Posted on 09/13/2017 8:09:10 AM PDT by Governor Dinwiddie
And what is inflation, but merely another tax, but this time on value rather than on the money itself.
So if going back to constitutional government would create an economic cataclysm, the only alternative is to phase our way back, so the disruption will be less. But you know what politicians do with phase-outs: they phase ‘em back in.
I like your summation of the end times movements. People love to believe they are gonna get raptured but it’s just a poor interpretation of Scripture and some enthusiastic people selling books.
The funny part of that, other than the hypocrisy, is that nobody is proposing to change any current or soon-to-be recipient’s Social Security. But if some reforms aren’t made for younger workers, the program will go bankrupt.
I’d happily dispense with any and all government programs and benefitw.
In fact, I’ve had this argument with people.
“But you can’t oppose that program. it benefits you.”
“Maybe, but it hurts the country — and I would benefit in different ways by its elimination.”
“Well, that’s just stupid. You can’t oppose a program that benefits you.”
So what are you going to do?
Which is the reason for excessive spending. And what's the reason, for bloated, mostly unconstitutional government?
The various interest groups asked for it. And the politicians gave it to them to buy their votes. And that includes 99.9 percent of us.
So you say you are one of the few who 'know their ass from the ground' because you actually believed Trump's ridiculous promise to pay off the national debt, and that now you are not bothered in the least because he is doing the opposite of what he promised.
HAHA, I see your keen logical skills haven't faded a bit.
Trump talked most about getting the spending under control and paying down the debt. You have chosen to address one of the times when he did address paying off the debt, but I would have to see the exact wording even then to agree with the foundational premise here.
You are operating under a premise you have come up with in what passes for your brain. Sadly, it's a false premise. I doubt many (perhaps none at all) of Trump's supporters voted for him because he said he'd pay off the full federal debt. I do think folks voted for him knowing he'd do his best to cut spending, increase numbers of people working, cut taxes, and double or triple the federal tax recepts. This would impact the nation's fiscal debt significantly. It would bring us back from the brink and closer to fiscal solvency.
We have addressed the fact that Trump has now signed his third Continuing Resolution. What this means, is that in his first 7.5 months, Trump has not signed a long term Continuing Resolution. He is trying to hold Congress' feet to the fire, to get them to reduce spending and head in the direction of a balanced budget. This is totally lost on folks like you, who seem to have a vested interest in looking for the worst things they can find about Trump, blowing them out of shape, or mis-interpreting them to fit the worst case scenario..
This outlook of his supporters was reasoned. Let's look at what you expected, to see if that was reasoned. You say we were gullible. Let's see how gullible you were.
You have taken Trump to taske for failure to strike down DADA day one. You have takent him to task for signing Continuing Resolutions which continue to allow the debt to rise. You bought off on the idea he'd stop funding Planned Parenthood day one. You actually bought off on the idea Trump would do these things on day one. Talk about a gullible fool. I don't know many adults over 18 that are this stupid.
Trump could have struck down DACA on day one. Is that what a true Conservative would hope for? No. Why? If Trump struck it down with an E.O., the very next president could undo his E.O. with one of their own. This is what Obama set up most of his actions as president to do, be sunsetted as soon as he left office. Trump did strike many of those things down, but with DACA he didn't want the next president to be able to undo his actions.
Trump could have come up with some E.O. on day one that would have addressed PP funding, and would have been challenged in the courts. Would that have been wise?
He put Congress on notice that DACA was being sunsetted in 180 days. Congress has to act. Further, it allows Trump the ability to use his Veto Pen if he doesn't like the bill. Trump has kept his options open, while putting Congress on the spot.
He has let it be known he wants to stop funding Planned Parenthood. Has Congress followed through on that? It worked on a bill that did defund PP, but then let it die. Trump advocated for the bill.
Did you describe it this way? No. It was more important to you to trash talk Trump yet again. You have done that since about one month after he was sworn into office. You will continue it for the duration.
Please tell us who you think would be more in tune with our views than Trump.
Maybe if Trump wasn't so scared of Pelosi he would run up less debt.
Trump agrees to short-term funding, debt package [with Schumer & Pelosi) The Hill ^ | 09/06/2017 |
Not mentioned by you is the bill the Repubicans wanted to pass. It would have extended the Debt Ceiling by five times the amount of time. The bill he signed involved a roughly three month CR. The bill the Republicans wanted him sign was a 15 month CR. It would have required five times the three month debt ceiling increase. And you try to cast this as a Leftist move by Trump. Evidently you are under the mistaken impression a five times bigger CR approval, would have been more Conservative. Ignorance is evidenly bliss for you...House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) spoke to President Trump by phone on Thursday and asked him to issue a tweet reassuring young undocumented immigrants that they won’t be deported in the next six months.
Trump tweeted Thursday morning, “For all of those (DACA) that are concerned about your status during the 6 month period, you have nothing to worry about — No action!”
Pelosi asked Trump to issue tweet reassuring DACA recipients and he did( The Hill - 09/07/17)
These supposed gotch moments you list here are childlike do to their lack of significance, and your obvious delight that you think you have just scored big. Rather pathetic...
What is wrong with Trump stating a fact, that DACA candidates will not be deported until after the 180 days? This was a clarification that was called for, and it's a reasoned thing to do to explain how the president's policy affects these people now.
We don't need to be as vindictive or mean as we can be, to maintain the semblence of law and order, and work toward resolving this issue.
As we talk about the 800,000 or so people on DACA, the flow over the border has been cut by 70-80%. That means that in just one year Trump will have been responsible for cutting border crossings by 1.0 to 2.0 times the number of people on DACA. Didn't see you mention that.
Trump has also awarded preliminary approvals for mock-ups of border wall concepts. Those are going to be moving foward in the next few months.
Trump has demonstrated that he is serious about the problems of illegal immigration. You turd in the bunch bowl attitude not withstanding.
Why is it you attack Trump so much? Tell us who you think would be far ahead of what he has accomplished in his first 7.5 months. I'm curious to see who you come up with.
Those are some valid points, but I want you to think about it.
Massive funds exist in TSAs, IRAs and other retirement funds. There’s a ton of private investment out there.
I honestly don’t know what the comparative totals are, these private funds compared to the federal SS funds.
It is not my intention to create a massive fund that the government would place all with one broker and gorge the market thereby setting up potential destruction.
The government funds could be broken up into large funds handled by a broad spectrum of brokers, much the same as current personal retirement accounts are set up.
As for taking these funds out of the general fund, what would the overall upshot be?
I believe you stated it would be $1.1 trillion a year.
That’s a large bundle of funds, however the U.S. Government now pays out more than a trillion per year for S.S., according to a Walter Williams article posted on the forum today.
Fund would necessarily flow in and out of the government portfolios. Some would probably be held in reserve.
Still, it would be best if our funds did achieve optimal growth, so that people in their 30s today, have to pay in so retired folks can be paid right now.
I still maintain these funds have been mismanaged big-time.
I am aware of how much money I paid in over time. That money should have doubled or tripled over time. It didn’t grow at all.
I will wind up getting back more than I put in, but that is not my fault. It is the fault of Congressional mismanagement.
“I learned it right here on FR. My guess is that 80% of Freepers will not part with SS. Most Freepers will not even agree that SS is just another government vote buying wealth transfer scheme and will flame you for calling it welfare.”
I saw this too even in the tea party where so many were retired. Conservative people didn’t want to hear that ss was socialism. We have been bought and paid for..... and the political elite know it. I see no real solution anymore. It’s all talk election after election. The train will run out of gas.
It is not unconstitutional to ask for federal entitlements. It is unconstitutional for the feds to implement entitlements.
But the fact is, FDR and his Leftist buddies forced a lot of these entitlements down our throat. There wasn’t enough resistance to stop it and the demagoguery and lies of the Leftist media helped twist the issue for the uninformed and unwary in their time of need.
Wolves in sheeps clothing all of them.
That is pretty interesting logic you put there.
D1 said that Trump shouldn't UNDO any of Obama’a orders because the next POTUS can just redo Obama’s orders that Trump might have reversed, so Trump should just leave them in place during his whole presidency so the next president doesn't have to repeat what Obama did.(that will save him/her time)
...even if Trump promised he would undo them and you believed him.
Your ‘logic’ speaks for itself. .
Trump has undone many of Obama’s E.O.
This is an issue I care more about, and I don’t want to see it reversed.
Trump is allowing time for Congress to work it’s magic, but I’m reading reports that say Congress probably won’t left a finger.
At that point, DACA is over.
Congress will have in effect elected not to ensconce it into law.
Yes, my logic does speak for itself. I appreciate that.
You just got done arguing that he shouldnt undo them, seeing how silly your argument was you now flip and say he has does undone many.
You just point out you are not the least bit serious in anything you argue with your constant contradictions, its :Keep a promise good, break a promise good, go backward good....BLABLABLA
One idea might be to simply buy T-bills with them. At least T-bills have a rate of return.
I think if you coupled this with privatization it would be hard for the Donkeys to argue that there was some larger risk to Social Security. Only if you think FedGov will default on bonds.
Then, at age 65 - you could convert it to an annuity (again, one option would be government run), or move it to private funds, or spend the principle. (Possibly with some maximum per year.)
This eliminate all the people gaming the system who work just enough years to get the minimum at the end of their productive years and get a much higher rate of return than the diligent 50 year contributors (which I will be when I retire)
Right now it is 1/2 a retirement system and 1/2 Yet Another Wealth Transfer System.
Link me to where I stated he should never undo any of Obama’s E.O.s.
Thanks in advance.
Found a bit of a mistake here:
"Still, it would be best if our funds did achieve optimal growth, so that people in their 30s today, have to pay in so retired folks can be paid right now."
Meant to say, "Still, it would be best if our funds did achieve optimal growth, so that people in their 30s today, would not have to pay in so retired folks can be paid right now."
Meant down the road a bit, but I think you'll catch my drift.
It bothers me to see one person have to pay in so another can live off their income.
Just mention social security on this site and over half (more like 85%) will demand what they were promised. Yet they understand it’s corrupt, evil, insolvent, generational debt and predatory. But they want theirs then it can be killed. Total BS in my opinion.
D1 argues that Trump shouldn't undo Obama's DACA EO at #51
On the same subject DADA, I see your three favorite people in DC were working yesterday on a DACA amnesty bill
No we are not; at least in the absolute sense. Unless implicit magic powers are presumed to be at work. Which we all can agree is not the case. I usually refer to these magical powers as "fairies" of the non-sexual variety.
Who or what, then, is to blame?
Elected representatives unqualified to lead, by default if not by design.
Most of our founding Fathers were very educated, literate and, if not so, at least with the ownership of a normal working brain.
None were idle indolent of aimless character.
Unfortunately it did not remain so for more than two generations, and the unnoticed result were social, economic and political time bombs just waiting to go off. And off they went and haven't stopped since the early 19th Century.
The first is the lack of measurable qualification for eligibility to hold public office regardless of demonstrated ability or the influence of inherited wealth.
The second was the failure to foresee the instant corrosive effect of uncontrolled de facto open borders. Imagine if "gysies" or the modern equivalent, "homeless people" were the exclusive class of mass influx from mainly Europe, then the rest of the world, in the late 19th and early 20th Centuries, all willing to work or starve as they chose to exist.
The third was the lack of imagination to entertain the certainty that a barbaric, killer culture, a 100% cultural fatal cancer, would arise, destroy and kill with impunity under the guise of "religion," worldwide.
None of the Founding Fathers was equipped even to countenance the possibility.
PING! BIGGER DON’T YOU DARE COMMENT ON MY IGNORANCE!!! /hypocritical sarcasm
PONG!
ALMOST A TRILLION$ "STOLEN" FROM SS AND TRANSFERRED TO WELFARE DIDN'T REALLY MATTER!!!!!
< /INSANITY >
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.