Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.
Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Political Issues' started by G29Reload, Oct 10, 2012.
People who disagree with where the line is drawn like to cry about "loopholes".
Bingo! Saw it in the shipyard back in 1979-1982. But of course everyone wants to pretend that such stuff only began with the nationalization of healthcare by the squatter.
Loopholes? Yep. Close them? Only if those who own and operate the legislatures want them closed.
My partner and I have been discussing how to do just that. One way or another, we aren't going to provide health insurance. If we could afford it our employees would already have it.
We only need a little bump in deduction rates to get us over the hump.
A little bump? You're kidding right? You know how much SS eats in deficits right? SS is insolvent.
If the gov't wasn't controlling this, you know who ever created it would be sent straight to jail for creating a ponzi scheme right? But since it's the gov't it's ok.
Pretty much. I'm still rubbing my eyes at the "little bump," as if that's all that's needed.
Here's the issue. You have a kajillion people set to collect benefits within the next 10 years. The only thing that's sitting in the fund right now are a bunch of notes saying "IOU a lot of money XXXOOO The Feds" The labor participation rate has been shrinking (can't collect FICA if someone isn't working) and there aren't enough young workers to pony up and cover the mass Baby Boomer 20 year vacation that is modern retirement without a hell of a lot more than a "little bump."
But that's only the first side of the problem.
The second is that even if you want to drive FICA deductions up, that is money those workers will expect to recover when they hit retirement age. Meaning...those taxes can't come down unless there is an exponential increase in the labor force. Of course, if there is an exponential increase (for instance, the Baby Boom) then the subsequent generation has to pony up more to pay for that second mass.
The reality is that Social Security, just like a Ponzi scheme, relies on an ever-expanding pool of rubes to join the system. However, we don't have an ever-expanding pool. The system is fundamentally flawed and any realistic long-term solution has to be centered around ending it.
Obama: "...bumps in the road..."
"Bump" seems to be the new progressive word of choice to try and marginalize any circumstance on which they can get creamed.
I can't tell you how many times I've heard the same thing over and over from people who never saved a dime in their lives and never even funded a 401k or IRA (even ones that provided matching funds). Now they complain, "how is someone supposed to live on just social security?" Well, wake up people...social security was never meant to be the welfare program for retirees that it is now. It was only meant to be a small supplement for retirees. The bulk of retirees' money was to come from their own savings and/or investments. If they didn't save/invest, then "too bad" that's not my fault...I lived within my means and did save and invest for my retirement. So, how am I being rewarded for doing the right thing? Our socialist president wants to take the money that I worked so hard for for more than 40 years and redistribute it to the 'losers' who did not. Free cell phones, anyone!
You must be kin to Joe Biden.
You can call him "Winner Joe".
Why? Has something changed recently? For as far back as I can remember Joe Biden has been the court jester of Congress, putting his foot in mouth so often that now no public speaking engagement is done until Joe has tossed out a whopper for everyone to chuckle at.
Actually, I call him "Doofus Interruptus."
You are kind and generous...
I know it's tempting to roll back to insulting others on this thread, when you can't answer my question.
But, I'll ask you again.
Do you know that SS is insolvent? So you know how much goes into SS and how much goes out?
Do you know what a ponzi scheme is?
Isn't the Darden chains the same ones that banned a Veteran's group from displaying a USA Flag at a banquet?
I'll bet you on that. HmmmmLet see, I'll even spot you the left media bias and we can use the CNN poll and the MSNBC poll.
While that did happen, it wasn't corporate policy that refused the flags, it was a mistaken employee of that one restaurant. I checked Snopes.com and it says that while the event did happen, the Darden chain execs said that there is no such corporate policy and that the employees of THAT restaurant were mistaken. The management also took responsibility for what happend and issued a telephone and in-person apology to the Kiwanis chapter. I wouldn't blame the whole Darden chain for the action of one misinformed employee, but it was good to see that they took responsibility for it and gave aplogies.
Spyder didn't have the facts correct???
Let me show you my shocked face
We always have equal bargaining power.
You pay me what I want or what I'm worth or I leave for someone who will.
Employer can't find someone to work for what is being offered, they have to sweeten the deal or they don't get any work done.
Your feet aren't nailed to the floor and no one owes you a job.
It's not. Check their FAQ page.