?Just as fire seeks oxygen, Democrats seek power, which is why they will always be found championing the mob whether the mob consists of Democrats lynching blacks or Democrats slandering the critics of ObamaCare as racists?. From ?Demonic? by Anne Coulter
It seems that Anne has something here even in these forums some fall into the name calling category in attempt to vilify contenders to the Obama throne. Thus we enter into an era of name calling and class warfare. It seems that Obama fits into one of the following categories, he is deliberately trying to take us into socialism or he is deceived and hasn?t got a clue as to what is happening. Was not the deceiver first deceived. When entitlements were established years ago the pathway was being laid, greased and the slope has gradually been increased.
Think about it, one cannot buy stock in the US government. You may think so if you purchase bonds or T-Bills but they don?t increase in value beyond the interest rate and we pay the interest. So any government scheme that appears to place money in one?s hand is but a Ponzi scheme as some taxpayer in the future has to pay the increase. If one happens to fall in the 40 some per-cent that pays no taxes that?s a whole ?nother story. Even though the government recognizes this and offers its own employees savings plans that include private sector funds any attempt to do so with social security is immediately vilified.
The government carefully tracks GDP as it gives it clues as to how much taxation and borrowing it might get away with. In reality GDP has nothing to do with government as the government uses GDP rather than contributing to it (though it can hinder it with regulations and taxation). Social Security and all entitlement programs are Ponzi schemes as the payee draws out considerably more than he paid into the plan. Since the government has no way to grow trust funds the terminology is a joke as we pay any imagined growth with our taxes. Class warfare enters the picture when we attempt to place the burden for the government?s error on the rich, after all can?t they afford it? Legitimate persons of need will be wheeled into the spotlight in attempt to feed the populace into a mob frenzy demanding that the government pay all our needs. Numerous personalities have been give credit for the quote, ?a government that is big enough to supply all our needs is big enough to take all we have.?
The real problem is spending coupled with the deception that future revenues will be large enough to support entitlements by the time the need increases. But again the deceiver has been deceived as future gatekeepers add services to the entitlement mix, as in Medicare, Medicaid and of course the same will hold true for Obamacare. But now we have gone too far and are in a catch 22 situation. Politicians cannot bow out of entitlements and get re-elected, the current debt is unpayable and the answer the deceivers would have us to believe is to raise the debt limit. Surely someone will find a way to solve the problem if we just keep the spending levels intact. But remember these deceivers have first been deceived and the next congress and administration will be no smarter than the present mix so the problem grows. The plans and authors currently being vilified haven?t even touched a real solution, nor will they be given a chance. If the problem is not addressed now it will never be resolved.
?Just as fire seeks oxygen, Democrats seek power, which is why they will always be found championing the mob whether the mob consists of Democrats lynching blacks or Democrats slandering the critics of ObamaCare as racists?. From ?Demonic? by Anne Coulter
wow, I'm sure this is going to be fair and balanced....especially with anne coulter who is about as bat **** insane as anyone on the right is
Quote:
It seems that Anne has something here even in these forums some fall into the name calling category in attempt to vilify contenders to the Obama throne. Thus we enter into an era of name calling and class warfare.
yes, the republicans wanting to cut all benefits for the working class while giving huge tax breaks to the rich is in no way class warfare....not a bit.....
Quote:
It seems that Obama fits into one of the following categories, he is deliberately trying to take us into socialism or he is deceived and hasn?t got a clue as to what is happening. Was not the deceiver first deceived. When entitlements were established years ago the pathway was being laid, greased and the slope has gradually been increased.
maybe stop for just a second and consider that YOU might be being deceived into supporting more money going to the rich through another doubling down of trickle down economics that HAS significantly reduced the middle class by moving the income to the top tax bracket people
Quote:
Think about it, one cannot buy stock in the US government. You may think so if you purchase bonds or T-Bills but they don?t increase in value beyond the interest rate and we pay the interest. So any government scheme that appears to place money in one?s hand is but a Ponzi scheme as some taxpayer in the future has to pay the increase. If one happens to fall in the 40 some per-cent that pays no taxes that?s a whole ?nother story. Even though the government recognizes this and offers its own employees savings plans that include private sector funds any attempt to do so with social security is immediately vilified.
Social security has a trust fund with enough to last as-is till 2037, yes it will start to pay out more then goes in but that is reasonable, the issue is all that surplus has been IOU'd out to fund typically republican led wars
Quote:
The government carefully tracks GDP as it gives it clues as to how much taxation and borrowing it might get away with.
theres no attempt to tax anything they can get away with, it's about paying for the services we all benefit from
Quote:
In reality GDP has nothing to do with government as the government uses GDP rather than contributing to it (though it can hinder it with regulations and taxation). Social Security and all entitlement programs are Ponzi schemes as the payee draws out considerably more than he paid into the plan. Since the government has no way to grow trust funds the terminology is a joke as we pay any imagined growth with our taxes.
Sure it does, the SS rate has been adjusted in the past
Quote:
Class warfare enters the picture when we attempt to place the burden for the government?s error on the rich, after all can?t they afford it?
So again let's take it from the poor and working class (which statistically includes you), after all according to the republicans they can afford it, the rich can't
Quote:
Legitimate persons of need will be wheeled into the spotlight in attempt to feed the populace into a mob frenzy demanding that the government pay all our needs. Numerous personalities have been give credit for the quote, ?a government that is big enough to supply all our needs is big enough to take all we have.?
persons of need, with medicare (that republicans are seeking to destroy, THAT INCLUDES YOU, you will become old one day and even if you live a perfectly healthy life if you think there is a chance you are going to get health care on the free market you are insane, even the voucher program the republicans are pushing won't pay for half of most premiums, so tell me are you saving up to be able to pay $8000 a year(more when adjusted for inflation) towards your medical premiums (not including any co pays etc once you retire) - no seriously answer this, and then could you do so without a pension if you have one? because the next generation won't know what those are.
Quote:
The real problem is spending coupled with the deception that future revenues will be large enough to support entitlements by the time the need increases.
the republicans have tax breaked aweayt any surplus and or spent it on their own agenda, again open your eyes - medicare part d that made a huge increase in the deficit?
Quote:
But again the deceiver has been deceived as future gatekeepers add services to the entitlement mix, as in Medicare, Medicaid and of course the same will hold true for Obamacare. But now we have gone too far and are in a catch 22 situation. Politicians cannot bow out of entitlements and get re-elected, the current debt is unpayable and the answer the deceivers would have us to believe is to raise the debt limit. Surely someone will find a way to solve the problem if we just keep the spending levels intact. But remember these deceivers have first been deceived and the next congress and administration will be no smarter than the present mix so the problem grows. The plans and authors currently being vilified haven?t even touched a real solution, nor will they be given a chance. If the problem is not addressed now it will never be resolved.
so lets just throw all the burden on the working class, I mean the rich have the lowest tax rates they have had in 60 years, and less then just about any developed country, how can we keep persecuting them, they shouldn't even pay taxes.....
wow, I'm sure this is going to be fair and balanced....especially with anne coulter who is about as bat **** insane as anyone on the right is
File under Name Calling
Quote:
yes, the republicans wanting to cut all benefits for the working class while giving huge tax breaks to the rich is in no way class warfare....not a bit.....
All benefits? Are you sure?
Quote:
maybe stop for just a second and consider that YOU might be being deceived into supporting more money going to the rich through another doubling down of trickle down economics that HAS significantly reduced the middle class by moving the income to the top tax bracket people
File under Class Warfare
Quote:
Social security has a trust fund with enough to last as-is till 2037, yes it will start to pay out more then goes in but that is reasonable, the issue is all that surplus has been IOU'd out to fund typically republican led wars
Who might pay the interest on the trust fund if not the gullible taxpayer?
Quote:
theres no attempt to tax anything they can get away with, it's about paying for the services we all benefit from
Substitute "pay for" in lieu of "benefit from"
Quote:
Sure it does, the SS rate has been adjusted in the past
SS is not adjusted for GDP.
Quote:
So again let's take it from the poor and working class (which statistically includes you), after all according to the republicans they can afford it, the rich can't
Who hires the poor, should we bite the hand that feeds us?
Quote:
persons of need, with medicare (that republicans are seeking to destroy, THAT INCLUDES YOU, you will become old one day and even if you live a perfectly healthy life if you think there is a chance you are going to get health care on the free market you are insane, even the voucher program the republicans are pushing won't pay for half of most premiums, so tell me are you saving up to be able to pay $8000 a year(more when adjusted for inflation) towards your medical premiums (not including any co pays etc once you retire) - no seriously answer this, and then could you do so without a pension if you have one? because the next generation won't know what those are.
The premise of a nanny state.
Quote:
the republicans have tax breaked aweayt any surplus and or spent it on their own agenda, again open your eyes - medicare part d that made a huge increase in the deficit?
There was no surplus
Quote:
so lets just throw all the burden on the working class, I mean the rich have the lowest tax rates they have had in 60 years, and less then just about any developed country, how can we keep persecuting them, they shouldn't even pay taxes.....
In reality you can't tax a corporation it will pass it down to the consumer.
Actually Sarah Palin has the best idea which would take the subsidy tool out of the hands of politicians of either stripe. It should be made applicable across the board, not just for energy. After all a controlling government uses tax code power and manipulation to buy votes (or to feather their nests).
Palin said;
Quote:
"I think that all of our energy subsidies need to be relooked at today and eliminated," Palin told RealClearPolitics. "We've got to allow the free market to dictate what's most efficient and economical for our nation's economy."
sems to be their agenda against - medicare/ss / unions / affordable accessible health care / overtime pay/ mandatory binding arbitration / reducing spending on education... the list goes on, these cuts don't hurt the rich they severely hurt the average american and the country as w hole
Quote:
File under Class Warfare
so you agree then the republicans are engaging in class warfare?
Quote:
Who might pay the interest on the trust fund if not the gullible taxpayer?
the interest is currently quite low, about 3%
Quote:
Substitute "pay for" in lieu of "benefit from"
benefiting from what we benefit from, not sure of your point here, as a society many of the government services we do benefit from together as an economy, we all can't live on seperate islands of ourselves anymore.
Quote:
SS is not adjusted for GDP.
no, and it should not be
Quote:
Who hires the poor, should we bite the hand that feeds us?
well I have been hired by no millionaires. This is such a lame argument, millionaires are not the ones going around buying goods and services, they are the ones right now with significant amounts of money but are "waiting to see" what to do with it.
for a successful economy we need supply AND DEMAND - republicans forget that, we have excess supply, we have little demand
Quote:
The premise of a nanny state.
note that you DID NOT answer my question, AGAIN ARE YOU PREPARED FOR A REPUBLICAN STYLE RETIREMENT?
Quote:
There was no surplus
DUH, that is what I said, we would have had the republicans not given it away as tax breaks to the rich and for medicare part D, did you even read it?
Quote:
In reality you can't tax a corporation it will pass it down to the consumer.
again you don't seem to understand economics and gross verse net income, consumers will pay what it is worth to them, and companies only pay taxes ON PROFITS, you can argue that higher tax rates could make it harder to expand but in some ways it makes more incentive to, a "use it or lose it" situation
Quote:
Actually Sarah Palin has the best idea which would take the subsidy tool out of the hands of politicians of either stripe. It should be made applicable across the board, not just for energy. After all a controlling government uses tax code power and manipulation to buy votes (or to feather their nests).
Palin said;
like that will EVER happen, especially from the republicans who whined until they got a continuation of oil subsidies recently.
and again you didn't respond because you know it's true, the rich have the lowest tax rates here in 60 years and are far lower then most developed countries, we have a huge deficit ----- I wonder why.......
and again you didn't respond because you know it's true, the rich have the lowest tax rates here in 60 years and are far lower then most developed countries, we have a huge deficit ----- I wonder why.......
It could be a spending problem! Those who think the government owes them a living in reality think that future generations of Americans owe them a living, that's how Ponzi schemes work.
BTW are you debt free? That's a good test of any knowledge of economic principles.
It could be a spending problem! Those who think the government owes them a living in reality think that future generations of Americans owe them a living, that's how Ponzi schemes work.
BTW are you debt free? That's a good test of any knowledge of economic principles.
1.) note that you once again did not answer any questions posed to you
2.) absolutely and I am focusing on building up both my 401k and individual stock brokerage account, after all in this country the republicans will throw me to the dogs unless I can afford to pay AT LEAST $8,000 a year on top of a subsidy (unless they discontinue that by then so the rich can have an even bigger tax break) as the republicans will surely destroy social security/medicare and I certainly will never have a pension since they are all but extinct except for government jobs. So yeah I will be prepared
but the majority of people will not be, and when people get closer to retirement they vote, so we will just end up with the expense of retirement and medicare but without adequate funding and the republicans know that it won't work but they will get their tax breaks for the rich out of this and in the end isn't that all that really matters? protecting the rich?
1.) note that you once again did not answer any questions posed to you
2.) absolutely and I am focusing on building up both my 401k and individual stock brokerage account, after all in this country the republicans will throw me to the dogs unless I can afford to pay AT LEAST $8,000 a year on top of a subsidy (unless they discontinue that by then so the rich can have an even bigger tax break) as the republicans will surely destroy social security/medicare and I certainly will never have a pension since they are all but extinct except for government jobs. So yeah I will be prepared
but the majority of people will not be, and when people get closer to retirement they vote, so we will just end up with the expense of retirement and medicare but without adequate funding and the republicans know that it won't work but they will get their tax breaks for the rich out of this and in the end isn't that all that really matters? protecting the rich?
Sounds like you plan well. The question seems to be how far the government (dems and reps) should proceed into debt for the nanny-state concept. Handouts may sound sweet but printing and borrowing money to pursue this path is sure to crash at some point. Obama would have that happen sooner rather than later. Since he read Rules For Radicals he seems to be following that path as a deceiver.
Sounds like you plan well. The question seems to be how far the government (dems and reps) should proceed into debt for the nanny-state concept. Handouts may sound sweet but printing and borrowing money to pursue this path is sure to crash at some point. Obama would have that happen sooner rather than later. Since he read Rules For Radicals he seems to be following that path as a deceiver.
1.) note that once again you have not answered my questions to you.....still waiting for a response to my questions in the first reply.... are you financially prepared for $8,000+ for healthcare as pretty much a minimum of what you will have to pay under the republican subsidization plan for medicare in retirement after the voucher?
and if you live to be 85 then expect about $15000 on top of that voucher (and of course these numbers ARE NOT adjusted for inflation so every 20 years or so away from those dates you are you can generally double the number... AGAIN ARE YOU PREPARED?
2.) we are not printing and borrowing for social security, that is where we have a surplus, we are printing and borrowing for the wars, just because most people look at it as one big pool does not mean it is
safety nets exist for a reason, social security does not pay a lot, it is but a net to avoid poverty, medicare exists because near the end of life having a government supported system is the only method that really works, can you really expect an 80 year old with alzheimers to be able to work to pay for their care?, so the government won't kill these people so they have to be cared for, we can either plan for it or have it as a surprise expense, either way it will fall on the government
The republicans won't budge on regulation, If they want to reduce gopvernments role then there will need to be more regulation to ensure people can get these services that right now the free market leaves alone due to cost such as healthcare for pre-existing conditions, you can't leave people without any viable solution and then say they are moochers of the system, yes some certainly are, but we need real solutions and not just a "**** them all" approach
Sounds like you may not care for republicans! I don't care much for either party seems that most people are born into one or the other. My insurance costs are about $11,000 per year my fear is that Obamacare will eventually force my current private insurance policy out of the picture. I am not looking to the nanny-state or the rich to fund my future.
I just heard that the promises, the unfunded liabilities, push the national debt to a number about five times the advertised number. I don't know if that includes Obamacare or not, it will cost far more than advertised as it is fleshed out and understood.
Linear Mode
