Shout out to Oakman (Debt Ceiling)
-
Do you think we will make the "dead line"? Whether we do or not, do you think that we will come up with a medium to long term solution for dealing with our increasing debt?
----------------------------- Just along for the ride. -----------------------------
Slacker007 wrote:
Do you think we will make the "dead line"?
I would have said no a few days ago. Now I am beginning to think McConnell's brilliantly conceived and statesmanlike kicking of the can down the road might appeal to enough of the old-boy network of both parties to pass, even in the House. An y time our Congress can abdicate its responsibility and hide its head in the sand, it is unwise to think any other alternative will succeed.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
Raise the ceiling and borrow more. Simples. :-D
Panic, Chaos, Destruction. My work here is done. Drink. Get drunk. Fall over - P O'H OK, I will win to day or my name isn't Ethel Crudacre! - DD Ethel Crudacre I cannot live by bread alone. Bacon and ketchup are needed as well. - Trollslayer Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb - they're often *students*, for heaven's sake - Terry Pratchett
Nagy Vilmos wrote:
borrow more
How's that working out for Greece?
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
Raise the debt ceiling to deal with the immediate problem, then raise taxes and cut loopholes. Also, allow inflation to eat at long term debt. Cut foreign aid, cut military aid, cut military expenditure by not fighting all those wars, 10% on petrol and increase retirement age by 2 years.
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave CCC Link[^] Trolls[^]
Dalek Dave wrote:
then raise taxes and cut loopholes.
As long as we continue to tax production rather than consumption, we are fucked. The reason our Congress will never adopt a Fair Tax[^] is because it treats everyone equally. Our government is all about playing favorites. That's why my brother-in-law who runs a small business pays 39% on his company profits while Jeffrey Immelt, friend of Obama and head of G.E., pays no corporate taxes at all. I am all in favor of eliminating loopholes, but most folks consider tax breaks only for people or organizations they don't approve of to be "loopholes." We need to eliminate the homeowners mortgage loophole, and the charitable organization loophole. We need to dump the oil loopholes and the green energy loopholes. We need to tax hedge-fund managers in exactly the same way that we take plumbers. We also need to tax farmers in exactly the same way as we do plumbers.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
wizardzz wrote:
and likely never benefit?
The only reason why you won't benefit is if you allow SS to be destroyed. The Republicans are working very hard to make that happen, so I cannot guarantee that it will be there when you retire. Best - though not perfect - defense is to vote Democratic.
wizardzz wrote:
If the SS surplus helps us get out of debt
How might I put this delicately - oh never mind that. Here's what I have to say about that - FUCK YOU! I've paid into SS all my life and I see no reason why that money should be stolen so that rich people can have tax cuts. If you want to balance the budget then you're going to have to pay higher taxes. I'm ready to. Recind the bush tax cuts.
Why exactly do you think that making some people pay a larger share of what they earn than other people is fairer than asking everyone to pay the same share? Why shouldn't the guy making $20K pay $2,000, if the guy making $200,000 is paying $20,000? I do understand that the 49 percent of American citizens who don't pay income tax thanks to their tax breaks are all in favor of raising taxes on the folks who are already looking at a tax rate, after tax breaks of around 35% of everything they make being paid to city, state and national governments, but how, exactly do you justify it? TANSTAAFL
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
Why exactly do you think that making some people pay a larger share of what they earn than other people is fairer than asking everyone to pay the same share? Why shouldn't the guy making $20K pay $2,000, if the guy making $200,000 is paying $20,000? I do understand that the 49 percent of American citizens who don't pay income tax thanks to their tax breaks are all in favor of raising taxes on the folks who are already looking at a tax rate, after tax breaks of around 35% of everything they make being paid to city, state and national governments, but how, exactly do you justify it? TANSTAAFL
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
I'm almost 30, and I learned in business school to not rely on social retirement programs in my lifetime, so what do you say to those of us, like myself, who will pay into it for 30+ years, and likely never benefit? It's just as unfair as raising the retirement age now. If the SS surplus helps us get out of debt, then I say do as you may with it.
"I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours. " — Hunter S. Thompson
wizardzz wrote:
I learned in business school. . . .If the SS surplus helps us get out of debt, then I say do as you may with it.
In business school they taught you not to pay your debts? The Social Security Trust Fund is 2.5 trillion dollars worth of Treasury bills backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. The Savings Bonds that your father may have purchased for you when you were a kid and the T-Bills we've been selling to China, Japan and Europe are also back by the full faith and credit of the U.S. If the U.S. was to default on any of its bonds, it would be in at least technical default. That includes refusing to redeem the pay-on-demand bonds held by the SS Trust Fund, just as much as those held by China. In addition, one quarter of all payroll taxes (used to be 1/3rd until Obama cut it) is earmarked by law to be used to cover Social Security benefits with the excess deposited into the trust fund. You are right to be pissed off because every President from Reagan onwards has spent the money paid into the Trust Fund and replaced it with I.O.U.s that are now coming due. Obama's stimulus, Bush's wars, Clinton's balanced budget, and everything back to S.D.I and the Department of Education was paid for by siphoning out the money paid into Social Security as fast as it was paid in. However, to pretend that you, or your generation, did not benefit from the raiding of Social Security in so very many ways, is to deny verifiable facts and head off into never-never-land.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
Dalek Dave wrote:
then raise taxes and cut loopholes.
As long as we continue to tax production rather than consumption, we are fucked. The reason our Congress will never adopt a Fair Tax[^] is because it treats everyone equally. Our government is all about playing favorites. That's why my brother-in-law who runs a small business pays 39% on his company profits while Jeffrey Immelt, friend of Obama and head of G.E., pays no corporate taxes at all. I am all in favor of eliminating loopholes, but most folks consider tax breaks only for people or organizations they don't approve of to be "loopholes." We need to eliminate the homeowners mortgage loophole, and the charitable organization loophole. We need to dump the oil loopholes and the green energy loopholes. We need to tax hedge-fund managers in exactly the same way that we take plumbers. We also need to tax farmers in exactly the same way as we do plumbers.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
Have you ever gone over politicians' or otherwise wealthy or powerful individuals' tax returns? I'm not saying illegally, many are public. It's absolutely amazing.
"I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours. " — Hunter S. Thompson
-
wizardzz wrote:
I learned in business school. . . .If the SS surplus helps us get out of debt, then I say do as you may with it.
In business school they taught you not to pay your debts? The Social Security Trust Fund is 2.5 trillion dollars worth of Treasury bills backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. The Savings Bonds that your father may have purchased for you when you were a kid and the T-Bills we've been selling to China, Japan and Europe are also back by the full faith and credit of the U.S. If the U.S. was to default on any of its bonds, it would be in at least technical default. That includes refusing to redeem the pay-on-demand bonds held by the SS Trust Fund, just as much as those held by China. In addition, one quarter of all payroll taxes (used to be 1/3rd until Obama cut it) is earmarked by law to be used to cover Social Security benefits with the excess deposited into the trust fund. You are right to be pissed off because every President from Reagan onwards has spent the money paid into the Trust Fund and replaced it with I.O.U.s that are now coming due. Obama's stimulus, Bush's wars, Clinton's balanced budget, and everything back to S.D.I and the Department of Education was paid for by siphoning out the money paid into Social Security as fast as it was paid in. However, to pretend that you, or your generation, did not benefit from the raiding of Social Security in so very many ways, is to deny verifiable facts and head off into never-never-land.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
Oakman wrote:
In business school they taught you not to pay your debts?
The Social Security Trust Fund is 2.5 trillion dollars worth of Treasury bills backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. The Savings Bonds that your father may have purchased for you when you were a kid and the T-Bills we've been selling to China, Japan and Europe are also back by the full faith and credit of the U.S.Well they typically teach you to gut or ditch a program that is destined to collapse. The only reason TBills are worth anything is the game of chicken between China and the Fed. When that stimulus is gone, the value won't maintain without rates adjusting to cause a good amount of inflation. When they ease off Quantitative Easing, that will be the shit hitting the fan.
"I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours. " — Hunter S. Thompson
-
Oakman wrote:
In business school they taught you not to pay your debts?
The Social Security Trust Fund is 2.5 trillion dollars worth of Treasury bills backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. The Savings Bonds that your father may have purchased for you when you were a kid and the T-Bills we've been selling to China, Japan and Europe are also back by the full faith and credit of the U.S.Well they typically teach you to gut or ditch a program that is destined to collapse. The only reason TBills are worth anything is the game of chicken between China and the Fed. When that stimulus is gone, the value won't maintain without rates adjusting to cause a good amount of inflation. When they ease off Quantitative Easing, that will be the shit hitting the fan.
"I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours. " — Hunter S. Thompson
wizardzz wrote:
Well they typically teach you to gut or ditch a program that is destined to collapse.
Well, I have never been to B-school, but on the other hand I've run two businesses, one a company and the other a corporation. As I remember it, in business, the way to get out from under paying your debts is to declare bankruptcy. Nations do the equivalent of this by defaulting on their debt - but usually they stiff their foreign investors first, then their own citizens. Why do you think we should let our citizens starve while paying off the Chinese?
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
wizardzz wrote:
Well they typically teach you to gut or ditch a program that is destined to collapse.
Well, I have never been to B-school, but on the other hand I've run two businesses, one a company and the other a corporation. As I remember it, in business, the way to get out from under paying your debts is to declare bankruptcy. Nations do the equivalent of this by defaulting on their debt - but usually they stiff their foreign investors first, then their own citizens. Why do you think we should let our citizens starve while paying off the Chinese?
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
Bankruptcy grants you protection, and you can try to continue operating or not based on your financials / goals / etc. When you do try to continue operating, the strategy is often as I said; you ditch or gut the assets from programs that will become a liability, as our social security program will be...
Oakman wrote:
Why do you think we should let our citizens starve while paying off the Chinese?
What is the scenario in which I recommended this?
"I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours. " — Hunter S. Thompson
-
Have you ever gone over politicians' or otherwise wealthy or powerful individuals' tax returns? I'm not saying illegally, many are public. It's absolutely amazing.
"I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours. " — Hunter S. Thompson
wizardzz wrote:
Have you ever gone over politicians' or otherwise wealthy or powerful individuals' tax returns? I'm not saying illegally, many are public. It's absolutely amazing.
They are the ones who can afford the bevy of lawyers, accountants and lobbyists that shift the tax burden to the middle class. Crony capitalism seems to be the new name for it, but the man who first defined it in detail called it "fascism." I see strong resemblances to what is going on now to what happened when the Roman Republic turned into the Roman Empire. Jeffrey Immelt, Bill Gates, Charlie Rangel, Tom Delay - all of them working to insure that their money and their power is not diluted or taxed while that of the middle class, especially the upper middle class that might otherwise move into the ranks of the rich, pay through the nose. Obama, for instance, talks about taxing the millionaires, but in truth, he's going after the upper middle class.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
I'm all for a progressive income tax. But that's not what I've been discussing in this thread.
Majerus wrote:
I'm all for a progressive income tax. But that's not what I've been discussing in this thread.
Actually, from the looks of it, we're supposed to be discussing my thoughts about the debt ceiling. Do you disagree? :laugh: You might, by the way, want to look up the difference between a fair tax, a flat tax, and a progressive tax. You seem to have gotten them confused.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
Majerus wrote:
I'm all for a progressive income tax. But that's not what I've been discussing in this thread.
Actually, from the looks of it, we're supposed to be discussing my thoughts about the debt ceiling. Do you disagree? :laugh: You might, by the way, want to look up the difference between a fair tax, a flat tax, and a progressive tax. You seem to have gotten them confused.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
wizardzz wrote:
Have you ever gone over politicians' or otherwise wealthy or powerful individuals' tax returns? I'm not saying illegally, many are public. It's absolutely amazing.
They are the ones who can afford the bevy of lawyers, accountants and lobbyists that shift the tax burden to the middle class. Crony capitalism seems to be the new name for it, but the man who first defined it in detail called it "fascism." I see strong resemblances to what is going on now to what happened when the Roman Republic turned into the Roman Empire. Jeffrey Immelt, Bill Gates, Charlie Rangel, Tom Delay - all of them working to insure that their money and their power is not diluted or taxed while that of the middle class, especially the upper middle class that might otherwise move into the ranks of the rich, pay through the nose. Obama, for instance, talks about taxing the millionaires, but in truth, he's going after the upper middle class.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
I'm at a point where I'm sick of people actually thinking the Democratic Party is actually going to do anything that would tax the actual rich in our country. Republicans don't hide it, you know what you are getting, but Democrats pretending to give a shit and tricking our middle and lower classes to vote them in to stick it to the man, ugh, can't handle it.
"I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours. " — Hunter S. Thompson
-
wizardzz wrote:
Have you ever gone over politicians' or otherwise wealthy or powerful individuals' tax returns? I'm not saying illegally, many are public. It's absolutely amazing.
They are the ones who can afford the bevy of lawyers, accountants and lobbyists that shift the tax burden to the middle class. Crony capitalism seems to be the new name for it, but the man who first defined it in detail called it "fascism." I see strong resemblances to what is going on now to what happened when the Roman Republic turned into the Roman Empire. Jeffrey Immelt, Bill Gates, Charlie Rangel, Tom Delay - all of them working to insure that their money and their power is not diluted or taxed while that of the middle class, especially the upper middle class that might otherwise move into the ranks of the rich, pay through the nose. Obama, for instance, talks about taxing the millionaires, but in truth, he's going after the upper middle class.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
Bankruptcy grants you protection, and you can try to continue operating or not based on your financials / goals / etc. When you do try to continue operating, the strategy is often as I said; you ditch or gut the assets from programs that will become a liability, as our social security program will be...
Oakman wrote:
Why do you think we should let our citizens starve while paying off the Chinese?
What is the scenario in which I recommended this?
"I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours. " — Hunter S. Thompson
wizardzz wrote:
Bankruptcy grants you protection
For a business not a nation. Countries have been invaded for not paying their debts.
wizardzz wrote:
the strategy is often as I said; you ditch or gut the assets from programs that will become a liability, as our social security program will be...
But sometimes the simplistic answer is not the right answer (in the real world, as opposed to B-School) There are been a number of proposals put forth that would make SS totally sound and that might require you to wait a few more years to benefit from it. It is relatively easy to spot the primary "problem" with social security. It's medicare. Starting in 1965, seniors began getting better health care. Almost immediately, the life expectancy of Americans began increasing and I believe it is about 15 years more than it used to be - which is 15 years more that everyone is collecting social security. The simplest solution, proposed by the Bowles-Simpson tax plan simply requires your age group to wait a couple of extra years to start collecting and puts the plan on an even keel for beyond your (expanded) life expectancy. If your B-school training tells you that it is better to cause the kind of financial upheavals that defaulting on the Social Security debt than to move the portal down the road a little bit, I'd suggest the college ripped you off.
wizardzz wrote:
What is the scenario in which I recommended this?
"If the SS surplus helps us get out of debt, then I say do as you may with it."
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
You're late to the party, and I was discussing SS with wizardzz. No, I'm not confused. I'm for a progressive income tax, just like I said.
Majerus wrote:
You're late to the party, and I was discussing SS with wizardzz.
If you want to have a private discussion, I recommend setting up a private group. Running around telling people what they can or can't talk about in this forum is a privilege reserved to Chris. We are all, of course, permitted to ignore posts that we feel are not worth reading. A privilege I am about to exercise in this thread, since you seem to be unable to answer a simple question or defend your point of view.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
I'm at a point where I'm sick of people actually thinking the Democratic Party is actually going to do anything that would tax the actual rich in our country. Republicans don't hide it, you know what you are getting, but Democrats pretending to give a shit and tricking our middle and lower classes to vote them in to stick it to the man, ugh, can't handle it.
"I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours. " — Hunter S. Thompson
wizardzz wrote:
I'm at a point where I'm sick of people actually thinking the Democratic Party is actually going to do anything that would tax the actual rich in our country. Republicans don't hide it, you know what you are getting, but Democrats pretending to give a sh*t and tricking our middle and lower classes to vote them in to stick it to the man, ugh, can't handle it.
I pretty much agree - not that it makes the old guard republican like Boehner any more acceptable as a leader of this nation.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
Also, great info graphics on this: http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/02/income-inequality-in-america-chart-graph[^]
"I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours. " — Hunter S. Thompson
wizardzz wrote:
Also, great info graphics on this:
Back when I was working for a fortune 500 company, (2001-2004) I was told, three years running, that I was being given raises that were among the top ten (in percentage) being given in IT dept (about 400 of us.) The raises were around 5% and were offset, to some extent, by an increase in the percentage of the insurance costs I had to pay. Shortly after I left, some secret files were released by a disgruntled employee that showed that senior management had, during the same three years tripled their own salary and benefits packages.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
wizardzz wrote:
Bankruptcy grants you protection
For a business not a nation. Countries have been invaded for not paying their debts.
wizardzz wrote:
the strategy is often as I said; you ditch or gut the assets from programs that will become a liability, as our social security program will be...
But sometimes the simplistic answer is not the right answer (in the real world, as opposed to B-School) There are been a number of proposals put forth that would make SS totally sound and that might require you to wait a few more years to benefit from it. It is relatively easy to spot the primary "problem" with social security. It's medicare. Starting in 1965, seniors began getting better health care. Almost immediately, the life expectancy of Americans began increasing and I believe it is about 15 years more than it used to be - which is 15 years more that everyone is collecting social security. The simplest solution, proposed by the Bowles-Simpson tax plan simply requires your age group to wait a couple of extra years to start collecting and puts the plan on an even keel for beyond your (expanded) life expectancy. If your B-school training tells you that it is better to cause the kind of financial upheavals that defaulting on the Social Security debt than to move the portal down the road a little bit, I'd suggest the college ripped you off.
wizardzz wrote:
What is the scenario in which I recommended this?
"If the SS surplus helps us get out of debt, then I say do as you may with it."
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
Oakman wrote:
For a business not a nation. Countries have been invaded for not paying their debts.
That's what I was saying, oak. I was not referring to it as a national strategy, what I was saying is that strategies to survive a bankruptcy (business) can be applied to a nation with mounting debt. Greece has taken small steps in the same manor a business would. Might as well employee the strategies now.
Oakman wrote:
But sometimes the simplistic answer is not the right answer (in the real world, as opposed to B-School) There are been a number of proposals put forth that would make SS totally sound and that might require you to wait a few more years to benefit from it.
It is relatively easy to spot the primary "problem" with social security. It's medicare. Starting in 1965, seniors began getting better health care. Almost immediately, the life expectancy of Americans began increasing and I believe it is about 15 years more than it used to be - which is 15 years more that everyone is collecting social security. The simplest solution, proposed by the Bowles-Simpson tax plan simply requires your age group to wait a couple of extra years to start collecting and puts the plan on an even keel for beyond your (expanded) life expectancy. If your B-school training tells you that it is better to cause the kind of financial upheavals that defaulting on the Social Security debt than to move the portal down the road a little bit, I'd suggest the college ripped you off.Your cause of the problem and solution to it, are not complimentary. Isn't it a temporary solution? Meaning, do you feel science and medicine will continue to raise the average lifespan? Will SS keep having to raise its age requirement to meet the always growing number of elderly? What if the average lifespan is prolonged, but the ability of people to work remains around the same age? How will it be possible to support a growing number of people on SS for either A- age requirement, or B- physical ability. You can raise the age to 80 to retire, but wouldn't a majority qualify for it via disability before then? The problem with a program like SS is that since it has always been paid forward, to stop it, or change it too drastically would be ripping someone off that has paid into it with some expectation. People of my generation have no expectation of SS.
Oakman wrote: