Perry in debate: Lets throw Science "OUT THE DOOR"

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Laz

I stand corrected I thought they had actually succeded in that last year. They only got close. But my point is still the same. Those were the only years where Congress actually focused on getting the budget in balanced.

thank you sir. You are a gentleman. Most will never admit a honest mistake in these forums. Most dems try and give clinton to much credit btw. I am a numbers guy. Our numbers look horrible.

[anaximander]

Dolt.
'Borrowing' from the public is little different
from raiding SS. Semantics, where does SS monies
come from? Raiding the SS fund is just a loan
they don't have to pay interest on.

We have a Contitutional obligation to provide
for the military. Social programs are not the
responsibility or duty of the US govt.

It was the dems that argued to make SS deductions
part of the general budget. GOP has never had
the numbers to reverse that much less debate it.

SS isn't a literal ponzi scheme because one,
Mr Ponzi isn't responsible for this.
Second, the govt is involved.
Hence the bottom that ponzi's have,
are lacking in fdr's creation with a cellar door.
You just go less than zero.
SS originally had something like 35:1
worker to retiree; now it's closer to 6:1.
At 2:1 that looks awfully ponzish.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by Laz

A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation that pays returns to separate investors, not from any actual profit earned by the organization, but from their own money or money paid by subsequent investors.

Usually consistent with "Ponzi schemes" is the raiding of the funds by those overseeing the accounts to provide themselves with a current standard of living that exceeds their actual current revenues ... i.e. stealing trust funds.

Most of the current recipients of social security checks understand that Congress has been "raiding" the funds for years and leaving behind IOU's that will never get paid, particularly as the number of contributors to the fund decrease and the number of recipients increase.

If a CFO (or union financial officer [except in this administration]) did that, he or she would go to prison.

[Old-T]

Ah yes, 21st Century "politics" at its finest.

Was I surprised to learn from some of these exceptionally brilliant men that with enough $ they can find one "scientist" to support whatever they want to believe?

Was I shocked that the debate was seen as unfair by at least one side's supporters?

Did it amaze me that the religeous creationists want to contaminate politics even more with their view of the one true way to believe (Viva the Inquisition! is next, I assume)

No, no, and sadly, no.

Go get 'em WTF. Wow, did I really say that? I guess I did.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by Old-T

Viva the Inquisition! is next, I assume.

Psssst.... that one has already started.

[charlestudor2005]

.

[gnadfly]

Social Security is NOT a Ponzi Scheme.

A Ponzi scheme is totally voluntary. Paying SS/Medicare tax is compulsory.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Usually consistent with "Ponzi schemes" is the raiding of the funds by those overseeing the accounts to provide themselves with a current standard of living that exceeds their actual current revenues ... i.e. stealing trust funds.

Most of the current recipients of social security checks understand that Congress has been "raiding" the funds for years and leaving behind IOU's that will never get paid, particularly as the number of contributors to the fund decrease and the number of recipients increase.

If a CFO (or union financial officer [except in this administration]) did that, he or she would go to prison.

It is not broke.

If has a surplus.

What part of that do you guys have trouble understanding?

Does it need adjusting?

Yes of course it does. People are living longer than what they had planned for. Is that a bad thing?

But yes Defense spending is raiding SS surplus. Instead of our elected officials making tough choices (like raising taxes or cutting spending) they take money from the SS overrun and leave a big fat IOU.

That is not a ponzi scheme, that is robbing Peter to pay Paul.

Or if you really want to call it a ponzi scheme, then you have to go after the people that benifit most from what Perry and his folks think is a ponzi scheme. That is the vast industrial military complex. That is who the SS overpayment has benifited.

They have been able to get us to buy their weapons with that surplus instead of making us tax ourself more.

Follow the money folks, follow the money.

[Jackie S]

In one year, I can choose to start drawing SS, as I will be 65. I will continue to work, make a good living, but I want a small part of what I put in for 50+ years back.

There is no SS fund so to speak, is there? I was under the impression that all Federal Money collected by what ever means was simply thrown into a big pot, and used for what ever purpose the Government so chose at the time.

[Laz]

Originally Posted by WTF

It is not broke.

If has a surplus.

Yes but the surplus is entirely in Tbills. When the SS trust fund needs to redeem those Tbills where is the money going to come from? China, increased taxes on who, how high can they afford.

What part of that do you guys have trouble understanding?

We understand. We are also recognizing the assets in the surplus.

Does it need adjusting?

Yes of course it does. People are living longer than what they had planned for. Is that a bad thing?

No it is not a bad thing but it does make the flaws in the initial creation of this program obvious.

But yes Defense spending is raiding SS surplus. Instead of our elected officials making tough choices (like raising taxes or cutting spending) they take money from the SS overrun and leave a big fat IOU.

The most important function of the federal government is national defense. While I believe that any government function is bound to have waste I would not blame this on defense spending.

That is not a ponzi scheme, that is robbing Peter to pay Paul.

The program was set up so that the current workers (peter) are robbed to pay the retired workers (paul). Only since the 80's was a significant excess collected supposedly to handle what we are facing now. Unfortunately, as you have pointed out that money was wasted by all congresses since then.

Or if you really want to call it a ponzi scheme, then you have to go after the people that benifit most from what Perry and his folks think is a ponzi scheme. That is the vast industrial military complex. That is who the SS overpayment has benifited.

You have some kind of fixation on the military. As I pointed out earlier that is the federal governments number one responsibility. Why dont you point at any of the other things Congress spends money on.

They have been able to get us to buy their weapons with that surplus instead of making us tax ourself more.

See above.

Follow the money folks, follow the money.

There are numerous ways Congress has wasted the money that should have been reserved. But you need to quit focusing exclusively on the military.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Laz

The most important function of the federal government is national defense. While I believe that any government function is bound to have waste I would not blame this on defense spending.
Laz, we spend more on Defense than the rest of the world COMBINED!

There are numerous ways Congress has wasted the money that should have been reserved. But you need to quit focusing exclusively on the military.

Why? That is where we spend the most money.
Laz, Reagan was able to spend on the Defense by cutting taxes on the very rich and then raising taxes on SS. This gave him room to spend freely on his pet project, Defense. A practice that has hardly stopped in the last thirty years. The thread was on Perry calling SS a Ponzi scheme. If in fact it is, it is because of Defense spending raiding SS surplus. Bush doubled military spending!

You have to be able to open your mind and then just follow the money.

http://www.warresisters.org/pages/piechart.htm

Federal Funds vs. Unified Budget. WRL uses "federal funds" rather than the "unified budget" figures that the government prefers. Federal funds exclude trust fund money (e.g., social security), which is raised separately (e.g., the FICA and Medicare deductions in paychecks) and is specifically ear-marked for particular programs. By combining trust funds with federal funds, the percentage of spending on the military appears smaller, a deceptive practice first used by the government in the late 1960s as the Vietnam War became more and more unpopular.


Past Military Spending. If the government does not have enough money to finance a war (or spending for its hefty military budgets), they borrow through loans, savings bonds, and so forth. This borrowing (done heavily during World War II and the Vietnam War) comes back in later years as "hidden" military spending through interest payments on the national debt.
How much of the debt is considered “military” varies from group. As mentioned above, WRL uses 80% whereas FCNL uses 48%. Consequently, FCNL reports that 43% of the FY2007 budget is military (29% current military and 14% past military). WRL's figures are 54% of the FY2009 budget (36% current — which includes 7% for Iraq & Afghanistan wars — and 18% past).

[CPT Savajo]

Social Security is a Ponzi Scheme, it's an involuntary ponzi scheme that is made voluntary. "The American Dream" by George Carlin! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0CjA...yer_detailpage

Ron Paul2012

[WTF]

Originally Posted by CPT Savajo

Social Security is a Ponzi Scheme, it's an involuntary ponzi scheme that is made voluntary. "The American Dream" by George Carlin! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0CjA...yer_detailpage

Ron Paul2012

Who is stealing the money?

Who benifits the most?

Let me ask you this....If we had paid for all the other things we wanted (and sorry Laz but the majority of those wants were military spending ) would we be having this discussion.

I mean really...SS has enough saved to last fully until 2037.

Who are we kidding?

We have robbed our trust funds so we would not have to raise taxes. That has been the problem. The reason why people are complaining now is because there is no longer no huge surplus.

Now we have to do what our parents would not. Raise taxes and cut spending and benifits but those same selfish bastards that got us here do not want us to cut their benifits!

That is wtf Ronald Reagan raised, a nation that puts shit on credit. Out political system is broke folks both in dollars in morals.

[acp5762]

This is an interesting thread. Iam currently retired, but not under Social security. For those of you who will retire under Social Security what age do you expect to retire and what benefits do you expect to recieve? What about Dental and Medical, will your job provide that or do you have to acquire it on your own. I am only asking cause I worked under Social Security up to age 22. My first job I was 15. I spent 25 years in my career. My retirement benefit is funded by the state in which I live in. I have worked since my retirement which of course they deducted SS from my check.

[CuteOldGuy]

Originally Posted by wellendowed1911

That's a huge LIE- COG you may think from my post that I am a DEM, but I am actually an Independent and over years this is what I have noticed- yes DEMS normally and traditionally spend more, but they pay for it- the GOP spend like liberals but charge it to the debt. I respect the Dems method far more- can you tell me who is paying for medicare Part D drug plan???? I'll be waiting for your response- but to save you time- it's 100 billion dollars a year charged off to the debt- the plan wasn't paid for by Bush. Can you tell me how this massive Iraq and Afghan War is being paid????
At least Obama had the idea of paying for his plans without shipping it to the deficit.

Uh, I don't think my post was directed at you. How have the Dems paid for anything? How have the Repubs paid for anything? I am NOT a Republican, and Bush was wrong for those bills. The debt keeps going up. It has to stop, or we will end up a police state. It's almost here. And I OPPOSE the Iraq and Afghan war. Ridiculous waste of life and treasure. And why has the deficit ballooned under Obama? Remember, the Dems had control of everything the first two years. How's the kool aid?