What's new
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

Cause its BS?

When the Republicans correct their funding mistake for the two wars, NCLB, and Medicare Prescription "D" come talk to me. When they pay for the Bush Tax Cuts come talk to me. When they pay for the oil subsidies they refuse to give up come talk to me.

I'm open to slashing it all. You can start with Medicare and Social Security which are the biggest joke on the American people of all.

Regarding the tax cut of 2003, look at the difference in 2002, and then look at it in 2007. Exactly the same, in fact 2007 was a little better. That's right, it was paid for.

I am glad, though, that we're on the same page with Medicare and Social Security. The biggest issue is the next generation paying for the current one.
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

Now we know how you felt after Dubya's debates. :D

The irony is the Liberal Media is saying Obama lost, which the Echo Chamber never admitted when Dubya lost.

Algore has come up for a "unique" excuse for Barry's lackluster effort. :rolleyes:

Former Vice President Al Gore, no stranger to disappointing debate performances, took to the airwaves to offer his own inconvenient excuse for President Obama’s shaky effort Wednesday night in Denver: Gore blamed it on the altitude.

“I’m going to say something controversial here,” Gore said on his Current TV network’s post-debate analysis. “Obama arrived in Denver at 2:00 p.m. today, just a few hours before the debate started.
“Romney did his debate prep in Denver. When you go to 5,000 feet and you only have a few hours to adjust — I don’t know, maybe ….”
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

Lots going on here. Good stuff.

The notion that this race is now 'even' needs to be confirmed with some polls.

Politics is so fast and jaded now that Romney's debate bounce started to fade a half hour before the debate started. We're now on the backlash to the claims over how high Obama's rebound performance will take him in the next debate.
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

Anyone else notice that Romney wore a red tie and Obama wore a blue one?

That was pretty funny. :)
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

Um, it's all part of the same issue.

No, no its not.

They destroyed that program along with everything else. And now they think they're owed something.

As long as I'm being accused of being an Obamapologist I may as well go with it.

I agree with Obama about the debate.

http://xfinity.comcast.net/articles/news-politics/20121002/US.Obama/

Looking for a quick recovery from a disappointing debate, President Barack Obama questioned the identity of the "real" Mitt Romney on Thursday, suggesting his Republican rival had not been candid about his policy positions while on stage.

"Gov. Romney may dance around his positions but if you want to be president, you owe the American people the truth," Obama said at a post-debate rally.

Obama should have known that going in. I did.
 
Last edited:
Regarding the tax cut of 2003, look at the difference in 2002, and then look at it in 2007. Exactly the same, in fact 2007 was a little better. That's right, it was paid for.

I am glad, though, that we're on the same page with Medicare and Social Security. The biggest issue is the next generation paying for the current one.

Umm....I don't even think Republicans try to argue that Bush's tax cuts were paid for, but okay...
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

No, no its not.

They destroyed that program along with everything else. And now they think they're owed something.

As long as I'm being accused of being an Obamapologist I may as well go with it.

I agree with Obama about the debate.

http://xfinity.comcast.net/articles/news-politics/20121002/US.Obama/



Obama should have known that going in. I did.

One would have been prevented with the other. That's why the Baby Boomers were willing to steal from it: It wasn't theirs! It was for their parents! Those baby boomers know that we pay for their social security, not them, so when they're ready to retire, they're more than happy to bump the tax back up so they can collect.

That's why it doesn't work. If you want the government to be determining retirement, give those that participate a stable value fund, even if it's 100% cash invested. Take a commission from the savings interest if you have to in order to pay the administrative costs. Voilà, problem solved.
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

One would have been prevented with the other. That's why the Baby Boomers were willing to steal from it: It wasn't theirs! It was for their parents! Those baby boomers know that we pay for their social security, not them, so when they're ready to retire, they're more than happy to bump the tax back up so they can collect.

That's why it doesn't work. If you want the government to be determining retirement, give those that participate a stable value fund, even if it's 100% cash invested. Take a commission from the savings interest if you have to in order to pay the administrative costs. Voilà, problem solved.

What a crock. That is the most convoluted reasoning I've seen yet. And, sorry, the stock market doesn't solve this problem. Give me a pension over the stock market any day. That's why everyone's getting rid of pensions because its easier to give an employee a 401K then it is to give them a pension.

There is no excuse for the baby boomers to steal the Social Security Trust Fund. None. No one should be allowed or feel willing to steal anything.
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

What a crock. That is the most convoluted reasoning I've seen yet. And, sorry, the stock market doesn't solve this problem. Give me a pension over the stock market any day. That's why everyone's getting rid of pensions because its easier to give an employee a 401K then it is to give them a pension.

There is no excuse for the baby boomers to steal the Social Security Trust Fund. None. No one should be allowed or feel willing to steal anything.

Then go under contract with various banks across the country. People are getting rid of pensions because they're set up the same gosh darn way that Social Security was set up. You put money in, and the generation before you takes it. They happen to be taking the hit for the current retirees; it's time to do that with social security now.

I'm trying to remedy the situation by eliminating the possibility of stealing from it, because there's nothing to steal from.
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

So I've come to the conclusion that Facebook is pretty much the best venue for watching your friends turn into partisan morons during a major election season.

Had half a dozen that post political stuff fairly often (Granted, one works in Washington at a Republican think tank, so I like to tweak him when he has an off day and posts dumb things). Last night, pretty much everyone.

Hell, I don't bother posting political crap on there because I don't want 144 responses when I wake up the next day. Happened to a friend of mine who mentioned that she donated to PP during one of their periods where their funding got cut for a week.
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

Had half a dozen that post political stuff fairly often (Granted, one works in Washington at a Republican think tank, so I like to tweak him when he has an off day and posts dumb things). Last night, pretty much everyone.

Hell, I don't bother posting political crap on there because I don't want 144 responses when I wake up the next day. Happened to a friend of mine who mentioned that she donated to PP during one of their periods where their funding got cut for a week.

I unfriended the one right wing knuckledragger that spent all day on Facebook every day whining about Obama. I don't post ANYTHING political on Facebook. Facebook is for friends and family. Not politics, or religion.
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

Then go under contract with various banks across the country. People are getting rid of pensions because they're set up the same gosh darn way that Social Security was set up. You put money in, and the generation before you takes it. They happen to be taking the hit for the current retirees; it's time to do that with social security now.

I'm trying to remedy the situation by eliminating the possibility of stealing from it, because there's nothing to steal from.

If you're going to go stock market, blah, blah, blah then just abolish SS and Medicare altogether. On the retirement side let them die in the streets if they don't save. On the Medicare side, same thing. Heck on the Health Care side as well. Just make sure you stop this BS in the debates about keeping things the same for current retirees. No. They're the problem. They're the ones that raided their parents money (the surplus that used to be there).

Privatize, privatize, privatize.
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

Scooby,

You really need to come up with a coherent position here. You're all over the place. I think we largely agree on future generations being milked for current benefits, but it's hard to follow some of your wandering around in these posts.
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

They destroyed that program along with everything else. And now they think they're owed something.

Umm...not sure if you are talking about Social Security here?

If you are, that indeed was the promise that was made to them: you pay money into this program throughout your entire working lifetime (I had Social Security tax withheld from my paycheck when I was 16 years old, working as a ticket-taker at high school athletic events) and then at retirement the program pays money out to you. In the early 1980s there was concern that the Social Security Trust fund was running low on money, and so Reagan and Rostenkowski put together a bi-partisan deal that substantially raised the payroll tax, in order to make sure the money would be there when needed.* That "fix" extended the projected insolvency date by several decades.

So if I make a promise to you that if you give me $x I will give you $y, for most people, that would mean that I do indeed owe you something, namely $y.

That money was supposed to be set aside in a Trust fund to make sure it was available when needed. Then the politicians raided the Trust fund and spent all the money.

So there are two different "they"s involved and you seem to think there is only one? One set of "they" is people who've had money deducted from their paychecks for forty-five years under the promise that this money was being set aside to provide for them in their retirement. The other "they" are the embezzlers who stole all the money.

it sounds like you are saying "serves them right for not paying closer attention." Really, Scooby, someone commits criminal fraud against you and rather than sue the person who committed the fraud for restitution, you'd just shrug your shoulders and say "oh, well."?




Now, if you were to say something like "gee, it really is a shame that so many people were defrauded by their own government. I really feel for them, but realistically, you cannot expect the rest of us to bail them out at 100% on the dollar; it's only fair to spread the pain around equally, and so let's bail them out at 80% on the dollar" then you are being responsive. To blame a janitor for believing a politician's lies however seems like a pretty extreme position.



* from Wikipedia:
Social Security Amendments of 1983, Public Law. 98-21 (April 20, 1983). The 1983 Social Security Act provided solvency for the social security system which was facing bankruptcy before the enactment of this critical bill. Specifically, the 1983 Act secured the financial solvency of the Social Security Trust Fund by providing a dependable stream of revenues to the Trust Fund and by rationalizing the benefit structure including the retirement age determining benefit eligibility.
 
Last edited:
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

Scooby,

You really need to come up with a coherent position here. You're all over the place. I think we largely agree on future generations being milked for current benefits, but it's hard to follow some of your wandering around in these posts.

My position is simple. If the Baby Boomers won't come up with the money they owe the trust fund then scrap the program and do it now before they're able to bankrupt it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top