Social Security costs 47 billion more than it takes in

[Chica Chaser]

'Everything else" is half the spending cuts.
Cuts totaling $110 billion per year will be applied from 2013 to 2022, split evenly ($55 billion each) between defense and non-defense discretionary spending. Individually, all these cuts may be peanuts, but when you add it all up it turns into real money.

I've been spending some time seeing what exactly is included in that $55B/yr, discretionary spending cuts. Social Security, Medicaid, supplemental security income, refundable tax credits, the children's health insurance program, the food stamp program and veterans' benefits are excluded from the cuts scheduled under the cliff. All those benefits for low-income families, which I would guess are not peanuts to them at least.

The White House has also said that military personnel would be exempt from the cuts.
The government-run health care program for seniors would face a 2 percent cut in Medicare payments to providers and insurance plans, which amounts to a reduction of $11 billion next year.

[JD Barleycorn]

You can show them the numbers and they still don't believe it. Just like a bunch of dumb farm animals. That is the democrat dream.

CJ7 on the make

[gnadfly]

Originally Posted by Chica Chaser

Those are going back up when we go over the cliff. Its part of the deal. And its why the "taxes will only go up on the +$250K earners" is bullshit. These are taxes every working person pays, regardless of income.

If you are referring to the cut in SS, it was only a two year deal. Never meant to be permanent. The taxes are going up when the Obamacare taxes kick in.

Originally Posted by Chica Chaser

No doubt. As long as the other half of the spending cuts come along with the defense cuts that is. You always forget to mention those along with the defense cuts.

Its pretty likely they could just kick the can for another year also.

The Democrats have no intention of cutting anything significantly. None. Even the Republican/Democrat $400 billion reduction in Defense spending is a planned "faked" savings from the Iraq/Afghan war dying down. If anything, they'll count "faked" raises to existing programs. There will be no real cuts.

Originally Posted by The2Dogs

The money that is collected on the behalf of the citizens is required to be invested, In US T BIlls.
SS is as solvent as the good faith and credit of the US government which I believe lost their AAA rating.
The fed is buying T bills and derivatives so they can keep those printing presses running all the while maintaining an artificially low or non-existent interest rate. Sooner or later it will all catch up and we will have worse inflation than we have seen since Nixon.

Sure SS is solvent; solvent with freshly printed money.

That explains it! WTF is smelling the solvents.

Right 2Dogs, the Fed is buying a lot of the TBills, I heard up to 40%. Geitner also recently tied the raising of interest rates to 6.5% unemployment. When this hits, its going to cripple the country.

[JD Barleycorn]

Just taking a minute to point out that the Tea Party was on this almost four years ago. Nice to know that we were right but sad that we were.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Chica Chaser

'Everything else" is half the spending cuts.

The government-run health care program for seniors would face a 2 percent cut in Medicare payments to providers and insurance plans, which amounts to a reduction of $11 billion next year.

My solution is to cut the benifits from everyone who wants to reduce the deficit.

Wouldn't bother me a bit as I am not planning on getting any. But my guess is that a bunch of these old Tea Pot bastards calling for smaller government , would shit their pants if you told them their benifits would be the first one cut.

My guess is JD would scream the loudest if you tried and cut his military benifits! Boy I sure would like to see that...ole JD screaming about smaller government and then when we actually gave it to him in the form of smaller benifits, listen to him crap his panties.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Just taking a minute to point out that the Tea Party was on this almost four years ago. Nice to know that we were right but sad that we were.

Originally Posted by gnadfly

Right 2Dogs, the Fed is buying a lot of the TBills, I heard up to 40%. Geitner also recently tied the raising of interest rates to 6.5% unemployment. When this hits, its going to cripple the country.

[Randy4Candy]

Originally Posted by WTF

My solution is to cut the benifits from everyone who wants to reduce the deficit.

Wouldn't bother me a bit as I am not planning on getting any. But my guess is that a bunch of these old Tea Pot bastards calling for smaller government , would shit their pants if you told them their benifits would be the first one cut.

My guess is JD would scream the loudest if you tried and cut his military benifits! Boy I sure would like to see that...ole JD screaming about smaller government and then when we actually gave it to him in the form of smaller benifits, listen to him crap his panties.

You mean to tell me that Perfesser Cornhole was in the military? LOL - TFF! Now I know where he picked up his skills for his current profession as janitor at a Kommunity Kollege - latrine duty.

Teawipe "equality" = "Take everyone's stuff but MINE!!!" See, that's short enough to fit on a bumper sticker.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Randy4Candy

Teawipe "equality" = "Take everyone's stuff but MINE!!!" See, that's short enough to fit on a bumper sticker.

LOL, I might have to go print up a batch of those. Problem is, half of'em aren't smart enought to understand it's meaning.

[Randy4Candy]

Obviously, they are seriously challenged when it comes to understanding the absurd.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Randy4Candy

Obviously, they are seriously challenged when it comes to understanding the absurd.

They understand the absurd, it is reality they are having trouble with.

You realize how much gun dearlers are making feeding their paranoia!

[Guest123018-4]

The idea that by continuing to reduce the value of our money via inflation, to reduce the value of our retirement savings to force us into dependency upon the government so that the government can continue to control the populace is the Democrat plan. When a statesman speaks up and says that we must wean ourselves for government programs, who is the party that screams the loudest? You threaten that if government is smaller that the smaller comes from taking away earned benefits rather than making cuts in programs that are spending without results.
Social Security was never intended to be the retirement plan. Even so, the government keeps moving the carrot on the stick further away while rigging the numbers to keep from paying out what was promised.

I wish you leftists would make up your mind about who is more fearful of having "benefits" cut. It seems the only ones that are afraid of smaller government are you commie socialists.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by The2Dogs

I wish you leftists would make up your mind about who is more fearful of having "benefits" cut. It seems the only ones that are afraid of smaller government are you commie socialists.

If we cut government funding for cancer research, who would scream louder, you or me?

[Randy4Candy]

Hmmmm, let's see.....totally private, for profit cancer research without government subsidy or oversight. Sounds great! I wonder what the treatments would cost under that monopoly? Poor ol' T2Nutlickers would probably have to sell his business 5 or 6 times to make the cost of the first treatment. Ahhhh, capitalism at its finest!

Yeh, yeh, yeh, let's hear all about "government getting out of the way" of private enterprise. You Teawipes know all about how fair and inexpensive a monopolized treatment would be. Wondering what type of pretzels will form trying to justify that.

[gnadfly]

Originally Posted by WTF

My solution is to cut the benifits from everyone who wants to reduce the deficit.

Wouldn't bother me a bit as I am not planning on getting any. But my guess is that a bunch of these old Tea Pot bastards calling for smaller government , would shit their pants if you told them their benifits would be the first one cut.

My guess is JD would scream the loudest if you tried and cut his military benifits! Boy I sure would like to see that...ole JD screaming about smaller government and then when we actually gave it to him in the form of smaller benifits, listen to him crap his panties.

You may find this hard to believe but I know some people who refused to take their rightfully earned Social Security because they wanted smaller govt. They even didn't take Medicare until their Primary Insurer said you've gotta take Medicare.

You've confused earned benefits with entitlements - among other things.

[Randy4Candy]

Originally Posted by gnadfly

You may find this hard to believe but I know some people who refused to take their rightfully earned Social Security because they wanted smaller govt. They even didn't take Medicare until their Primary Insurer said you've gotta take Medicare.

You've confused earned benefits with entitlements - among other things.

You Teawipe Parrotriots are the ones who lump any benefit as an entitlement so cool it with your bait'n'switch tactics.