Gov't downsizes amid GOP demands for more cuts

Feb 22, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: WTOP-FM Washington

Republicans and other fiscal conservatives keep insisting on more federal austerity and a smaller government.

Comments (Page 4)

Showing posts 61 - 80 of147
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

Since: Apr 07

Oak Ridge, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#66
Feb 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Pamela wrote:
<quoted text>The young people today are a larger generation than the baby boomers, so you are wrong there. The millenium generation is over 100,000, whereas the baby boomers are 80,000 and that's why the young people out-voted the old baby boomers and got Obama reelected.
Actually the birth rate has declined after the Baby boom generation we are still the largest group of American citizens.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby_boomer

The vast majority of today's youth population hasn't even started working yet. You'll continue paying into YOUR Social Security and Medicare hoping there will be something left for your retirement if we do not fix it NOW.

Jim

Jim Hayden in 2016
https://www.facebook.com/jimhayden2016

Jim Hayden for President in 2016
http://www.jimhayden2012.org

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#67
Feb 27, 2013
 
Jim Hayden wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually the birth rate has declined after the Baby boom generation we are still the largest group of American citizens.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby_boomer
The vast majority of today's youth population hasn't even started working yet. You'll continue paying into YOUR Social Security and Medicare hoping there will be something left for your retirement if we do not fix it NOW.
Jim
Jim Hayden in 2016
https://www.facebook.com/jimhayden2016
Jim Hayden for President in 2016
http://www.jimhayden2012.org
And when your generation dies off over the next 20 years, social security will go back to generating surpluses.
Pamela

Citrus Heights, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#68
Feb 27, 2013
 
Jim Hayden wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually if you must know the truth Obama was reelected with about 12% of the eligible vote. Obama did not win anything.The Evangelical Christians were willing to vote for Romney.
you are absolutely correct both Social Security and Medicare are ponzi schemes now we have to find a remedy to fix them. You seem to lack a basic knowledge of exactly how compounded annual interest works. Every year a person sets aside say $50.00 a month towards their retirement. Over the first year their money earns interest which is added to the principle at the end of the year. The following year and every year thereafter they continue to put aside $50.00 a month and every year their principle continue to earn interest which is added to the principle. They are being paid interest on the interest earned the previous years as the principle continues to grow. Over a 45 year period because of the compounded annual interest a $50.00 a month investment has grown into a $1,500,000.00 return. Look at any health insurance company or life insurance company. They pay out far more than what most people pay in. How do they stay in business? They live off of the compounded annual interest earned on the money people give them to invest.
Actually the World War II people did pay into both Social Security and Medicare since the Social Security Act was signed into law in 1932 and World War II didn't break out until December 6,1941.
Ever since 1983 the Congress has been using OUR Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds as their personal slush funds. by converting all of those 'Special' Treasury bonds into eDollars we can double or triple the amount of money being held in trust and without being forced to increase anybody's taxes or cutting anybody's benefits. As a matter of fact we will be able to increase everybody's benefits. Medicare will start paying 100% of a persons medical expenses while Social Security benefits can be increased.
The current interest rate on money in the bank is ZERO percent. Compound interest equals zero too at zero percent interest.

There would not be $122 TRILLION of unfunded liabilities in SS and Medicare if it was not welfare to people. Your money went to the World War II generation. They paid zero into medicare and ONE HALF OF ONE PERCENT into SS. They used up all they paid in within one year of being on SS and Medicare, and they have been on SS and Medicare for almost 40 years now. That's WHY they call it a Ponzi Scheme, the older generation gets the money from current workers. Everyone knows this.

You want the money and health care and don't want any of it cut so you make up crazy stuff about the WWII folks paid for it and that the government spent Medicare money on wars, all lies, all made up crazy talk. Same as you are running for president.

I bet you are on disability for psychiatric problems, obviously, the fact that you think you are running for president.

You assume, as all of the tea party does, that I am young, because why would I tell the truth about the debt ind SS and Medicare if I was old? That is because Americans are so god damned dishonest today that they are all only out for money, so they will not even admit the debt in SS and Medicare. They won't deal with it, so they figure anyone who tells the truth about it must be young and not trying to get SS and Medicare. No, there are a few, few people left in the country who are capable of telling the truth, who are smart, who have IQs high enough to get it that telling the truth about his stuff is the only way out.

Just because 95 percent of people in this country are dishonest and dumb as hell and only care about money for themselves, does not mean every single person left is like that.
Pamela

Citrus Heights, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#69
Feb 27, 2013
 
Jim Hayden wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually the birth rate has declined after the Baby boom generation we are still the largest group of American citizens.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby_boomer
The vast majority of today's youth population hasn't even started working yet. You'll continue paying into YOUR Social Security and Medicare hoping there will be something left for your retirement if we do not fix it NOW.
Jim
Jim Hayden in 2016
https://www.facebook.com/jimhayden2016
Jim Hayden for President in 2016
http://www.jimhayden2012.org
No. The younger generation IS bigger than the baby boomers.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/daveserchuk/2011/...

What you all should have done and should be doing is admitting that SS and Medicare pay out so much more money to each person than they paid in that it cannot go on beyond one generation, and all of you should be concerned with your nation going under from debt and all of you should agree to cut 2/3ds of SS spending, cut 2/3rds of Medicare spending, no longer pay women who did not work and did not pay in, no more double payments to men, make those who have other pensions take less SS and pay a lot more of their Medicare, and you all should demand that welfare programs also be cut by 2/3ds and that military spending also be cut by 2/3ds. That would cut the one trillion per year that we need cut and it would cut into the three biggest spending items we have - military spending, SS, Medicare/Medicaid.

Unless you all are willing to take cuts on your stuff, you have no platform, no leg to stand on. To just keep saying you want spending cuts but don't cut the stuff you get is not patriotic and it is stupid because once everyone saw that SS and Medicare have $120 trillion of debt, that told all of you that you cannot ever get that money. It's so much too high of a number, that is the number you need to be thinking about and you need to be thinking about how to fund $122 trillion for SS and Medicare over the next 20 years, or, a more realistic position would be means testing, giving up a lot of it and making Medicare into vouchers now. You have to solve the problem of SS and Medicare having $122 trillion in unfunded liabilities, and that is the largest problem you have to solve.

I am 55 and on SS myself. I am being realistic. I realize it is going to end soon and I have to find another way to survive. I'm not young but I am also not crazy enough and stupid enough to simply sit here and make it up that somehow the government is going to keep giving me that money. They are not. So I look at ways to cut it and ways to keep it and ways to fund it. The Tea Party just sits in the sh!t and keeps saying the gov. has to give them that money somehow with no ideas of how to pay for it. The gov. will just end that stuff on everyone except the poor if the tea party doesn't come to the table and agree to cuts in their socialism.

A reasonable position would be that every person of every age on every govermment program has to agree to cuts. You can't just keep saying your group will take no cuts and cut everyone else, especially considering SS and Medicare would be using up 97 percent of the federal budget in five more years. It is sick to make it up that the old people will be able to use up 97 percent of the federal budget on themselves for Christ's sake. That's not ever going to happen so they have to face up to cuts and to further taxes to fund the socialism that they want.

A real patriot and a decent person would come to the table agreeing to cuts to their gov. money and then ask for cuts to other gov. spending as well. The idea that no cuts ever on SS and Medicare and greed of money is all that matters and consumerism, this is all BS and it's not normal and it's not important.

Since: Apr 07

Oak Ridge, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#70
Feb 27, 2013
 
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
And when your generation dies off over the next 20 years, social security will go back to generating surpluses.
It has never stopped generating a surplus.

the only thing keeping Social Security and Medicare from meeting their obligations is the fact that those THIEVING Democrats keep spending the surplus it generates.

If this makes you mad? Get ACTIVE by joining our movement to save the Constitution and the Republic it created by go to my Fan Page and LIKE it.

So please help yourself by helping Jim Hayden reach 60 million LIKES. Then get ACTIVE by Sharing, Copying and Pasting Jimís posts where ever you feel it appropriate and encourage your friends, families and strangers to do likewise.

Thank you for your support.

Jim

Jim Hayden in 2016
https://www.facebook.com/jimhayden2016

Jim Hayden for President in 2016
http://www.jimhayden2012.org

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#71
Feb 27, 2013
 
Jim Hayden wrote:
<quoted text>
It has never stopped generating a surplus.
Wrong again.

In 2020, 2011, & 2012 social security paid out more in benefits than it took in during the year. That means it did not generate a surplus during those years.

Yes, Congress spent every penny of the surplus in previous years, but in '10,'11, & '12 there was no surplus.

Since: Apr 07

Oak Ridge, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#72
Feb 27, 2013
 
Pamela wrote:
<quoted text>No. The younger generation IS bigger than the baby boomers.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/daveserchuk/2011/...
What you all should have done and should be doing is admitting that SS and Medicare pay out so much more money to each person than they paid in that it cannot go on beyond one generation, and all of you should be concerned with your nation going under from debt and all of you should agree to cut 2/3ds of SS spending, cut 2/3rds of Medicare spending, no longer pay women who did not work and did not pay in, no more double payments to men, make those who have other pensions take less SS and pay a lot more of their Medicare, and you all should demand that welfare programs also be cut by 2/3ds and that military spending also be cut by 2/3ds. That would cut the one trillion per year that we need cut and it would cut into the three biggest spending items we have - military spending, SS, Medicare/Medicaid.
Unless you all are willing to take cuts on your stuff, you have no platform, no leg to stand on. To just keep saying you want spending cuts but don't cut the stuff you get is not patriotic and it is stupid because once everyone saw that SS and Medicare have $120 trillion of debt, that told all of you that you cannot ever get that money. It's so much too high of a number, that is the number you need to be thinking about and you need to be thinking about how to fund $122 trillion for SS and Medicare over the next 20 years, or, a more realistic position would be means testing, giving up a lot of it and making Medicare into vouchers now. You have to solve the problem of SS and Medicare having $122 trillion in unfunded liabilities, and that is the largest problem you have to solve.
I am 55 and on SS myself. I am being realistic. I realize it is going to end soon and I have to find another way to survive. I'm not young but I am also not crazy enough and stupid enough to simply sit here and make it up that somehow the government is going to keep giving me that money. They are not. So I look at ways to cut it and ways to keep it and ways to fund it. The Tea Party just sits in the sh!t and keeps saying the gov. has to give them that money somehow with no ideas of how to pay for it. The gov. will just end that stuff on everyone except the poor if the tea party doesn't come to the table and agree to cuts in their socialism.
A reasonable position would be that every person of every age on every govermment program has to agree to cuts. You can't just keep saying your group will take no cuts and cut everyone else, especially considering SS and Medicare would be using up 97 percent of the federal budget in five more years. It is sick to make it up that the old people will be able to use up 97 percent of the federal budget on themselves for Christ's sake. That's not ever going to happen so they have to face up to cuts and to further taxes to fund the socialism that they want.
A real patriot and a decent person would come to the table agreeing to cuts to their gov. money and then ask for cuts to other gov. spending as well. The idea that no cuts ever on SS and Medicare and greed of money is all that matters and consumerism, this is all BS and it's not normal and it's not important.
Naw it is a whole lot easier to convert all of those 'Special' Treasury Bonds into eDollars which will retire 65% of the nationals debt and be done with it. That way everyone gets exactly what they have paid for and without having to raise taxes or cut anyone's benefits.

Jim

Jim Hayden in 2016
https://www.facebook.com/jimhayden2016

Jim Hayden for President in 2016
http://www.jimhayden2012.org

Since: Apr 07

Oak Ridge, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73
Feb 27, 2013
 
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong again.
In 2020, 2011, & 2012 social security paid out more in benefits than it took in during the year. That means it did not generate a surplus during those years.
Yes, Congress spent every penny of the surplus in previous years, but in '10,'11, & '12 there was no surplus.
Sorry to disappoint you AGAIN but in 2010 there was a $83 BILLION surplus, 2011 a $91 Billion surplus while there was a $101 Billion surplus in 2012. http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm...

If Social Security paid out more money then it took in there would not have been any surplus now would there?

However you are right about one thing. as long as those THIEVING Democrats are able to continue stealing from OUR Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds nothing is going to change. That is one more reason why we need to convert those 'Special' Treasury Bonds into eDollars and use those eDollars to pay our Social Security and Medicare benefits. By converting the bonds into eDollars we can increase the amount of money is the Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds without increasing taxes while increasing benefits. It is a win win situation. As long as OUR MONEY is tied up in worthless Treasury Bonds we are unable to use them for our benefits. We have got to free that money up to be used to pay OUR BENEFITS.

At the same time we must privatize Social Security and Medicare by placing them both under an independent Board of Trustees who are elected from the membership.
serfs up

Kissimmee, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#74
Feb 27, 2013
 
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
And when your generation dies off over the next 20 years, social security will go back to generating surpluses.
Sheeple, 20 years! You are being optimistic. The last years of the boomer generation will be collecting approximately at that time. With all life the life span advances you are looking at forty years of tough road.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#75
Feb 27, 2013
 
Jim Hayden wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry to disappoint you AGAIN but in 2010 there was a $83 BILLION surplus, 2011 a $91 Billion surplus while there was a $101 Billion surplus in 2012. http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm...
If Social Security paid out more money then it took in there would not have been any surplus now would there?
However you are right about one thing. as long as those THIEVING Democrats are able to continue stealing from OUR Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds nothing is going to change. That is one more reason why we need to convert those 'Special' Treasury Bonds into eDollars and use those eDollars to pay our Social Security and Medicare benefits. By converting the bonds into eDollars we can increase the amount of money is the Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds without increasing taxes while increasing benefits. It is a win win situation. As long as OUR MONEY is tied up in worthless Treasury Bonds we are unable to use them for our benefits. We have got to free that money up to be used to pay OUR BENEFITS.
At the same time we must privatize Social Security and Medicare by placing them both under an independent Board of Trustees who are elected from the membership.
Wrong yet again asshat.

Your link is a PROJECTION done in Aug of 2010 (look at the date of the article is your first clue).

My numbers were from the Social Security Administration.

They paid out MORE than they took in during 2010, 2011, & 2012.

BOTH parties have spent every penny of the surplus over the previous decades.

Privatizing social security only destroys it faster.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#76
Feb 27, 2013
 
serfs up wrote:
<quoted text> Sheeple, 20 years! You are being optimistic. The last years of the boomer generation will be collecting approximately at that time. With all life the life span advances you are looking at forty years of tough road.
Wrong again.

The last of the baby boomers will start collecting social security when they turn 62 in just 10 years. Half of those will be dead in the following 10 years. So in 20 years 3/4 of all boomers will be dead and our social security deficit will be resolved.

The reason we had $2.5 TRILLION in surplus was to pay for that boom when they retired. Granted, we have to pay back that $2.5 trillion in order for social security to be solvent, but that's Congress' fault- and by extention our fault for allowing/demanding they spend the surplus in lieu of other tax increases.

WE ALL caused this problem, and now WE ALL are responsible for fixing it. That mean WE ALL pay higher taxes to pay back the $2.5 trillion needed to make social security solvent again, and YES that includes the current social security recipients who also benefited from artificially low tax rates.
Pamela

Citrus Heights, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#78
Feb 28, 2013
 
serfs up wrote:
<quoted text> Sheeple, 20 years! You are being optimistic. The last years of the boomer generation will be collecting approximately at that time. With all life the life span advances you are looking at forty years of tough road.
Half of the WWII folks are STILL on SS and Medicare for god's sake. Half of my grandparent's relatives are still alive - they are like 98, 99 and have been on SS and Medicare for almost 40 years and paid zero into Medicare and just about nothing into SS and they go on and on about how they paid in so much and they want more money. The more senile they get and the more welfare the gov. gives them, the more they declare they are more entitled than before. This is how it works. When people see they are getting huge welfare when they have a lot of money and income, they protest too much, they claim they are being taken so badly to get SS and Medicare for 40 years. It's called crapola.

Imagine of the WWII folks are still on all that stuff how long the baby boomers will be on it. You are right about that. They will be 90 and still alive and complaining the gov. doesn't give them enough free stuff.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#79
Feb 28, 2013
 
Pamela wrote:
<quoted text>Half of the WWII folks are STILL on SS and Medicare for god's sake. Half of my grandparent's relatives are still alive - they are like 98, 99 and have been on SS and Medicare for almost 40 years and paid zero into Medicare and just about nothing into SS and they go on and on about how they paid in so much and they want more money. The more senile they get and the more welfare the gov. gives them, the more they declare they are more entitled than before. This is how it works. When people see they are getting huge welfare when they have a lot of money and income, they protest too much, they claim they are being taken so badly to get SS and Medicare for 40 years. It's called crapola.
Imagine of the WWII folks are still on all that stuff how long the baby boomers will be on it. You are right about that. They will be 90 and still alive and complaining the gov. doesn't give them enough free stuff.
The demographics prove otherwise.

Agerage lifespan is currently 79. That means half will be dead before that age and half will live longer, but not much. Someone 65 today can expect to live to about 83.
broke is broke period

Vandergrift, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#80
Mar 3, 2013
 

Judged:

1

hopefully warren will be able to buy the whole county SOON at 1c on the dollar. and buy off congress and the senate with PICKELS AND RELISH AND KETCHUP..
serfs up

Daytona Beach, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#81
Mar 3, 2013
 
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong again.
The last of the baby boomers will start collecting social security when they turn 62 in just 10 years. Half of those will be dead in the following 10 years. So in 20 years 3/4 of all boomers will be dead and our social security deficit will be resolved.
The reason we had $2.5 TRILLION in surplus was to pay for that boom when they retired. Granted, we have to pay back that $2.5 trillion in order for social security to be solvent, but that's Congress' fault- and by extention our fault for allowing/demanding they spend the surplus in lieu of other tax increases.
WE ALL caused this problem, and now WE ALL are responsible for fixing it. That mean WE ALL pay higher taxes to pay back the $2.5 trillion needed to make social security solvent again, and YES that includes the current social security recipients who also benefited from artificially low tax rates.
Now you get conservative in numbers! People live longer then what you wrote. Much longer. I know. you want the teenage cows shitting out babies to continue their slutty ways. That is blinding you. That is gong to slow down.
Barry Goldwater

Lockport, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#82
Mar 3, 2013
 
The key to meeting these numbers is the Hispanic population. They are the only people having children. Schools are closing in all but three states and that is where the hispanic population is heavy. Stop fighting the immigration issue and you may help some economic issues. The Republican party lost the last election because they did not face up to this reality. If on no other level, at least embrace the economic argument. Economies die when population ages. This is fact. The Republicans will run Rubio and then George Bush the third who just happens to be half Hispanic.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#83
Mar 3, 2013
 
serfs up wrote:
<quoted text> Now you get conservative in numbers! People live longer then what you wrote. Much longer. I know. you want the teenage cows shitting out babies to continue their slutty ways. That is blinding you. That is gong to slow down.
The average lifespan in America is 78.

Those who get to 65 can expect to live to about 83; some will live a little longer, but not much. A very few will live to 100 or beyond.

Statistics don't lie.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#84
Mar 3, 2013
 
Barry Goldwater wrote:
The key to meeting these numbers is the Hispanic population. They are the only people having children. Schools are closing in all but three states and that is where the hispanic population is heavy. Stop fighting the immigration issue and you may help some economic issues. The Republican party lost the last election because they did not face up to this reality. If on no other level, at least embrace the economic argument. Economies die when population ages. This is fact. The Republicans will run Rubio and then George Bush the third who just happens to be half Hispanic.
It would be cheaper if we had a severe flu season a few years in a row and take out about 20 million old geezers instead.
serfs up

Daytona Beach, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#85
Mar 3, 2013
 
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
The average lifespan in America is 78.
Those who get to 65 can expect to live to about 83; some will live a little longer, but not much. A very few will live to 100 or beyond.
Statistics don't lie.
Improvements in medical technology don't lie either. Unless held back. Always expect the unexpected. We should be spending a pittance in medicare today according to the great society people. CBO tells us that we will grow a certain percent every year. Never believe them. None have to live to 100, just older then what you say for a few years at a high percentage. with all of the corruption in the medical industry and individuals who like to get paid off, this will keep the taxes very high.
serfs up

Daytona Beach, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#86
Mar 3, 2013
 
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
It would be cheaper if we had a severe flu season a few years in a row and take out about 20 million old geezers instead.
And this is after they spent their lives paying for the likes of you. Can you ever wonder why nazis and commies and dictators show up now and then to cull the population? And when they cull, it is so uneven and messy. It is the boomers time....now pay up like a good progressive should.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 61 - 80 of147
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

72 Users are viewing the US News Forum right now

Search the US News Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Chick-fil-A Vallejo Location Faces Opposition 7 min Frankie Rizzo 125
Black colleges face hard choices on $25M Koch gift 7 min dbiggs69 22
Gay marriage (Mar '13) 8 min Rose_NoHo 52,135
British Ban Teaching Creationism As Science, Sh... 9 min TurkanaBoy 116
Second chance? Perry in Iowa again courting voters 9 min Far Away 50
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 10 min Patrick 1,078,770
The President has failed us (Jun '12) 10 min Savoy 3 Killtop 243,542
•••
•••