The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

[Rover]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

Regarding Social Security, the solution is simple and painless. Forget about the whiny Baby Boomers. After doing stuff like chained CPI adjustments, simply go to people like myself, who have a good 30+ years of working left in them, and only give us what the system can pay out. So, whether its 85% or 75% or whatever, that's the new "promise". If for some reasons the #'s change over time (more people hit the middle class hence more payroll taxes, more young people than expected, etc) then by all means up the promise. However, as govt programs go, Social Security is one of the least worries to have.

My problem with Medicare is I don't think a ton of thought has been given to operating it much more efficiently. The idea that a simple block grant will do the trick something only a blockhead would advocate. It ain't that easy. So, I would take the GOP up on its tort reform offer. Lets see what it saves. I want a massive fraud crackdown, and would invite the private sector to look at the books (you could hire auditors, McKinsey, etc) and receive a % of the fraud savings they detect. If Medicare is operating cheaper on a per person basis than Medicaid, figure out why and make the change. Until Obamacare came along, I'm not sure how much this was even in the public discussion (efficiency that is) as a policy matter.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

Regarding Social Security, the solution is simple and painless. Forget about the whiny Baby Boomers. After doing stuff like chained CPI adjustments, simply go to people like myself, who have a good 30+ years of working left in them, and only give us what the system can pay out. So, whether its 85% or 75% or whatever, that's the new "promise". If for some reasons the #'s change over time (more people hit the middle class hence more payroll taxes, more young people than expected, etc) then by all means up the promise. However, as govt programs go, Social Security is one of the least worries to have.

My problem with Medicare is I don't think a ton of thought has been given to operating it much more efficiently. The idea that a simple block grant will do the trick something only a blockhead would advocate. It ain't that easy. So, I would take the GOP up on its tort reform offer. Lets see what it saves. I want a massive fraud crackdown, and would invite the private sector to look at the books (you could hire auditors, McKinsey, etc) and receive a % of the fraud savings they detect. If Medicare is operating cheaper on a per person basis than Medicaid, figure out why and make the change. Until Obamacare came along, I'm not sure how much this was even in the public discussion (efficiency that is) as a policy matter.

Wouldn't it be something if we could offer a commission to Congress if they came up with a budget surplus?

 

[FreshFish]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

The term "pyrrhic victory" comes to mind here.

George Bush's tax cuts for nearly everyone have now been permanently enshrined in law. The debate also exposed how mendacious the left has been all along: if the Bush tax cuts were so heavily slanted toward "the rich" then how come it was so important to preserve them for everyone else?

Now that a tax increase has been passed on a stand-alone basis, there is no leverage left for any future tax increases. Spending cuts must now follow. Naturally the Panderer-in-Chief will again demonstrate just how powerless he is when it comes to policy; L Frank Baum's metaphor of the man behind the curtain has never been more apt.

Credit to George Will today for reviving one of Churchill's pithy observations: "a man who has the gift of compressing a large number of words into a very small idea."

We can debate our ideas as much as we want, secure in the knowledge that no one in politics will pay the slightest attention.

Something extremely significant just occurred, though it will take time for it to become apparent. Until lately, politicians could safely punt on the hard choices by deferring them to the next Congress. They won't be able to do that very much longer.

Sensible pragmatic people know that our path is unsustainable and won't put up with it much more. Funny how well over half the voting populace will be "knuckledraggers" by 2014, though I cannot understand how the concept of living within one's means is supposed to be the sign of a trogdolyte......

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

They could go into the hundreds of thousands of state and local government jobs that have been cut over the last 5 years or so. I'd rather fund local jobs than overseas ones, all else being equal.

You're then just shifting the government spending from one sector to another. Sure, you may view it as different from a standpoint of desirability, but it's still government spending with no opportunity for the government to receive added benefit through the form of taxation. Obviously there are the post-military college programs and trade schools which help. There are plenty of small business entrepreneurs out there that I'm sure would love to help with employment. Sadly, there are many hurdles in the way, some competition-based, and others government-based (such as PPACA). If anything, we should be looking towards creating an environment where people have the opportunity to escalate.

 

[Rover]

Wouldn't it be something if we could offer a commission to Congress if they came up with a budget surplus?

Works for me!

joecct, the key to job growth is 1) stabilizing the country's finances which God willing will happen after debt deal gets done and 2) energy independence.

Energy independence is the next great job creator. It drives millions of jobs, keeps money here in the US, and requires investment in infrastructure and manufacturing to make it happen.

Here's how it works. US must reduce oil usage whenever possible and replace largely with natural gas. Unlike oil natural gas is not really priced by the global market due to the difficulty of transporting it. That gives a tremendous advantage to the US with its large reserves. Not only does natural gas replace coal as dominant energy source for electricity, which necessitates switching over or building new plants (jobs) but govt needs to mandate that all trucks, busses, and trains switch to natural gas. As these usually fill up on the interstate or in municipal lots, it shouldn't be too much of a burden to set up the distribution network. However any infrastructure work needed to do so means jobs. Then the parts needed to switch vehicles from petroleum to natural gas need to be made on a large scale basis, and generally those things are manufactured in the market where they're being sold. Again, more jobs. Finally, cars need to continue to get more efficient, which the govt is already mandating.

Once this is done, the country can start exporting oil, coal, etc. What does that create? Jobs.

 

[Rover]

The term "pyrrhic victory" comes to mind here.

George Bush's tax cuts for nearly everyone have now been permanently enshrined in law. The debate also exposed how mendacious the left has been all along: if the Bush tax cuts were so heavily slanted toward "the rich" then how come it was so important to preserve them for everyone else?

Now that a tax increase has been passed on a stand-alone basis, there is no leverage left for any future tax increases. Spending cuts must now follow. Naturally the Panderer-in-Chief will again demonstrate just how powerless he is when it comes to policy; L Frank Baum's metaphor of the man behind the curtain has never been more apt.

Credit to George Will today for reviving one of Churchill's pithy observations: "a man who has the gift of compressing a large number of words into a very small idea."

We can debate our ideas as much as we want, secure in the knowledge that no one in politics will pay the slightest attention.

Something extremely significant just occurred, though it will take time for it to become apparent. Until lately, politicians could safely punt on the hard choices by deferring them to the next Congress. They won't be able to do that very much longer.

Sensible pragmatic people know that our path is unsustainable and won't put up with it much more. Funny how well over half the voting populace will be "knuckledraggers" by 2014, though I cannot understand how the concept of living within one's means is supposed to be the sign of a trogdolyte......

The term "CYA" comes to mind too.

While its certainly possible all these public humiliations are part of some grand plan to restore the GLORY of a PERMANENT REPUBLICAN MAJORITY, I have to confess I'm just not seeing it. So, being forced to eat tax hikes despite 30 years of rabid opposition is somehow a victory for the GOP? Even though they got no spending cuts in return? All that strife on the right, the Boner's job being in jeopardy, that's all part of the plan is it? Big business backers of the party who will take it in the shorts if the GOP forces a default are going to sit idly by while this happens without a peep?

Ooooookkkayyyyy...

Are you still waiting for those unskewed polls to come true too?

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

What a mess.

 

[pirate]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

Regarding Social Security, the solution is simple and painless. Forget about the whiny Baby Boomers. After doing stuff like chained CPI adjustments, simply go to people like myself, who have a good 30+ years of working left in them, and only give us what the system can pay out. So, whether its 85% or 75% or whatever, that's the new "promise". If for some reasons the #'s change over time (more people hit the middle class hence more payroll taxes, more young people than expected, etc) then by all means up the promise. However, as govt programs go, Social Security is one of the least worries to have.

My problem with Medicare is I don't think a ton of thought has been given to operating it much more efficiently. The idea that a simple block grant will do the trick something only a blockhead would advocate. It ain't that easy. So, I would take the GOP up on its tort reform offer. Lets see what it saves. I want a massive fraud crackdown, and would invite the private sector to look at the books (you could hire auditors, McKinsey, etc) and receive a % of the fraud savings they detect. If Medicare is operating cheaper on a per person basis than Medicaid, figure out why and make the change. Until Obamacare came along, I'm not sure how much this was even in the public discussion (efficiency that is) as a policy matter.

For the reasons you have stated previously, the 'just go to them" approach isn't likely to carry the day.

What your posts point out is that we need leadership...somebody is going to have to step up and explain why "as long as I get mine" isn't the foundation for a prosperous republic.

So, I respectfully disagree that all we can do is just give the people what they ask for or demand. It strikes me as a balancing act, and there are certainly plenty of places where we are out of balance, but I wouldn't make that the prevailing rule.

I agree with the idea of raising the ages due to life expectancy and/or changing the amount received. A second term president would be the right person to pull it off...short-term it will be painful but whoever invokes these types of changes will have a stronger legacy.

As for what we do for those 'caught' by this change: Just spit-balling but set up a new type of retirement account with the proper controls and give people some additional tax credit for what they contribute to their own retirement planning.

Sure some people won't follow through on that...but better to provide benefits to those who really need it vs. wealthy retirees with cash falling out of their pockets.

 

[jmh]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

We have to bring manufacturing home...

This is a great concept; if anybody has a solution for how to bring it about, I'd love to hear it.

 

[unofan]

This is a great concept; if anybody has a solution for how to bring it about, I'd love to hear it.

We have plenty of manufacturing here already. It's just all done by robots now. Why hire 500 line workers when you can do the same work with a dozen technicians?

Barring a mad max type scenario, that ship has sailed and isn't coming back.

 

[geezer]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

The term "CYA" comes to mind too.

While its certainly possible all these public humiliations are part of some grand plan to restore the GLORY of a PERMANENT REPUBLICAN MAJORITY, I have to confess I'm just not seeing it. So, being forced to eat tax hikes despite 30 years of rabid opposition is somehow a victory for the GOP? Even though they got no spending cuts in return? All that strife on the right, the Boner's job being in jeopardy, that's all part of the plan is it? Big business backers of the party who will take it in the shorts if the GOP forces a default are going to sit idly by while this happens without a peep?

Ooooookkkayyyyy...

Are you still waiting for those unskewed polls to come true too?

Rover, you're a sweetheart so for once I'll leave the snide remarks at the door to give a bit of advice. You don't have to turn every opinion into a Republican versus Democrat political party debate. Save that stuff for an election year. Often, as in the fiscal cliff mess, neither major party (at large) had any clue about the best path to take, while many of us conservatives felt that President Obama's opening position would have been better than the GOP's.
Along with that, don't take it as a given that any criticism of a politician equals an endorsement of his electoral opposition. These problems will never be solved by one of the 2 major political parties anyway; taken separately, they're both about 70 - 80% corrupt.
In simpler words yet: you're the only one here (since Kepler retired)* that's obsessing about how an outcome might advantage one political party or the other in future elections at the polls. Who cares? Let's work on solutions.
We can start by getting rid of everyone currently serving in government, regardless of what political party emblem they've tattooed to their armpits. (OK, that part was a bit snide.) But you get the idea. All of your focus on getting out the vote for Democrats is a complete waste of time and energy.

*Obviously, Priceless is still here too but he makes no secret of being an actual employee of the political party, at least in the past. So he's up front about benefiting financially from his politicking, which gives him a sort of excuse.

 

[mookie1995]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

Priceless benefits now. He offers to pay your tax bill with your income if you trade.... His income now IS your taxes

 

[Rover]

Rover, you're a sweetheart so for once I'll leave the snide remarks at the door to give a bit of advice. You don't have to turn every opinion into a Republican versus Democrat political party debate. Save that stuff for an election year. Often, as in the fiscal cliff mess, neither major party (at large) had any clue about the best path to take, while many of us conservatives felt that President Obama's opening position would have been better than the GOP's.
Along with that, don't take it as a given that any criticism of a politician equals an endorsement of his electoral opposition. These problems will never be solved by one of the 2 major political parties anyway; taken separately, they're both about 70 - 80% corrupt.
In simpler words yet: you're the only one here (since Kepler retired)* that's obsessing about how an outcome might advantage one political party or the other in future elections at the polls. Who cares? Let's work on solutions.
We can start by getting rid of everyone currently serving in government, regardless of what political party emblem they've tattooed to their armpits. (OK, that part was a bit snide.) But you get the idea. All of your focus on getting out the vote for Democrats is a complete waste of time and energy.

*Obviously, Priceless is still here too but he makes no secret of being an actual employee of the political party, at least in the past. So he's up front about benefiting financially from his politicking, which gives him a sort of excuse.

Actually geezer you're missing an important point, which is assigning responsibility. See, in the real world, where many of us work, there's consequences if you're an inflexible, irrational nut that stands in the way of getting the job done. How does this relate to our current political situation? Read on...

One party as presently constituted has little interest in compromise or moving things forward. Its made up of brain dead ideologues. While its true all parties have these, they usually aren't calling the shots. Many cons long for the days of a Reaganesque or Lincolnesque GOP and can't figure out the source of their now record unpopularity. Simply put, all the good people have long headed for the exits. True to your name, you strike me as somebody who thinks he's still dealing with the Republicans as they were in 1982.

So, unless some mythical 3rd party arrives, the solutions WILL have to come from one of the two parties. That's just the reality of the situation. Therefore, if one of the two parties is hell bent on obstructing anything and everything, they need to be called on it. If that offends the mealy mouthed pundits, media, and several USCHO posters, so be it! Your rant is trite. Its been used for decades by people on the left (Nader) and the right (Paul) and its no less nonsensical no matter which side its coming from. Simply put the govt functions better when idiocy is called out and exposed. Idiocy is more rampant on the right than on the left nowadays, so you do no good dismissing it with a "well, they're all no good" schtick.

 

[geezer]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

Actually geezer you're missing an important point, which is assigning responsibility.

and you managed to miss the WHOLE point of the free education I just offered. I'm all for assigning responsibility to politicians, although you disagree with the people who have brains over which party more of the irresponsible people belong to. My point is that that party membership just isn't what's at issue 90% of the time that you bring it up as the be-all and end-all of whether someone is right or wrong on a specific opinion. Look behind the labels. For an example, see your last exchange with FreshFish. You were so eager to go into Nancy Pelosi attack dog mode that you completely missed the point that was being made in good faith about tax policy.
And by the way, this is the main reason that people who want to talk ideas find liberals (in general) so much more irritating than conservatives (on average). Whether good or bad, Democrat Party loyalty has completely blinded liberals from openly debating ideas. They will most often just puke out whatever talking points Nancy wants to issue without taking the time to think them over. I'm sure there are exceptions, probably one or two guys in Alaska.

Take it from a completely neutral bystander who isn't interested in joining a party. They're both 80% corrupt anyway.

 

[Rover]

and you managed to miss the WHOLE point of the free education I just offered. I'm all for assigning responsibility to politicians, although you disagree with the people who have brains over which party more of the irresponsible people belong to. My point is that that party membership just isn't what's at issue 90% of the time that you bring it up as the be-all and end-all of whether someone is right or wrong on a specific opinion. Look behind the labels. For an example, see your last exchange with FreshFish. You were so eager to go into Nancy Pelosi attack dog mode that you completely missed the point that was being made in good faith about tax policy.
And by the way, this is the main reason that people who want to talk ideas find liberals (in general) so much more irritating than conservatives (on average). Whether good or bad, Democrat Party loyalty has completely blinded liberals from openly debating ideas. They will most often just puke out whatever talking points Nancy wants to issue without taking the time to think them over. I'm sure there are exceptions, probably one or two guys in Alaska.

Take it from a completely neutral bystander who isn't interested in joining a party. They're both 80% corrupt anyway.

geezer, geezer, geezer, spare me the "completely neutral bystander" stuff. If that helps you sleep at night over in the trailer park, then keep telling yourself that. However, your posts wreak of "dinosaurism". You're frustrated because people can see right through the make believe world you've created for yourself. On the one hand you're bleating about not taking sides, and on the other you're...wait for it...taking sides politically! Doesn't that violate the neutrality pact you have with yourself? Do you often violate yourself in this manner? In your world, brave moderate clear thinking righties only have our best interests at heart regardless of party. Does anybody really believe this anymore. Do you?

Its not my fault you're butthurt over the shifting in the ideology over the last 30 years, but I'll say to you and many people of your age suffering from the same issue: That's your problem. Continue to lose elections, get frustrated, then trot out the moldly old line about how it all doesn't matter. In the meantime liberalism just keeps marching on aided and abetted by the total idiocy coming out of the right wing. As has been said, we aren't creating any new crabby old white guys who aren't getting laid. That explains the problem with conservatism as an ongoing entity.

 

[unofan]

And by the way, this is the main reason that people who want to talk ideas find liberals (in general) so much more irritating than conservatives (on average). Whether good or bad, Democrat Party loyalty has completely blinded liberals from openly debating ideas.

They're both 80% corrupt anyway.

Oh horse hockey. The present day GOP is full of idealogues who refuse to accept anything less than 100% of their demands. They aren't interested in debate.

As to your closing line, while probably true it's still a freaking cop-out. As the running joke at Fark puts it, "Both sides are bad so vote Republican, amirite?"

 

[geezer]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

geezer, geezer, geezer, spare me the "completely neutral bystander" stuff. If that helps you sleep at night over in the trailer park, then keep telling yourself that. However, your posts wreak of "dinosaurism". You're frustrated because people can see right through the make believe world you've created for yourself. On the one hand you're bleating about not taking sides, and on the other you're...wait for it...taking sides politically! Doesn't that violate the neutrality pact you have with yourself? Do you often violate yourself in this manner? In your world, brave moderate clear thinking righties only have our best interests at heart regardless of party. Does anybody really believe this anymore. Do you?

Its not my fault you're butthurt over the shifting in the ideology over the last 30 years, but I'll say to you and many people of your age suffering from the same issue: That's your problem. Continue to lose elections, get frustrated, then trot out the moldly old line about how it all doesn't matter. In the meantime liberalism just keeps marching on aided and abetted by the total idiocy coming out of the right wing. As has been said, we aren't creating any new crabby old white guys who aren't getting laid. That explains the problem with conservatism as an ongoing entity.

This is actually a big improvement! Weirdness aside, it's a lot more palatable (and honest) if you defend "liberalism" and attack "conservatism" rather than going on and on about the two parties all the time. Thank you.
My point about being neutral is that nowadays, the parties right now are about equally liberal so this is a separate debate from which party suits my needs. My vote changes based on individual candidates. But you're getting there, I'm sure you would have realized this on your own.

 

[geezer]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

Oh horse hockey. The present day GOP is full of idealogues who refuse to accept anything less than 100% of their demands. They aren't interested in debate.

You're absolutely right. No argument at all. Read below for more about the difference between "GOP Party member" and "conservatives" (The second is the group I was talking about in the post you responded to). I'm not the least bit interested in defending the GOP, buncha stupid liberals (fiscally speaking).

I'm not being snide. This view that GOP=conservatives is so entrenched in the media now that I don't blame you a bit for mis-reading which group I was referring to. To a lot of people the terms are interchangeable. It's a very very common assumption.

Again, of course, in reference to tax/spend/fiscal policy. The social issues are a whole other ball of wax.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

Oh horse hockey. The president today is an idealogue who refuse to accept anything less than 100% of his demands.

FYP.

No other President in modern times has been less interested in reaching out to members of the opposite party. Reagan even got Rostenkowski involved in rooting out special interest tax breaks! Clinton achieved welfare reform and a balanced budget working with Gingrich, along with NAFTA ratification. They even had agreed on Social Security reform, although the Lewinski distraction scuttled its enactment. Bush recruited Ted Kennedy (!) to get No Child Left Behind enacted.

Whether you agree with the merits of any of these achievements or not, all of the people involved realized that compromise involved a partial "win" for both sides. We see no sign of that at all from Obama. You offer him something, he then asks for more. That's not how negotiations work with most people. Generally, you offer something to me, I offer something to you in return. Don't see that. Biden (!) did all the negotiating this time.

 

[mookie1995]

Biden (!) did all the negotiating this time.

This is because joe actually served in congress as a senator and knew how it works!