GOP and Tea BAggers to force government shutdown

[One Brow]

What part of Planned Parenthood should be defunded did you not understand? If you still don't understand, not a penny should be given to PP from the government.

So, you're in favor of defunding mammograms.
You're in favor of defunding providing contraception for women who can't afford it.
You're in favor of defunding prenatal care to women who have no other access to a doctor.
You're in favor of defunding sex education.
However, you don't really care about abortion at Planned Parenthood, because since all abortions are privately funded at Planned Parenthood, defunding it won't touch that program. In fact, without access to good contraceptives, abortions provided by Planned Parenthood will go up.

At least, those are the consequences of your position.

You didn't answer my question. Why is it the federal governments responsibility to provide retirement payments?

If the governemnt doesn't, the poverty rates and suicide rates among the elderly will go up significantly. I guess that still doesn't make it their responsibility, necessarily, but reducing the rates of pverty and suicide among the elderly is an outcome most people support.

 

[One Brow]

Ya know, the average American who didn't have 1/100th of enough to be a "qualified investor", let alone even get Madoff's attention in on a ski slope?

Since Madoff has been stopped, it would be silly to use him, in particular, as a threat. James Fisk is even less of a rsik, since he died over 100 years ago. If only, if only, I had referred to something like "a modern-day James Fisk or Bernie Madoff", instead of saying the actual people were the threats.

Just one more example of Big Fundy scaring the middle class as a way to protect the ultra-wealthy--like Madoff investors. First she advocates paying Chevron so they can pad profit margins by pumping more oil, now she's scaring you out of an ownership society by promoting the usual ultra-rich protectionist agenda.

Who is this "she" that advocated paying Chevron in order to enable them to pump more oil? If you mean me, I'm insulted (not by the pronoun, but by the idea I would think it's necessary to pay people to do what's profitable).

 

[One Brow]

Again, I have to ask, why is this considered to be the governments responsibility? Nobody will answer this question. All I keep hearing is how bad old people would have it if SS did not exist. Take into account that it will likely be insolvent by the time I retire in 20 years it seems like a dog with fleas that needs to be put out its misery. Why perpetuate it?

Insolvent still means payouts at 70-75% of the traditional value (at just about the time I'm going to be retiring, so this affects me directly). It's still better than rank poverty. It is not the case that the checks will simply stop.

 

[Scat]

To bring the philosophy component back into it, this comes down to whether or not widespread suffering and human misery are acceptable outcomes to you personally as a result of a failure to take care of the elderly. If you (like me) do not regard that as acceptable then government is the only way the problem gets solved.

I think you are overplaying the whole widespread suffering and human misery angle. In 1934 when SS was passed the suffering and misery was a direct result of the Great Depression. Before then the elderly either continued to work or lived with relatives or friends. The GD made finding work for the elderly much more difficult and made it difficult for relatives to take care of older loved ones. Once the GD passed SS would have been entirely unnecessary again for the most part. As with any government entitlement however, once put into place it can't be taken back.

The 1930's census showed that 58% of men over 65 still worked. By 2002 that figure dropped to 18%. It's likely even lower today. The federal government is essentially paying the elderly not to work. Of course there would be mass hysteria and rioting if people over 65 were told they simply had to keep working.

Right now the cost of administrating SS is as high as 328,000,000,000.00 That's billions. SS paid out 439 billion in benefits. Roughly speaking, for every four dollars paid out society as a whole bears up to a 3 dollar adminstration cost.

Imagine putting more money in every single worker's pocket as well as cutting 320 billion from the budget. At the very least SS should give workers the choice of opting out if the don't want to participate. Of course they can never do that because the government desperately needs every dollar they can get to keep the sinking ship afloat.

Gonna defend your tax rate claims, or are you calling uncle on those?

Give me a few... trying to work as well.

 

[Scat]

Insolvent still means payouts at 70-75% of the traditional value (at just about the time I'm going to be retiring, so this affects me directly). It's still better than rank poverty. It is not the case that the checks will simply stop.

So you are completely relying on SS for your retirement? That's your fist mistake. I don't think that's that case however as I seem to recall that you are a teacher. If so I suspect you'll have a better than average pension coming your way from the teacher's union once the government starts paying you not to work.

 

[LogGrad98]

I'm going to pretend you're sincerely asking even though I know you are not. Economists [on both sides] can't really figure this out. The major thing that has been against job growth since 2002 or so is a peak in the labor market participation rate. It could not increase forever so it peaked and has been falling ever since (after 50 or so years of gains). Pundits, and average Americans like you (no offense meant here), like to blame it on this or that to drive an agenda, or, to make sense of it all. The bottom line is it's most likely just collective America doing what collective America wants to do, and that's a good thing.

We can continue to play the blame game, claim raising taxes or lowering them, union advances or decreases, etc. are what caused our favorite era of prosperity or poverty, but there is absolutely no proof in the numbers either way. In fact, graphing about 200 years shows real per capita productivity growth has been 2% per year no matter if it's Obama, Bush, FDR, Coolidge, or George Washington in power. This tells anyone who wants to be remotely rational that somewhere in the middle, somewhere between the anger at the extreme, somewhere the polar agenda's converge to create America. As a side note, isn't it ironic Glenn Beck says the right choices are somewhere in the middle? Wrong use of "irony" I'm sure, but anyway...

Despite all the claims, it has lasted us this long and will continue to do so. I love the extremes because there wouldn't be a middle without them. They make America work. We make America work.



I'm voting for the guy who guarantees clawbacks on shareholders, CEOs, and bondholders that return us to pre-2008 FDICism.

You gotta go back about a decade before that to reverse the legislation that was really at the core of all this.

 

[LogGrad98]

I have to agree with this. I actually don't produce a damn thing.

He is right you know. No matter how much we love our roley-poley TroutBum he doesn't produce not one damn thing. Well nothing that we can show on the internet anyway.

 

[DeliveryBoy]

There are more people working for the government than construction, farming, fishing, forestry, mining and utilities combined.

Citation? And does that include the people in those industries that work for the government?

What the hell do all these people do? They are cushy, easy jobs no doubt when compared to farming or mining but they produce nothing. They manufacture nothing and simply create more of a drain on government. They add absolutely nothing to the overall health of the US. We are a country with a massive work force that essentially does nothing.

So, anyone that works for the FBI, State Department, FDA, SEC, National Weather Service, USPS, Fish and Wildlife Service, Justice Department, National Institute of Health, NASA, FTC, NOAA, or the National Science Foundation, and all soldiers, "have cushy, easy jobs" and "add absolutely nothing to the health of the US. "

Generalizations are fun. They fill in for thought.

 

[TroutBum]

Citation? And does that include the people in those industries that work for the government?



So, anyone that works for the FBI, State Department, FDA, SEC, National Weather Service, USPS, Fish and Wildlife Service, Justice Department, National Institute of Health, NASA, FTC, NOAA, or the National Science Foundation, and all soldiers, "have cushy, easy jobs" and "add absolutely nothing to the health of the US. "

Generalizations are fun. They fill in for thought.

This thread has now been Koufus'd.

Boom, bitches.

 

[Jazz Spazz]

He is right you know. No matter how much we love our roley-poley TroutBum he doesn't produce not one damn thing. Well nothing that we can show on the internet anyway.

*rowly-powly

 

[Sloanfeld]

"Some will be called reds and Communists merely because they believe in economic justice and the brotherhood of man. But we shall overcome." –MLK

So you wrote a whole anti-Republican post and ended it with a quote from, yep, A REPUBLICAN?????

LOL!!!!!

Of course, if you're quoting MLK, chances are the quote belonged to someone else first.

BANG

 

[PearlWatson]