going to “save” MY Soc Sec & Medicare from the predations ONLY of rapacious “Republicans.” I mean: can they LIE any more than that??

dont be afraid of the word entitlement
WE ARE ENTITLED to what WE PAID for!!!!!!

Koch-paid sock puppet.

I have NO MERCY for abject LIARS, who repeatedly tell the same LIES endlessly. NO MERCY. It’s crap, and I calls it as I sees it.

LOL – you really do not know jack s…

and it is not worth anyone’s time to educate you.

Yep. Someone deserves an Oscar for their performance.

forgot my snark tag…he is a paid troll

I am sure you can find numbers about lives saved or those who were given a modicum of security due to the SS benefit. It has been a highly favored benefit not only to the seniors/recipients, but also to their children who know that mom & dad will have some stability. You sound as if any care of the community means nothing to you….but maybe I misread.

I get the same shit and am not a registered Vichycrat. I also send them some rather obscene suggestions in the comment section of their donation requests. Fuck ‘em.

And alternate HeadedWest:

“I make up bullshit all day and get paid for it. Booyah!”

and Vermont will have single pauer

Seriously. If there hadn’t been Social Security in 1962 when my Mother died at the age of 44, leaving behind four minor children and her 90-year-old mother, we’d'a been on the street. Clearly, HeadedWest’s head is moving in a more southerly direction than the handle implies.

O, do I miss your clarion sanity……

Good to see your keystrokes.

Whoever’s payin’ him/her sure isn’t gettin’ their money’s worth. Lame motherfucker.

I’m pretty sure others have said this to you already, but just in case. SS might be the very little some people get after they retire. And it is not that they did not try to save. How the hell do you save when wages in this country are so low? The fact is we should be raising SS not cutting it. And note also that companies are doing away with traditional defined benefit plans. And, yes, that means taxes may need to go up and that means in turn that the rich will have to foot some of the bill. Yes, I am prepared to say the middle classes should also pay more. But cutting social programs, inlcuding medicaid, which as someone here said, injures and even kills the old ones is not my idea of the right thing to do.

Of course its an entitlement. It is stealing from those that have earned more to pay those that have earned less. Look at the CBO data, the bottom quintile of household earners are making 20% more than the next quintile and ~30% more than the middle quintile as a percentage of averaged indexed earnings. If the program was just a retirement annuity program those numbers would be even across the board.

And that is completely ignoring the fact that the federal government doesn’t have the constitutional authority to even run a program like this.

uhm…Cong Paul Ryan for one,and Ayn Rosenberg his heroine too

Seconded.

He should really be heading east. To Somalia.

Or maybe he’s just taking the long way around…

i scroll,a no nothing fer sure

Mike Malloy is the only syndicated commercial national program that does not support BO. Yes Mike is a traditional old school liberal.
There are liberals on pacifica radio who aren’t drinking the BO kool-aid.

Thank you.

These ersatz libertarian sock puppets like to make out that Soc Sec is some rip off of the super wealthy who “work harder” than anyone else.

IF that’s so, then these libertarians can forthwith fork over to the mega-wealthy their bank accounts, 401 (k) plans, and any other retirement annuities that they managed to save. Because essentially, that’s what they’re telling us to do with Soc Sec… give it to the wealthy, just because. Soc Sec is like a savings account that I have contributed to for many many years. Why the frick am I supposed to be “ashamed” to use it for my retirement? Why the frick am I being told that the money I contributed to Soc Sec is somehow ruining the nation and/or not legitimately mine to withdraw when I retire???

Boooogus!

The Dems called me several weeks ago sniffing for money and I told the guy what I thought of the Democrats and their dear leader and said I would not be contributing to or voting for the fraud in the WH.

Me too. I’ve gotten three in the last three weeks – - rated O a “fair” on all categories. I even sent a letter back with the last one.

Oh, and an “originalist” to boot. Spare me.

A House GOPer threatens IMPEACHMENT if 14th Amendment is invoked.

That must mean it is a good idea.

It also means that Obama just crawled under the table and won’t come out until the storm has passed.

S
C
R
O
L
L

So where the heck is YOUR bank account number??? You need to dissolve it forthwith; give the money to the Koch brothers; and start learning to “stand on your two feet” for a change.

Where is it??

I’m going to make you a tshirt that says “Got Links?” to remind you to support your assertions with facts when espousing your ill-conceived opinions on this board.

What size are you? And where can I send it?

Where is the fricking Congressional Progressive Caucus that *promised* nothing would be cut from Social Security? Not a word yet.

You are waaaaaay kinder that i’ve been… by a loooong shot.

Don’t hold yer breath, but good to provide the reminder.

Yup and so when they either capitulate it’s good theater or I’m thinking this new more rightward insane proposal now allows them to fully embrace the cough “saner” cough, cough Conrad deficit reduction plan and call it a major win. It’s a cover for what they going to do.

And there will be much back patting and congratulations amongst democrats themselves lauding their heroic efforts saying, vote for us we saved us from cutting more …aren’t we great, vote for us because we’re less worse than it might have been. It’s all along the same political lines of, vote for me because I suck less than the other guy.

Damn them all…damn them all.

Simply a savings account. Good call. We should then be able to opt out and have that money placed in an account in our name at our local credit union rather in the hands of the federal government. We agree.

They must be gettimg a lot of that. Wonder if they ever pass it on?

Amen …

Typo, he meant ‘perfume’

Glad to hear it. Pacifica usually has much more common sense than almost any other media outlet.

AWOL as usual. They wouldn’t have the courage to take on a 5 year old. Just taking up space.

This is exactly what we were expecting since this morning when the leaks came out. *sigh*

flip to chapter 7

http://www.ici.org/pdf/2011_factbook.pdf

I post them, but I can’t make you read them

You do not say if you are an attorney, but what makes you think the constitutionality has not been tested/reviewed/established. Not like the program was just created.

Do you really believe Karl rove didn’t hand pick this clown ?

On republican voting machines ? Remember the vote discrepancies in the primary vote between him and Hillary between machine counted ballots and hand marked ballots ?

He’s a well paid stand in until the next republican election results from the black boxes.

Yes, I thought about that but I gave the benefit of the doubt in some cases. If he caves this time around, it will be really bad. Social programs are the only reason to vote democratic and if they do away with them or make them significantly worse, there would be almost no reason to vote for them.

You don’t have to withdraw Soc Sec, if you don’t want to, since it’s so “tainted” by the dreadful Fed govt. Just don’t sign up for it. Case closed.

And no: you and I agree most likely on nothing, and you know it.

We’ve had this conversation before. I only “indulge” in it for the benefit of others reading here. I realize exactly who you are and who work for.

When the Dems caved so cravenly on healthcare “reform’s” public-option throwaway, after Obama dealt it away in closed-door meetings with health insurers and Big Pharma, they sent a message to our president:
We don’t matter! You can do what you want and we’ll fall in line right in back of you! Love! Love!
Then all the other cave-ins — extending Bush tax cuts, etc., etc.
So, here we are in 2011, Obama is selling Social Security and Medicare out, Dems express outrage. Lather, rinse, repeat.
The fix is in, and not in our favor. All we get are the bills. But hey, he’s a hopey-changey guy!

What we need now is to make the Dubbya tax cuts permanent and lower taxes still to about 15% for rich individuals and -4% for corporations.

Then what more could the Re-duper-dickans possibly want after that?

Suspend habeas corpus?

HeadedWest Hates the USA arm forces? ask Him

HeadedWest like Cheney never served and hates everything USA

HeadedWEST like most WALL STREETERS are ANTI-USA

Headedwest says that WW2 was fought for the TOP 2% only

HeadedWest = OBAMA

How do you say “stealing”? That is bullshit all the way through. If you hate this country that much leave. Where the fuck would you go?

Wait wait wait. You touted CBO studies but linked to Investment Company Factbook.

You want me to trust what an Institute founded by Investment Companies sells the unwashed masses?

Can’t find a link to the original CBO study?

But we are in an agreement its a simple savings plan. Right? So why is the federal government more capable than my local credit union? Seems like there is more transparency at the credit union.

I assume that’s snark, but the conservatives won’t be happy until the mega wealthy & corporations, etc, not only pay NO taxes whatsoever (it happens in Pakistan, for ex), but actually get PAID just to hang around. And yes, suspend habeas corpus for sure.

They will *never* be satisfied. Obama *pretending* to negotiate with Thugs is a mug’s game. There is no negotiating with the Mafia, which is what this is akin to.

This one won’t be a lather,rinse and repeat. They have come to the fucking end of the road here.

you need your mother to keep wiping your ass as well?

http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=11943

page 14

There’s gotta be some accountability for their lack of action fer cryin’ out loud.

Doubling down on the stupid may not be all that original.

There is more than enough “transparency” with Soc Sec. What IS it specifically that is not “transparent”??

The idea is to pool investments in order to realize greater savings.

This is ONE PLUS ONE.

The more money there is, the more there is a greater Return on the Investment.

Millions upon millions of smaller savings accounts – wherever they are stashed – are good, but combining these millions into one pool provides for a greater return on investment. Plus more security for the investors, which are tax-paying US citizens.

You are a big fat LIAR.

I paid into Social Security with dollars that are worth ten dollars in today’s economy.

Let me keep it simple for obvious reasons. In the 60s Tastycakes were 10 to 12 cents, now they are $ 1.39 for a pack smaller pack. In the store I worked and paid SS for the last in dollars that are worth ten times what my SS statements say from that time period.

It’s a trust fund not a general government fund.

I wonder how much a can of catfood cost back then?

I don’t necessarily need her to do it. If you’re volunteering your tongue, I’m game.

Thanks for the link.

Barack Obama is more rigid and as destructive as George W. Bush. Who knew? He deserves as much support from Democrats and liberals as his predecessor.

There is one element of these programs you seem to ignore: They keep people alive and out of the streets. What happens if medicaid is not enough to keep the old ones in a nursing home? Put em on the street and kill them? And if the old ones don’t have enough to eat, let them starve. There is a question of human dignity wrapped around these issues in addition to a decent retirement.

Hang on, I’ll form a commission to find out….

BHO…took the white house and congressional LANDSLIDE of 2008,looked at it,and decided THE DIM DEMS had waaaaaaaaaaaay too much power and handed all back to the goooopers
well done traitor

That’s what many corporations are paying, a negative tax rate. We pay them for the privilege of them doing business in our country, states, and communities.

We’re not worthy!! We’re not worthy!!

I thought you said it was a simple savings account?

Making 2% is the same whether the balance is $1 or $100 billion, it is still two percent. There isn’t any greater benefit to by pooling ss dollars together. Don’t kid yourself. In reality it is a dumping ground for low yielding U.S. treasuries.

Bingo.

Fuck the numbers, what about some humanity?

And by the by, earnings over $106,800 are not taxed in any case. How much is being lost to the trust fund on that?

that is precisely WHY Goldmaan Suks cant wait to get their thieving little hands on it
ALWAYS REMEMBER…in Blankfeins own words
ITS GODS WORK

That inflation would have been protected had you invested in the stock market or were able to use that money to buy real assets. Instead rampant spending has pissed lots of peoples savings away.

If the purpose of SS is to protect against inflation why can’t that be realized in a private account?

Actual Hope and Change may have come to fruition. Something absolutely had to be done to accomplish Nothing. Nothing if the hollowing out of middle class and working poor Americans doesn’t count.

Ya’ll need another hobby, you’re going to have a mass stroke if you keep this up.

I don’t know why all the elected Dems are not furious with Obama. He is possibly going to cost them their seats even he hangs on.

Since they don’t get paid “benefits” on anything above that whats the difference? Uncap the benefits and then uncap pull the cap on contributions. Don’t act like those making over 106k are getting away with something

Won’t be covered by my health insurance, so you make a good point.

HeadedWest is pissed off? LOL

HeadedWest, I mean OBAMA calmed down, you was always a 1 termer

now the Senate Dems, and House Members are playing dumb, like they did not know you were going to attack Social Security, Medicare, and Medicade

HeadedWest, I mean OBAMA, at least we know your taking your family to JAPAN

Hi, Raven.

That is so much bullshit. Look there are a hell of a lot more treasuries out there than in the SS fund and the interest rate is at least partly managed by the Fed. It is not a dumping ground. Now the thugs could make those rates go up – - a lot – - if they force a shut down over the debt limit. Would that make you happy?

Of course its an entitlement. It is stealing from those that have earned more to pay those that have earned less. Look at the CBO data, the bottom quintile of household earners are making 20% more than the next quintile and ~30% more than the middle quintile as a percentage of averaged indexed earnings. If the program was just a retirement annuity program those numbers would be even across the board.

You get out of SS an amount proportional to what you paid in. If you never worked, you do not get SS. Even if you retire a billionaire, you get to collect SS. It is not “stealing” anymore than collecting on a life insurance policy or getting you car fixed after you got in an accident. That is how insurance works. Those that pay the premiums pay for those collecting the claims.

Get out of the left-right paradigm mind-control, stop thinking that the magical “D” after Obama’s name makes him different, and you are on your way to being out of your misery.

Ever heard of the crash of 2008??

I feel all tingly…

Hey man.

It makes me sick to watch the Democtatic party morph into Republicans – more fun to watch the Republicans morph into the John Birch Society.

How much is being lost on the transfer? That’s what WS is salivating over, at least in the short term. Whatever that number is has to be netted against any potential future earnings before you even hit zero. And annual maintenance fees, I’m guessing? Smells scammy to me…

I’ll take an ironclad trust fund without any half-bright Wall Street jagoffs tampering with it, thank you very much. And don’t forget: Had a large chunk of that money been invested in MBS-type instruments when Bushco was pushing this cockamamie idea (and it most certainly would have been), guess how much less that pile would be worth now?

Your talking about the equity markets? Household Financial assets are higher today than they were in 2007. retirement assets are only 5% lower than in the peak year of 2007. Yea, the market crashed for 6 months now its recovered. We are talking about long time horizons.

*heh* I agree. It’s much more fun to mock R crazy than watch D fecklessness.

The feds aren’t tampering with it? Keep it in your mattress or an online money market account. Instead its going into a blackbox in whcih you have no control over it.

So you’re saying that no one who made above the cap is taking down SS after they retire? That’s bullshit, and you know it.

That isn’t what I’m saying at all.

I’m saying that their benefits are also capped. So for example if someone was making 200k their SS benefits don’t reflect a 200k salary, they reflect what they are paying into the system. If you uncapped their contributions then you should uncap their benefits as well.

They can fume all they want – if they vote for it they’ll absolutely be complicit.

People seem too easily to forget that the old ones were young once and they worked for this country, some of them were in wars and most of them built and sustained the things we now enjoy. But whatever, they are our countrymen and they desrve better than throwing them in the fucking streets. If the Kochs don’t like this country and don’t want to support it, get the fuck out.

HeadedWest Leave the THINKING TO THE INTELLIGENT LEFT!!!

Fact 1
This cruel economy is causing “ghost towns” to appear all across the United States. There are quite a few counties across the nation that now have home vacancy rates of over 50%.
Fact 2
There are now about 7.25 million less jobs in America than when the recession began back in 2007.
Fact 3
The average American family is having a really tough time right now. Only 45.4% of Americans had a job during 2010. The last time the employment level was that low was back in 1983.

HeadedWest you even think like Palin and OBAMA

I don’t think I can take much more of this. I think we should work hard to take back the house, gain more seats in the senate and let Obama go down to defeat. I can’t believe I’m saying that but I just have reached the end of my rope with this guy.

Let the rethugs have the White House for 4 and then push the Dems hard for a real progressive nominee. If they don’t or won’t…

PROGRESSIVE PARTY OF AMERICA

The equity markets are still below what they were in 08 and some of those banks and funds went bust and the people’s assets along with them. PS some people thought their houses would help in retirement too. Didn’t work out.

I heard someone this morning/radio saying how much Michelle Bachman frightens traditional Rs. They added anything the Dems can throw at her pales at what she will get in the R. primaries….looks like she may have a bumpy (interesting?) ride.

I think most would allow more SS if you paid in more. Reasonableness is not unheard of on the left.

yes. The S&P is 11% lower than its peak. I don;t think that is the end of the world scenario that makes a reasonable argument against private accounts. Yes banks went out of business, but all FDIC funds were protected. Businesses go under all the time and the owners of those businesses lose money. Again not an argument against private accounts.

Yup.

I know it isn’t. But if it is simply a savings account as suggested then what is the benefit for the rest of the program for the rich to make more contributions if it is just paid right back to them?

Who will guarantee the assets? If you solve that nut, maybe it will work but some are still going to be fearful that the thugs will recant when it becomes inconvenient to them or the Tea Party. Count me as one of them. Leave it in treasuries.

Ultimately, this is not just a philosophi­cal question but a moral question. Do we cut programs that will cause harm and suffering for working and middle class Americans, children and the elderly so that the rich and will connected can continue to live the good life at everyone else’s expense?

The GOP convention will bring us some good comedy, I’m guessing. Start stocking up on popcorn.

It is not simply a savings plan. It pays to people with disabilities, etc. It was never intended to be an annuity. It is an intergenerational plan.

Oh, settle down. There are no deals announced.

I would argue that SS is doing more to keep middle class people middle class than helping them.

It is an intergenerational plan.

read ponzi scheme……..

I think it is both but I definitely feel the moral question here when people talk about cutting benefits that will harm the old ones.

So, you’d rather have a ‘pub for President than re-elect PBO? You’re kidding, right?

It is, if you cannot trust your countrymen to carry on the program, like now for example.

Well look who’s back. I thought you headed west. If not why don’t you go right now??

After what looks to be this Dem blood letting, I still wonder if someone will come out against O….how many interests can one alienate?

Is that a snob remark? Many people are very, very glad to be middle class.

Don’t argue with this asshole. He sometimes loses his way and ends up here on his way to Fox News.

No yet…..but eventually it is going to happen

I understand the frustration of someone who has paid into the system and now feels like the carpet is being yanked from under them. But I do think there is room for a transition towards private accounts while maintaining the obligations of the current system to those who have paid into it their entire lives.

makes no difference…PBO is a gooper

There isn’t anything wrong with being middle class and no it was not a snob remark. I am merely suggesting that a program like social security has limited the opportunity for many members of the middle class to become members of the “upper class?”

I’m not sure what your problem is. I am happy to debate the topic with you but to just start calling me names seems more than a bit childish and immature.

Jerry…..why can’t we run another party nationally like the UK does. Why let the Presidency go down. We need to run a really good candidate. Then we need to get the youth going and convince them that their parents and grandparents are under attack……we can bring the seniors along with us as well as alot of Republicans and Independents who are about to retire and are as pissed as we are. Look what happened in New York.

Oh, settle down. There are no deals announced.

Right. There weren’t any deals announced on the Billy Tauzin Health Care Deal either. Or the Bush Tax Cut Deal.

Until there was.

THAT’s funny.

Someone who could use such childish bullshit reasoning as this:

Look at the CBO data, the bottom quintile of household earners are making 20% more than the next quintile and ~30% more than the middle quintile as a percentage of averaged indexed earnings. If the program was just a retirement annuity program those numbers would be even across the board.

.. calling someone else childish.

Do you believe everything you’re told by Rush et al without thinking because you just love them or because you’re incapable of thinking?

Why don’t we all write in “none of the above”. I think a few million votes would get their attention.

You’re arguing against the progressive nature of Social security?

Doesn’t this whole debt ceiling, budget deficit, national debt hysteria sound an awful lot like: ‘…don’t let the smoking gun come in the form of a mushroom cloud.’

Oh brother. Now after we all get a good acquired taste for dry cat food, they will come back and say, Social Security wasn’t a cause of the deficit after all! Well, that’s how macaroni and cheese started out in the depression.

So, I call the chicken flavor!! I don’t like real liver, so I am sure I won’t acquire a taste for the liver flavor cat food.

It was during the Bailout hearings,if you can call them that, when Goldman Scams sent out their young butt boy to tell the congress that we have to privatize SS. Goldman Sucks owns Obama. Obama is a Trojan Horse, the elite’s Pinocchio.

We have heard all your talking points Fox News and Glen Beck Show. If you have nothing new to add, please go to your self-reassuring boilerplate blog at foxnews.com.

NO.

You were trying to use those CBO numbers to insist that it wasn’t an insurance program, the same for everyone, which is NOT what those numbers show.

Social security is not a ponzi scheme, wealth transfer mechanism, or any of the other bullshit you’ve been Spreading West.

But keep trying to muddy the waters. I don’t blame you. When the people see clearly they’ll know what bullshit you’re spreading.

Right, I’ll put you down for a private account right now. You do understand that you don’t get to keep your employer’s contribution. Woops, medical costs just ate it all.

Lest we forget Bill Clinton was a hair’s breath away from radically changing Social Security? If it hadn’t been for that famous BJ, it could have happened.

They’ve got some tasty new flavors too like shrimp feast and turkey dinner. There’ll be plenty of variety.

If they are going to fuck with it, I’d rather just get all my money back now with compound interest.

Kent Conrad is the bulwark of reason? Good grief.

thats fine. I don’t get my employer’s contribution now. Whats the difference?

You didn’t answer the question.

I am merely suggesting that a program like social security has limited the opportunity for many members of the middle class to become members of the “upper class?”

That doesn’t even make sense. How the hell do you figure that?

I’m using those CBO numbers to show that lower income earners are getting a disproportionate benefit of the program which is what those numbers clearly show.

What would happen if `people stopped contributing to social security? Benefits would stop being paid. You need new money to pay the old money which had already been spent on older money. Exactly like Bernie Madoff…

WOW. Are you really this stupid??

Of course you get your employer’s contribution now.

I suppose you would argue that if the employer paid a part of your health insurance premiums for you that you wouldn’t be getting the benefit of that either, right?

Yummy! That sounds delicious! I bet the shrimp stock for the flavoring comes from…. wait for it…. the Gulf of Mexico at the Macondo Prospect.

I’m sorry. What question?

When Boehner says ‘taxing the American people more is off the table’, why doesn’t Obama counter by saying, ‘no, its taxing the upper 2% more’? Boehner always has his poker face on. Obama wants to always smile like a fool. It’s time for a mature man or woman in the white house.

because rather than investing in appreciating assets like stocks and real estate(until recently anyway)or even starting a business that money sits in an extremely low yielding account earning a minimal return. Would you be better off earning the SS return or invested in the stock market over the course of 30 years? Obviously the market. Sames goes for real estate.

Everyone should go here: http://my.firedoglake.com/members/headedwest and flag this Troll! Maybe the Mods will delete this asshole disturber. It adds no real value to the discussions except extreme RW/FAUX news talking points/propaganda…

Don’t feed the trolls.

He obviously ignores the $2.5 – $2.7 trillion that is in the Social Security trust fund and that would be solvent for 27 years even after the 2.5% payroll tax cut.

Well, it would be there if the Republicans in government hadn’t used it to cover bloated defense spending.

8% is a bad return for a conceivably zero-risk AAA rated bond? WTF? You need to Economics for Dummies.

I’m arguing that those dollars are being put into a large pool not an individual account and now other members of teh pool are benefiting from my employers contributions more than I am.

Finally, Ed Schultz said if Obama caves to the Republicans on SS and Medicare he’s done with Obama.

treasuries are paying 8%?

Again, I will ask if you just believe the right wing talking points without thinking because you just love them or because you’re incapable of thinking???

OF COURSE lower income earners get more of their wages replaced, because the $106,000 insurance cap covers more of their wages. For lower income earners, their entire wages are covered by the insurance. For higher income earners, only the first 106,000 of wages is covered, and therefore replaced.

If two people are in our example, and one earns $50,000 a year and the other $500,000 and both have insurance (Social Security) covering their earnings up to 70% of $100,000 a year, then the first worker will get $35,000 (70% of $50,000) while the second worker will get $70,000 (70% of $100,000). They are both insured the EXACT same yet the first worker got 70% of his wages replaced with the insurance and the second only got 14% of his wages replaced.

And that is EXACTLY what the CBO numbers show. That since there is a cap on the wages covered, those on the bottom have more of their wages covered (and thus replaced) by the insurance than those who make over the cap.

Why don’t you suck something of mine.

Most of us here are having a discussion rather then just a lot of back slapping. If its getting a bit too real for you I’m sorry.

Private accounts are BS for more reasons than I can go into here. There is really no necessary reason why there needs to be a fund at all. The federal governement pays for its functions and agencies out of general funds like the defense department and even medicare part b. SS could be funded the same way. But if we insist on having a fund we need to recognize it is not equal parts or proportional parts for everyone. It is intergenerational and if we are “afraid” it will go bust (whatever that means for the federal government) we can solve all problems with the feds ability to tax.

You are funny – guess by your definition the progressive income tax is theft. :-)

Indeed just to be friendly how about we change taxation from income to assets – say a 10% asset tax, but of course since all need a home or equivalent, we only tax assets above $250,000.

My calculations indicate that we’d have a great system with plenty of revenue to cover current outlays. Think of it as a variation on God’s Law in the time of Moses that the rich leave part of the field unharvested so that the poor could “gleen” the field.

O Poor Baby….ever heard of looking after the least of these or something about the common good? If it is all meritocracy, the next sentence is “Let them eat cake.” I hope you are paying attention to yourself.

Please look at the data again. I’m talking about the difference between the lowest quintile of earners and the second and third quintiles. No one in the bottom 60% of income earnings in this country is brushing up anywhere near the 106k cap.

Let me guess, you’ll be dead in 27 years so you don’t have to deal with the issues when it becomes insolvent, so you’d rather just skip out on the sacrifice people 27 years down the line have to make by keeping everything the same.

It took Ed Schultz long enough to wake up. Obama revealed himself to be a weasel long ago. I wonder whether Obama crossing this line will wake up Rachel Maddow. What about Bill Press?

Umm could be but that is what the “social security” means in social security.

We shouldn’t be taxing either. What incentive is it to tax work? or accumulated wealth? or investing? The tax that makes the most sense is a consumption tax.

Isn’t that sort of irrelevant?

All insurance works exactly as you describe. They put the money in a pool and some folks take out more and others take out less – depending on who qualifies for benefits based on the payout parameters. Just like all other insurance, some people pay higher premiums than others to acquire the same benefits.

This just sounds like a bunch of whining to me.

Dead wrong. The 27 year horizon can be fixed largely by putting the payroll tax back where it was, and LIFTING THE $106,000 INCOME CAP! Then it would be solvent indefinitely.

I bet he works for the AARP. I can;t think of anyone more ‘trusted’ by our nations seniors to privatize Social Security.

LOL – you are fun! :-)

you talk about an insurance program and do not link to what actuaries say about Social Security – I wonder if you ever met an actuary – well I am an actuary – look me up at the Society of Actuaries – my real name is available via Google.

But you run to an investment company site for knowledge on insurance? I bet you question your doctor on how to fix your car.

Perhaps it is you that should look at the data again, or particularly, the column labels.

I looked at the CBO data you linked to above, and it does indeed list percentages for 3 quintiles of workers, but not the lowest three.

The labels say the three are the lowest quintile, the middle quintile, and the highest quintile.

And, as I said above, it shows EXACTLY what you would expect from an insurance program that protects income only up to a certain cap.

Social Security money should not be diverted to solving other problems.

Because Social Security money is already invested in government bonds that finance the deficit, this means only one thing. Conrad is afraid that the agreement will do to those obligations what Alan Simpson said they already were — worthless IOUs.

If that happens, the US has defaulted on a class of its legitimate creditors. Some bright lawyer should be looking at how to frame a 14th amendment case out of this to defend Social Security beneficiaries, now and in the future, from being made subordinate creditors.

The consumption tax has been shown to be very regressive tax. But I am pretty sure you know that.

Well, I didnt go back that far but the S&P was at 1455 on Jan 3,2000 and closed yesterday at 1339. Such a deal???!!!Now if you take Wall Street fees out of that would that cover the dividends?

Is it an insurance account or a savings account? Because I’m hearing a lot of one or the other?

How many other insurance programs to people plan the last 25 years of their lives around? Insurance suggests that its protecting against a bad event. People don;t view it that way otherwise they would take saving for their own retirement more seriously and would not bank on cashing in at 67. Its the equivalent of me driving recklessly because I know I’m getting a new ferrari when I put my current ford into ab guard rail.

And falls mostly on the middle and poor classes unless you exempt food, shelter, clothing and energy costs. which eat up most of these people’s money and of course the rich will be laughing all the way to the bank as they will pay the very least in terms of percentage of income… That idea is really very regressive…How many people dieing because they can’t afford to feed and cloth themselves would make you happy??? Just how many???

The ones that Social Security is invested in do. They are not available for sale to the public. With every comment you simply prove yourself more ignorant. This is a fact based blog, not fantasy land. They pay between 5%-8% depending on when they were issued. You may know that interest rates fluctuate? That’s why it is so hard to peg the exact amount in the account at any point in time in the future. Try a little light reading:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_Trust_Fund#Structure_of_the_Social_Security_Trust_Fund

I linked to a CBO study on beneficiaries of SS. Not sure what your talking about. Congrats on being an actuary, must be awesome.

In 27 years, the fund doesn’t become insolvent. Estimated inflows of funds will be less than estimated outflows of funds under an actuarial model. Given what’s happening to health care for the elderly, the expected outflow is not likely to be as large as predicted. And the estimate is based on 5-9 years of workers who have not yet been born; no one knows right now how large that cohort will be.

There is an obvious way to deal with the fund inflow problem. Eliminate the income cap on payroll taxes.

O yeah, that would be a default if they held up the checks to recipients. I do hope someone is looking into that. I think the government holds funds for other functions as well. But aside from that, if you have a government contract and you are not paid, what is that? Just a late payment or default on a debt?

hilarious work today, firepups. good to get some comic relief from the lazy cruelty of Congress & preznit.

please link me to the 8% treasury securities that SS invests in. This is a fact based blog.

Interest rates fluctuate. When was the last time the feds issued an 8% coupon bond? 20 years ago?

Yes, it would but that would be a tax increase and we all know how popular that is these days.

Disturbing to see the thread being hijacked and chumped.

Yes lower paid do get “more” relative to income – indeed the first generation in the program got “more” than later generations. Intergenerational equity is a topic actuaries discuss quite a bit. Also the need for “non-trivial” benefits for the lower paid so they would not automatically starve to death does make for “disproportionate” benefits.

Indeed that is the charm of getting rid of the cap on wages used in benefit and tax determination. The SS three factor benefit formula gives an additional benefit to the rich that costs less than the extra taxes they pay – so extending the system to all wages – and including investment income – ends all financing problems and indeed gets a chunk of money to pay toward universal health care (not insurance – but instead – care).

But I guess that would upset your trust fund managers.

and then you will eliminate the benefits cap as well?

The wealthy can move consumption to non tax areas – the poor can not. We tried a consumption tax on the things the wealthy buy and the poor do not – and the above happened – 1993-1995.

Infrastructure disproportionately benefits the wealth – and a consumption tax does not capture this.

What exactly are you trying to argue? You just spent ten minutes putting something together that agrees with the data I posted 30 minutes ago?

I don’t think I ever said there was no way to fund social security. Of course if you raise taxes on a certain group of people then its pretty easy to do.

Sorry no trust fund unfortunately.

Correction, the lowest rates are in the mid to high 2′s and some could be more than 11%. It fluctuates the averages around that median I posted, but each special issue varies wildly over time depending on the economics of the month.

do you have the link? remember its a fact based blog not fantasy land.

It is “Social Insurance” (between generations)

Read Myers book “Social Security” – he is the actuary there in 1934 and a Chief Actuary in the early years.

Exactly 20 years ago you probably still have some bonds paying that, and the Social Security trust fund still has them BECAUSE IT STILL TAKES IN MORE THAN IT PAYS OUT. Here you can look each special issue up by the month. The government really does have some awesome information available for the taking. Too bad the ditto heads can’t be bothered to actually check their wild fantasies with reality.

http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/ProgData/investheld.html

Ditto heads are so patient too.

When you are correct the liberals don’t disagree – but only point out why your interpretation in wrong. Yes SS is a little progressive – but only in the benefit formula – that does bother many of the GOP folks, just like the FIT bothers them.

Why do we need social insurance between generations?

BTW i think over the past ten or eleven years you would be much further ahead investing in treasuries than in equities. And you would not have to worry about a Lehman or some hedge fund going bust, except this coming August 2, of course.

It smells like Galt and dumb in here now. I’m out.

you find everything you were looking for in the CBO link?

Ummm, it’s all in the wording. It’s “social security” as in social security. Keep up.

And that is completely ignoring the fact that the federal government doesn’t have the constitutional authority to even run a program like this.

Also, I couldn’t just let this continued right wing bullshit go either.

“The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts, and Excises, to… provide for the general Welfare of the United States;”

It doesn’t get much clearer than that from Article I.

We really should Place Tax on wages.Taxing employers at a higher rate when paying lower wages.The Employer would pay a lower tax rates when paying upper middle class wages.After all the people earning low wages will never have investment money.Low wage Employers become the benificary of Social Programs Tax the low wage Employer and put Taxes on slave wage products entering the USA.

Only Republicans are to the Right of Conrad. And that would make Obama a Republican. Oh well.

It is an income insurance program. The purpose is to provide protection for a completely foreseeable and unavoidable eventuality that is part and parcel of human life. At some stage, before one dies, the capacity to earn is diminished or eliminated. Planning for this is the exact opposite of reckless.

Life insurance is another form of insurance that many people pay in to for the bulk of their productive lives that is often integral to old-age planning.

You find the column labels I mentioned above showing which three quintiles of workers those columns represented?

So as of December the average interest rate paid was 4.4% a little more than half the 8% you quoted. And the highest three issues come due this year or next which means that average rate is just going down from here.

Yep. Social Security has outperformed equities over a 30 year time line, quite a bit due to the 2008 collapse I think. But when you put gambling junkies in charge of financial markets that is bound to happen.

It’s really hopeless. I’m outta here.

yep. see ya later.

I don’t disagree

NOT TRUE – The Anerica Saves program was a 401k VOLUNTARY ADDON payroll deduction to what SS does – it changed nothing but gave us an additional benefit – which is why the GOP killed it. Obama used this lie to defeat Hillary – it is time to put it to bed. Those like Newt that say a take away private account was discussed are talking about what they – Newt – was saying to the White House – stuff that was rejected – as can be seen by the fact 90 days after Newt says he told the WH of his idea, Clinton did his State of the Union proposal for the Voluntary addon.

Compassion, got any ?

Read some Eric Ericson or Maslow….Generativity is one of the high marks of maturity when one is concerned about what comes after our own sound & fury…That is, concern for the ongoing generations in contrast to Ive got mine…..Of course if you do not care about those who are coming along…Just say again “Let them eat cake.”

Social Security has still managed to pay for itself, despite being raided several times over to pay for our trillion-dollar wars and keep many of other federal programs afloat, namely Medicare and Medicaid. Talk about maintaining resilience in the face of repeated predatory attacks!

And Medicare and Medicaid wouldn’t be in so much debt today had our for-profit health care system not used them as a way to socialize its losses. This is why our medical-industrial complex is the epitome of crony capitalism, second only to our military-industrial complex.

That’s what I said, it fluctuates, the mean fluctuates, but it is definitely the very best zero risk investment going. It has been and will pay more than a money market and more than a CD or definitely a savings account. And it doesn’t have a $250,000 insurance limit or none at all in the case of some investments in the private sector. So your point is?

Learn what words mean – Ponsi had a system that had to blow up because of the math. The folks running the SS math – the actuaries – guarantee it will never blow up – stable tax rates and benefits with modest changes to reflect improved mortality.

Actually, that is insane. You propose gambling with core savings is a more responsible long-term strategy than investing in a guaranteed return.

And FYI, a LOT of people who had their retirements in stocks just got wiped out. And I know a LOT of people who’s homes are worth FAR less than they were when the investment was made … and most indicators are they will not even break even for 15 years. ALL of those people would have been better off with a low-yield stable investment.

Not surprisingly, many of these same folks who just lost their disposable retirement investments are rather skeptical of the idea their core Social Security investment should be nabbed by the same bankers who just ripped off their otherwise comfortable retirements.

True – reports are at http://www.ssa.gov/oact/tr/

All of that is considered by the actuaries – there is no problem.

“8% is a bad return for a conceivably zero-risk AAA rated bond? WTF? You need to Economics for Dummies.”

“This is a fact based blog, not fantasy land. They pay between 5%-8% depending on when they were issued.”

Not one security in the portfolio is paying 8% and the average is below the 5-8% you quoted. You’re being completely disingenuous. Yes, rates fluctuate but that doesn’t suggest that they are fluctuating higher.

I’m proposing allowing people to make their own decisions with their money. Property rights, we still have them in this country right?

And it was mention probably before you got here but the US equity markets are off about 10% from their peak. If that wipes you out then I’m not sure what to tell you. Diversification?

I have to ask papau.

Normally you make SO MUCH sense.

But I swear when it comes to the Clinton’s, you start sounding….. I dunno, well, I guess like you’re NOT making so much sense.

Are you related to the Clintons?

I’m arguing that those dollars are being put into a large pool not an individual account and now other members of teh pool are benefiting from my employers contributions more than *I* am.

my emphasis

Thanks to our resident “libertarian” sock puppet for neatly summing up the lazy conservative “argument.” It’s all & only about me Me MEEEEEEEEE!!

The dog forbid that someone/anyone else should get “something” that they putatively “didn’t earn.” What a load of rubbish.

I might add that I make enough every year to have income that does not receive the FICA deduction, and I am MORE THAN WILLING to have the FICA Cap *raised* so that EVERYTHING I earn gets the FICA deduction.

Some citizens just aren’t that selfish that we get insanely angry at the notion that someone less fortunate may get a fair shake. However, I duly note that the citizens who so self-serving usually endorse and enable the redistrubtion of earnings UPWARDS to the mega-wealthy.

Read it and weep… and go figure….

In reply to onitgoes @ 253

However, I duly note that the citizens who so self-serving usually endorse and enable the redistrubtion of earnings UPWARDS to the mega-wealthy.

Yep, EXCELLENT point.

They never seem to mind when banksters get away with theivery, and instead of being held accountable get more bonuses. Or oil companies breaking profit records still getting tax subsidies.

Outstanding point.

because the kids would not or could not take care of their parents and keep them alive.

And folks with a conscience wanted to end seeing the aged tossed to die – plus the employers were fighting union contracts to have private pensions, and human nature is to not save, at least not at the level necessary, and the transaction cost is about 10% of the level the private sector would charge for the same service (funny – that is the same thought as one has about single payer health care).

Besides which Soc Sec & Medicare are funded separately and have absolutely NOTHING to do with the current deficit.

you’re really stretching now. Go back and read what I was responding to.

I’m reasonably sure that Medicare is contributing to the deficit. Not social security, but I’m pretty sure (though not 100% sure maybe someone can help me??) that Medicare is taking in less than it is spending.

Oh Headed West and I have had many a “discussion” about the Banks, and Headed West totally disagrees that the banks & Wall ST have done anything remotely close to STEALING US taxpayers’ money. No, the only “theives” that Headed West acknowledges are “small people” who protest things like unfair bank/credit card fees. THOSE people should at least be put in the stocks in the public square, if not incarerated for life. But the Banksters & Wall ST greedhead??? The most fantastic of patriotic US citizens EVAH!!!

Just a clue…

I did. No stretching going on, except when I go to the gym. I quoted you word for word… your words, not mine.

property rights is what the law is all about – it is not what a social conscience is all about – see Christianity – Jesus, or the morals/ethics teacher of your choice (avoid Ayn Rand until you review her life style, use of welfare, sex and fidelity problems, and lack of economic knowledge beyond hate of Russia).

Probably believes the myth about the Community Reinvenstment Act and poor colored people caused the Great Depression II also I guess.

Oh well, some believe in the tooth fairy too. What can one do??

yep that is what I said. word for word………

One might add that Ayn Rand had not whit of a problem accepting her husband’s soc sec payments & medicare. Just for the record…

Why is a social conscience being mandated by the federal government?

Nope

Does China cashing in a bond contribute to the deficit or to the size of the National Debt beyond actually reducing that national debt? That is what SS is doing on occasion.

SS contributes nothing to the deficit

The only reason why I bother to “engage” sometimes is to get TRUTH out there for folks who lurk here.

It’s clear why Headed West is paid to post here… in order to publish pernicious lies all done in the smooth-talking/writing way of ye olde snake oil salesman.

Otherwise, it’s all a load of rubbish that stinks to high heaven.

Yeah, I know SS doesn’t contribute to the deficit.

I just thought that Medicare was. I thought Medicare was spending more than it was taking in.

Government – law – reflect us. One gets into minority rights very quickly here, but most feel government should “do no evil” – and maybe even “help” – and how you define help is what makes for two parties.

paid to post here? Is that actually a job?

One reason is because it ends up being cheaper & more efficient & effective to take care of citizens this way.

Frankly, it’s like GW Bush offering the ER as the “safety net” for uninsured people. Say what you like about people who don’t have health insurance, but the FACT is that forcing people to use ER for the medical needs ends up costing YOU and me a LOT more money in the long run.

That is also why your glibertarian “arguments” are so specious. That world-view ends up making no sense bc it ends up costing everyone more to deal with the issues created by people not having enough to get by or, in the case of health care, not having enough to pay for it.

Albeit I get it that you are all for citizens just dying in the streets anyway. Good for you.

Yes. It’s the one you have right this second.

Just don;t think that is government’s role and take offense to one party being more charitable than another.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html

Yeah, same here.

They spend huge amounts of dollars to come up with precise language that will sound like it makes sense even though it’s complete bullshit. But because sometimes they’re very good at what they do, it DOES sound like it makes sense. And they SHOULD be responded to in those cases as well.

Besides a very clever use of language, the right wing is also very good at playing the victim card. Imagine, in one sentence they can espouse the most foul “I’ve got mine and fuck everybody else” mentality in the world and in the very next claim victimhood because someone called them out for being a selfish asshole.

Thank you onitgoes for doing that. I shouldn’t be here, I know I shouldn’t be here, but Spreading West’s bullshit spreading was getting under my skin today and I responded. My bad.

Please, onitgoes, continue the good fight. I’ll revert back to watching.

If only

Medicare as a program does not contribute to the deficit – but we keep it within budget on Part B via provider cuts – and then do a “doc fix” out of general funds – which does increase the deficit. Part A is thus “funded”, Part B not so much.

But Part D has no funding – just draws down the Trust.

When the Trust is gone, benefits by law are cut – so again no affect on the budget – but then also no real program as no one will take you as a patient.

you need to read the link in the post above yours. The republicans yea real “I’ve got mine and fuck everybody else” kind of people…

Well I hope you keep commenting at points. I gotta go soon, too, but here & there, I feel the need to respond to the pernicious, but neatly phrased, lies spread by rightwing sock puppets.

Frankly, everything spouted here today by Headed West are almost direct quotes from Rush Limbaugh. I hear the same stuff, almost word for word, from conservative friends and relatives, who are similarly selfish & self-absorbed. It’s a real disease that has been rendered upon US citizens by Grover Norquist and his pals and minions.

Soc Sec is no more unfair than any other annuity program. You pay into it, and you take out of it. No one’s getting some “unfair” advantage. It’s a load of rubbish to say that’s happening. It’s not. It’s another way to handle the needs of our society in general in a manner that’s been very efficient and cost-effective.

To jump out of the gate and purport that:

Social Security is nothing more than a wealth redistribution tool that has proven not to work for the past 40 years.

is a bald-faced LIE.

No one’s making you stay & post here, then, IF you are not being paid to do so… which I don’t believe. But if that’s the case, then you are more than free to move along & do something else.

i very much enjoy the conversations despite the lack of agreement on some issues. Just thought getting paid would be a nice perk.

you listen to rush limbaugh? That is unfortunate

And our local actuary chimed in and mentioned that in fact the program did benefit lower earners at the expense of higher earners……so

Maybe if you turned off your radio & tv for several weeks and spent more time on the Internet, the “conversation” with you would be more sensible and intersting. It’s a thought…

No, I do not, but I do converse with close friends and relatives who listen to Rush a lot. Hence I know very well his talking points, which, amazingly enough, are word for word *exactly* like your rightwing glibertarian talking points. What a coincidence! … NOT.

You won’t see an asset tax, flat tax or VAT. The SOB’s in congress won’t allow it. They use tax loop holes to finance their campaigns. Any republican that supports these taxes should be challenged to write a bill for it. We’ll get rid of this BS real quick.

And our local actuary chimed in and mentioned that in fact the program did benefit lower earners at the expense of higher earners……so

Yes, I do not dispute that, either. What “so” do you mean??

As I’ve stated numerous times throughout my commentary, I’m not the one who’s *insanely* freaked out at the thought of someone less well off than me benefiting a bit more from Soc Sec. Frankly, whatever the poor get from Soc Sec is NOT all that much. Like: whatever.

And then as I mentioned earlier, it’s actually much more cost-effective (that means: cheaper) to provide for basic needs of citizens via Soc Sec. So what if some poor person gets a little “more.” It’s a specious, meaningless argument at best and again, is just someone whining about poor people. I duly note that you never ever mind that the super-rich have managed to have corporate-welfare at every turn, which frankly costs ME and YOU a whole LOT more than some poor person’s alleged “more” in Soc Sec.

This site is for people who come together to talk about issues that we care about. We are progressives that believe in that our Government should be helping its people. We don’t see Government as a bad thing. We will never convince someone like you…….you only visit this site to mock and impose your uncaring views about the people and the world you live in and frankly I get depressed when your kind jumps into this site. I need these people because it makes me feel like I am not alone in this world. The kind of people who think Fox News is fair and balanced would love to hear from someone like you. You will really pump them up. Why do you bother to come here and irritate us? I wouldn’t think about “crashing” a conservative site.

And defense spending only benefits the a$$holes, so why should I pay for it?

Well, exactly. OUR tax dollars go pouring into the coffers of the mega-super wealthy -via the Military Industrial Complex for one example – so that OUR tax dollars are *wasted* on the killing War machine. Gazillions of dollars (literally) have been poured down the drain to enrich filthy greedheads like Dick Cheney, the Bush Crime Syndicate, the Kochs, the Scaifes, the Mellons, etc etc. And then there’s all those subsidies to Agribusiness which benefit even more pernicious greedheads running death corporations like Monsanto.

But that’s all just fine & jim-dandy because YOUR tax dollars & MINE are being re-distributed UPWARDS to the upper 1%. Hooray hooray!

Yet we have a very functioning social welfare program, which YOU and I contribute to, but the glibertarians go *nuts* contemplating that some poor person – who *also* contributed to Soc Sec from their very hard work – might get some paltry amount “more” than what they put into the program.

There’s no ignorance being displayed by Headed West; there’s only a desire to spread pernicious lies for the benefit of the upper 1% who are currently working VERY HARD to rip off Soc Sec & Medicare yet again for their (the upper 1%) personal gain & benefit.

You have to ask yourself: WHY does a sock puppet like Headed West show up here *every time* an important vote is being taken on these programs? And WHAT is Head West’s pay-off for spreading these lies? Caveat emptor.

It is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one; if you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle.
Sun Tzu, Art of WarCh. 3, the last sentence.

Eh? Headed West actually does us all a vital service, in the end (but no thanks offered to you, Headed West). It pays to keep your enemies close so that you get to know them really well. That way, you can avoid being “fooled” by pretty lies and smooth talkers. Just saying….

I’m sorry to say I am. If a politician repeatedly breaks their pledges to their supporters then what else can one do? Obama has time after time shown disdain for those who elected him. Where would he be without progressives and young voters. At every turn he has given generously to republicans and dismissed us. If he’s going to preside as a republican then what’s the difference?

I think the progressive community has shown the existence of the kind of infrastructure neccessary to make a strong start. I believe many true dems will join us. It’s clear from poll after poll that the American people strongly support progressive policies. We need to give them a home to go to.

PROGRESSIVE PARTY OF AMERICA

“Fuming” my ass. A nice show for their constituents maybe. But as long as we have 2 self-indulgent back room pro-Obama hard-line Moderate hacks like Harry Reid and Steny Hoyer leading Congress, Pelosi will never ever gain enough ground to keep us away from Obama having his way.

It’s all about their jobs now, and nothing else. Still.

This is all on SS in Chapter VII of your source, the Investment Company Industry Factbook:

“I find it notable that many of the Baby Boomers who are in or nearing retirement will draw income from many of the same sources on which their parents relied. Social Security, for example, continues to play a key role in providing income security for many retired Americans because it replaces a large share of annual labor income for many low- to moderate-income families.”

The suggestion that the SS payments of low income Americans are augmented by revenues from higher income Americans may be anathema to you, but it goes to the heart of what progressives have always stood for: government leveling the playing field for those who never had the opportunity in their working careers to accumulate enough savings to retire on. This is what people here believe. I you don’t like it, go away, as in jump in a very shallow muck-filled lake.

If you don’t like it…

People like him/her (most likely him) don’t know what human dignity is. And they have no concept that “no man is an island.” The individual must be self-reliant, must never look for help from his fellows and must never offer same, must never look up from his own navel. A self regard that swallows up the soul into its black hole of egotism.

So you go to the ER for what ails you–and it’s the worst–cancer. Try going back to the ER for those necessary treatments. Oh, and you still have to pay for the original ER visit; where’s that $6,000 you owe, hmmmm? Wonder why medical expenses are the biggest single reason for bankruptcy? Wonder why suicides among the elderly are up? Do ya?

agree with you but bears repeating, imo, that a program such as Soc Sec – which all taxpayers pay into from their hard work – is a much *cheaper* means of keeping seniors & the disabled somehow functioning in our society at a minimal level.

The teensy amount “more” that lower-income earners gain from a program like Soc Sec is truly not even chicken-feed in comparison to the much more massive re-distribution of US tax dollars – that means YOUR hard earned money & MINE – to the upper 1% via corporate welfare & other *entitlements* enjoyed by the mega-rich.

That is why I’m being *redundant* here in calling out “arguments” such as those offered by the sock puppet, Headed West, as pernicious and bald-faced LIES.

The Rush Limbaugh talking point is that somehow low income earners are “enjoying” this massive rip-off of the mega-wealthy bc of Soc Sec. It’s patently false, as well as patently absurd. Check out what Soc Sec payments are for low-income earners. I can tell you in 2 words: NOT MUCH.

But what kind of entitlements do the MIC, agribusiness, BigOIL get? HUGE, really HUGE pay-offs & other perks & lurks. Hedgefunders, who literally make Billion$$$ annually, only pay 15% tax rates. 15% And those greedheads ain’t creating all that many jobs, just lots of filthy lucre for themselves. And then ya wanna whiiiiine about some low-income earner’s purported “gain” from Soc Sec. Spare me.

Because voters have a social conscience (or had when SS was created) and they want the government to govern in accordance with it.

Well I certainly don’t wonder about that.

GW Bush was full of sh*t on so many things, but one thing that made my blood boil was his glib and specious claim that the poor had “health insurance” bc they could go to the ER. Horse hockey!

Because of this drek, though, people are *forced* to use the ER in ways that ER was never meant to be used. Besides the obvious issues that you mention, such as bankruptcy & suicide, mis-use (but done out of desparation and lack of other options) also directly causes hospital & ER costs to skyrocket to insane levels.

GW Bush typified credit card Republicans, who refuse TAX but continue to spend like drunken sailors, never mind when the bill comes due.

Now these same lying creeps come here to tell us that we should get rid of all social safety nets just because it “offends” them in some way to contemplate the fate of low-income earners. What a load of crap.

As I stated to Headed West, it’s clear that s/he would *prefer* that citizens die in the streets… and that IS what’s happening right now.

I would say: For Shame, but it’s clear that credit card conservatives wouldn’t know shame if it hit them upside the head with a 2 X 4. PTOUI!!!

“Keeping your own party in the dark while you conspire with the GOP to gut the New Deal is very hopey and changey!”

Can we now say what I’ve been thinking for awhile now, Obama’s no Democrat, he’s the Manchurian Candidate. He’s been sent in to destroy our party, and he’s doing a damned good job of it. I’ve said this before and I’m saying it again, if this president has no allegiance to Democratic principles and priorities, why the hell should we have any allegiance to him. We need to treat Obama like a friendly witness at the start of the trial and request permission to treat him as a hostile witness because he flips the script once on the stand.

This president made certain promises to win our party’s nomination and presidency, now he’s betrayed us on so many issues it’s hard to keep count. It’s now time for the Democratic leadership and party members to protect the brand, and forget about a single individual who seems bound and damned determined to destroy the brand. Are we Democrats, bound to a set of principles and priorities, or are we psychophants, wedded to fate of one man. If we choose the latter, what happens to the party when this one person is off the political stage. The party must survive, even if this one man doesn’t.

It’s time for our leadership to come out and make a statement on this. This president has no hesitation to stab the party in the back, so long as it makes him look good; will the party now stand up to him, for the good of the people, and for the long term viability of the party.

I agree with all you say – and you say it well. It does stick in one’s craw that the Headed Wests of the world make such a stink about SS heaping dollars into the laps of low income people – as with the welfare queens of yesteryear – when it barely provides enough to live on, if that. Hence the cat food.

They have a black hole for a heart.

They are very greedy, self-absorbed & self-centered. I know many “Headed Wests” in my personal life. Most of them have way over-extended themselves in leading the “good life,” although most had high-paying jobs. Some have lost their jobs in the current depression, but rather than *really* looking at the reality of why it happened, they choose to be easily “entertained” by rightwing media and then blame their plights (and growing debt) on poor people.

We have had commenters who’ve posted here who call themselves “recovering Republicans.” The fully admit that they used to be greedy & selfish, and a LOT of their motivation to be virulently anti-tax came from the brainwashing that mis-led them into believing that *some* day they, too, might strike it RICH. And then IF they were mega-RICH, they wouldn’t want to have to pay hated dreaded taxes.

I’ve seen quite a few different folks post comments similar to this. These people have all confessed that they “hated” poor people bc they truly believed that somehow the poor were “getting away with something.” And they sympathized with the super-wealthy bc they decided to identify with the rich.

Some of these people have confessed now feeling guilty about their disparagement of the poor and lower income earners, but all have stated clearly that they were led down the garden path to vote against their own better interests.

That’s why I keep repeating that the “arguments” put forward by Headed West are pernicious LIES. They are lies, plain and simple, but lies churned out in a smooth and cunning fashion with the INTENT to “fool” people with lies & spin… in order to get them to either vote agains their own better interests or to support those who really ripping them off. It’s called distraction, as well.

It’s just disgusting, but it’s what Fox & Clear Channel and really nearly all of the corp-owned media (of all kinds) engage in 24/7/365. As people have said here numerous times: in the former Soviet Union, at least the Soviet citizens KNEW that their media was total propoganda. The problem with the USA is that citizens think they’re being told “truth” and facts.

NOT SO.

This is what Obama’s always done: insulted his base and gone around Congress in a very kingly way.
I’ll never forget when he set up the “Gang of Six”, because the rest of congress wanted a Public Option and he didn’t, So they met behind closed doors, arrested doctors for coming in to testify, but Wellpoint was there writing the whole thing
He wants pain? I’ll be glad to give him some of mine when I don’t get my treatments; he can “share that”

A simple answer to a simple question.

N 300 comments later, it’s still the simple answer.

Pure kabuki, sad that any proggy would react to it other than as kabuki. Barely worth a mention . . .

Better spend time calling and complaining to yer erected offals, for all the good that does it MILLIONS dont’ do it.

Nice to see ya back eCahn . . . *G*

Fuck off, troll.

But they spend them, onitgoes; they don’t invest them. There’s nothing in the trust fund but I.O.U.’s

In perusing this thread, and scanning over the plethora of logical fallacies at HeadedWest, it really grieves me to say that this site is about 80% at the level of DailyKos circa 2009. There used to spirited discussion here at the Lake, now it has dissolved into vituperative name calling and thought crime finger pointing.

Depressing. My apologies to HeadedWest who, while I haven’t researched his data enough to say whether or not I can agree with his reasoning, is certainly not a troll, nor arguing his points at the level of Fox News.

That’s because his MSNBC job demands that Ed Schultz support Obama and the left-right paradigm. Keep the phony kabuki going, keep us all arguing with each other just like everyone trying to “get” HeadedWest on this thread, and ignore the reality that government derives all its moral authority by holding a gun to your head and by providing the illusion that you have some say in the matter of its firing.

Like shadows on the wall of Plato’s cave, you are led to believe they are real, but they are all to keep you in mental slavery so that you keep on working to keep the Ponzi scheme going (i.e. the Fed).

Well, at least more than a few of you have become radicalized by the actions of the Manchurian President and his gaggle of preening jackals.

Obama is a vacuous opportunist
As a democrat I am asking demanding a challenger to him for 2012
Otherwise my vote goes to the green party

I cannot trust Obama, nor afford this GOP style of governance for 4 more years.

Mr Obama is the ultimate liar in chief. He flips and flops on issues and his hype is not what he is nor how he governs.

He has betrayed his campaign promises and left us hopeless