Governing is Hard II

NeMont

NeMont

Long Time Member
Messages
12,632
LAST EDITED ON Mar-02-15 AT 10:45AM (MST)[p]http://www.cnbc.com/id/102468455

So with the 2016 race starting it is always good to look ahead and see what is over the horizon.

This article, while only an opinion piece, articulates some of the reasons I am not as sure as others that a conservative candidate is a shoe as the next president.

Republicans will have to navigate some pretty dangerous waters in a really leaky boat and they will do it while also having a primary. Regardless of what congress does, it will be become political fodder for one side or the other. If the DHS vote is any indication I still would bet on the Republican leadership shooting themselves in the foot.

For guys like Homer, Eel and DW that believe politics exist in a vacuum please explain the tactics republicans will employ to avoid another government shut down if they refuse to increase the debt ceiling?

How do Boehner and McConnell thread the needle to keep the government operating, the economy working and still keep the Conservative wing happy?

A Republican misstep or miscalculation in congress could kill a candidate before they get their oars in the water.

Nemont
 
As much as I would like to see a true conservative President, I have to agree with Nemont that it would be very hard for the public to vote a conservative into the White House.
Take a strong look at the almost 40% of the voters that still support Obama after his screw-ups and liberal policy as President. They will never vote for a conservative. That leaves us with a smaller playing field right from the start.
Most women who consider themselves as moderate will never vote for a conservative who takes a stand of anti-abortion as most conservatives do. That knocks out another very good percentage of voters. Hispanics will not vote for a conservative as they feel they have a better chance with immigration reform with the Democrats. There goes another voting block.
Nemont is right about how Boehner and McConnell will need to handle their party members and appease the voting public at the same time to keep their support from electing a President from the left to counter balance the GOP majority Congress.

RELH
 
The Senate needs to go nuclear on every issue like this. Let Obama use the veto until America realizes he is truly the obstructionist. Send bill after bill to his desk. If he has 99% of the funding for DHS approved then uses the veto who can blame republicans? I am sure you are correct that the GOP will have a difficult time taking the WH but they need to take the battle to the POTUS and make him the bad guy.
 
You don't think they've been trying to do that since his inaguration?

The republicans need to learn they're not in a position to just put a stick in the spokes anymore. they have to lead, and to lead you have to come up with good ideas before the libs do. right now they can just sit back and watch you cut your wrists.

The whitehouse is out of reach for the GOP given their candidates. question is now can they hold congress next fall? at the moment the dem congress hold a 10% higher approval than the republican congress. good luck.















Stay thirsty my friends
 
I know republicans are good at shooting their feet off. and I know they know how to turn victory into defeat.

2016 isn't as far away as you wish.











Stay thirsty my friends
 
Rush: "The Republicans, I am convinced, are scared. They're just in fear of the usual things and maybe some things that we don't even know about."

I suspect they are afraid of the left side of the aisle poking a stick in their eyes and their far rightwing kicking them in the nuts and the people in the middle giving them the finger.

Still no strategy on how the Republicans can navigate the looming debt ceiling deal and still keep their rightwing happy and keep the government open? I can't see a deal that would keep the Ted Cruz's of the Senate happy.

Nemont
 
Did u read the last sentence in eel's link? Thumpin comin after 2 more years of this crap.
 
DW,

Let us bet whether there will a "thumpin comin"

The last sentence doesn't mean diddly if they Republicans don't get through the next two years without shooting themselves in the foot. McConnell and Boehner are not going to "win" on the DHS vote and instead will pass it with Democrat votes in the House and enough Republicans in the Senate that it won't matter.

Now explain the tactics that will have to be used to get the debt ceiling passed and still keep their right wing from revolt? Do you think the Tea Party Senators will simply vote to raise the debt ceiling again? After making so much political hay about the last debt ceiling deal and then capitulating?

You can live in la-la land that politics don't matter but they do and the challenges ahead are real. Imagine a calendar that includes not only the Debt ceiling but an ACA crisis and the CR to fund the government ends. All of those things could further hurt the brand especially when you have a couple of conservative Senators running for the Presidency and will want to grandstand and show their base that they will fight for what they believe regardless of what happens to the country.

You can pretend that the Republican nominee can start measuring the drapes in the Oval office but I have watched the GOP screw it up too many times to have any confidence in them getting it right and playing smart politics.

Nemont
 
I want the republicans to show their true colors, Peter King doesn't, but I want to see bills containing public lands sales, I want to see them take the affordable care act down, I want them to propose more tax cuts for the rich.
I also want to hear a lot more about immigration reform,( I'm more of a republican on this)

These are things that I pay attention to so let's not sidestep. I hate this "House of cards" game they all play.
 
The teabaggers will never have enough power to lead, but they seem to have enough to prevent the GOP from leading.

I cannot understand how even the teabaggers see that as a good thing. if you can't get your chit together you're going to lose it all.












Stay thirsty my friends
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-03-15 AT 09:37AM (MST)[p]>
>You can live in la-la land
>that politics don't matter but
>they do and the challenges
>ahead are real. Imagine
>a calendar that includes not
>only the Debt ceiling but
>an ACA crisis and the
>CR to fund the government
>ends. All of those
>things could further hurt the
>brand especially when you have
>a couple of conservative Senators
>running for the Presidency and
>will want to grandstand and
>show their base that they
>will fight for what they
>believe regardless of what happens
>to the country.
>
>
>
>
>Nemont


What they believe is what will save the country. We can't spend our way out of debt. We can't stamp trillion dollar coins like some moron suggested. If we don't turn the ship now it will b too late if it's not already. 20 trillion might b insurmountable.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-03-15 AT 09:56AM (MST)[p]>>
>>You can live in la-la land
>>that politics don't matter but
>>they do and the challenges
>>ahead are real. Imagine
>>a calendar that includes not
>>only the Debt ceiling but
>>an ACA crisis and the
>>CR to fund the government
>>ends. All of those
>>things could further hurt the
>>brand especially when you have
>>a couple of conservative Senators
>>running for the Presidency and
>>will want to grandstand and
>>show their base that they
>>will fight for what they
>>believe regardless of what happens
>>to the country.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Nemont
>
>
>What they believe is what will
>save the country. We can't
>spend our way out of
>debt. We can't stamp trillion
>dollar coins like some moron
>suggested. If we don't turn
>the ship now it will
>b too late if it's
>not already. 20 trillion
>might b insurmountable.

$20 Trillion is the breaking point? Based on what? I thought $5 Trillion was bad but GWB showed that wasn't the case.

I agree that our debt is bad news and whenever anyone points out the biggest problem in the country they get shouted down.

The $20 Trillion is peanuts to what is off the books.

http://www.npr.org/2011/08/06/139027615/a-national-debt-of-14-trillion-try-211-trillion
(I know it is from 2011)

You don't hear Tea Party members citing these numbers because it leads to the natural conclusion. We need to both raise taxes and cut spending on these programs and not tea partier can say those words. Anything that looks like a tax increase is bad, regardless of the reality.

I know it is from 2011 but try to cut any of that an you get your head slapped.

There isn't a single Republican who could withstand the political heat of cutting any of those programs. That is why I am so cynical about the supposed Tea Party movement. It attracts people with little comprehension of political reality.

So I am from Missouri, Show Me. Show me the way forward that deals with both the problem and the political reality of where the country is. To do both requires the one thing none of you guys are willing to accept: A compromise.

Nemont
 
I've mentioned unfunded liabilities b4 and generally get a glazed over look in response. We need small steps in quick succession. The days of government employees retiring after 20yrs at age 40 and receiving a pension and Healthcare for the next 40yrs has to stop! Social security? I've said on here b4 I've been living like that was not gonna b there when I retire since I was in my teens. We can't get a cut of any kind what's the point of bringing up unfunded liabilities if we can't simply balance the budget? We need to not just balance the budget but be putting money back into these accounts at the same time! Let's tighten the belt to balance the budget first then after, we can start rebuilding these accounts like ss that the dems robbed back in 68!
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-03-15 AT 10:43AM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Mar-03-15 AT 10:42?AM (MST)

Piper squeals about federal lands under siege and I agree it would b a bad thing. But if we continue to act like our resident hortense we will b out of options.
 
So explain how to balance the budget with zero tax increases. You work with budgets and there are two sides to the ledger: Income and expenses.

Whose ox are you willing to gore in order to cut the expenses enough to get the budget into balance?

presidents-budget.png



Please offer a reasonable scenario that can get passed into law that closes the gap and balances the budget.

I am all ears.

Nemont
 
Eliminate federal redundancy and waste combined with putting people back to work will create a surplus. It's been done b4 not long ago.
 
Are you willing to blame the problems Obama faced on GWB as well? Just wondering how you divy up blame and credit.

Nemont
 
And isn't smaller government, lower taxes, more people working paying taxes what the tea party is about?
 
Doesn't seem like that is what they are about. If we judge them by their actions it certainly isn't what they are about.

If they are about those things, then they are about the most ineffective politicians in DC.

Nemont
 
Look at Ted Cruz's record in the Senate. Not a single bill he has sponsored or cosponsored by passed and been signed into law.


Sen. Ted Cruz
Republican ? Texas ? 1st Term ? Sworn In 2013

7 Sponsored Bills (Ranks 38 of 92) 0 Made Into Law (Ranks 1 of 92)

41 Co-Sponsored Bills (Ranks 47 of 99) 0 Made Into Law (Ranks 1 of 99)

He can't even get the name of a Federal Building in Texas changed.

He is all hat and no cattle.
 
Haven't they been saying there's only about 50 of em, just ignore em, "they're holding the country hostage"? Haven't I been saying we need a conservative president? We need to evict the republican establishment because they're no better than the tax and spend, piss on our allies, make treaties with our enemies, democrats!
 
What is attractive enough to voters to get that all done and wipe the slate clean? That isn't how people have voted and without the votes it is all pi$$ing the wind.

Ever look at the percentage of incumbents reelected? The people don't just vote the rascals out because most voters know they will just be replaced with new rascals.

So wish in one hand and crap in the other and tell me which fills up first.

You can wish for a perfect conservative government but that won't happen, ever, period. So what is the second best scenario?

Nemont
 
The black plague? Our debt will b the end of us if we don't change things soon. We're both aware of what's coming down the pike.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-03-15 AT 05:29PM (MST)[p]I don't see anything in the last 50 yrs that says the dems and the rino's are gonna put their big boy pants on and address this issue. Do u?
 
Maybe not, so why don't you find a fiscal conservative who's not a dipchit?

I suppose the war you're pulling for with Iran won't be expensive? be careful what you wish for.















Stay thirsty my friends
 
If the republicans are worried about the debt, why did they give trillions of dollars away in unneeded Tax cuts during GWBs presidency?
The cuts weren't needed and they were totally irresponsible.

Was it to force the government to do things like sell off public lands and cut Medicare ect.

Will the rightwingers explain please? We need an explanation
 
Create a situation where the books are not balanced, then cry about the situation. W T H.

I guess most voters forget, I don't.
 
Did you forget how the Dumbocrat majority voted to steal our SS nest egg with a promise to pay it back with interest?
 
What about medicare? it is an absolute fact it will break us if everything else doesn't first. nobody wants to talk about it .


Back to the subject at hand. so the republicans folded on immigration as everyone knew they would, not that this was the way to go about it.

WTF was the point? are they even able to have an original thought or do anything except obstruct? where is the alternative plan to anything they oppose?












Stay thirsty my friends
 
piper, the rich need tax breaks so they can afford to buy National Forest and BLM land so we can keep ACA afloat.

Eel

It's written in the good Book that we'll never be asked to take more than we can. Sounds like a good plan, so bring it on!
 
>Did you forget how the
>Dumbocrat majority voted to steal
>our SS nest egg with
>a promise to pay it
> back with interest?

Really, what sits in the Social Security Trust fund? Don't believe the 30 second spots used to get you excited. The trust fund is held in bonds, which are the same as cash. In addition they do earn interest.

http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/progdata/investheld.html


http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/progdata/fundFAQ.html#a0=8

Both sides have dirt on their hands when it comes to Social Security.

Which party didn't allow Medicare the ability to make deals with Drug Companies to reduce the cost of prescription and didn't fund Part D with a revenue source, just put it on to my kids and grand kids?

Social Security is a pay as you go system, when there are excess revenues they are invested in the trust fund. Unless you are saying government bonds, convertible into cash on demand and paying interest are not safe enough for you. If so nothing is safe.

If the Democrats voted to steal it, why haven't the Republicans voted to restore it when they have power?

Nemont
 
It's hard to argue that the dems are not idiots, but it's harder to argue the republicans are better.


















Stay thirsty my friends
 
Social Security was sold to the American public as a "trust fund" to get it passed just like the AFFORDABLE Care Act was passed as something to make health insurance more affordable. It was a calculated ruse that was tested in the courts for decades following the 1939 law. The government continued to call it the Social Security TRUST Fund and therefore implied it was a designated trust held for the beneficiaries based upon their contribution. It was laways a general fund item and never even resembled an actual trust. Problem is that no one knew they were paying into some bogus pyramid scheme until the late 80's.
 
Glen,

What is in the Trust Fund? It still is not a general fund item and never has been.

Anyone with a firing brain cell or the intellectual curiosity of a newt could have read what the SSA publish every year since the inception of SS.

You know how I know you are full of it, Social Security is a self funding program that has it's own appropriation every year.

http://www.ssa.gov/budget/FY16Files/2016BST.pdf

You don't even know the history of the law let alone how it is funded or how it is budgeted.

The act passed way back in 1935 with bipartisan support, not at all like the ACA.

Here is the actual vote count and dates: http://www.ssa.gov/history/tally.html

THERE WAS NEVER A TIME ANYBODY IN AUTHORITY STATED THAT YOU HAD A PERSONAL ACCOUNT THAT KEPT YOU CONTRIBUTION JUST FOR YOU.


Answer the question: What is held in the Social Security Trust fund? Does it pay interest?
 
That is the point. For the last 60 years they have called it a trust fund. It is in no way a trust fund. I know I don't have an individual account but they do send out a form stating what I have paid in to MY ACCOUNT. The point is that it is a bogus plan designed to make people believe they have money going into an investment of some sort ie a trust fund. It is in fact a self funding program BUT it is not self funding if it will run out of money.
 
Do you understand that in order to spend the money, any money for that matter, it has to be appropriated? That is different than budgeted or collected.

If the solvency of the trust fund is in question, that means the solvency of the nation is as well.

The argument here isn't whether the government IOU's in the Trust Fund are good or not.

What is in the trust fund and why would the debt ceiling need to be raised in order to get seniors their checks? The article doesn't get into it because it would make clear how the system works.

The trust fund is backed by exactly the same thing the U.S. dollar is. There are convertible bonds in the trust fund and they are the same as dollars.

I would love to be able to divert any SS tax into a private account.

People whining about SS have zero problem with collecting their check and sticking my kids and grand kids with the tax bill. It is a pay as you go system and it has been since inception.

If it is broke Why have the Republican fixed it when they had the power from 2001 to 2007?
 
Glen,

I bet you cash every check sent you. You should quit sniveling and send a thank you note to my kids.


Nemont
 
Typical comeback when you are losing your argument. Just google SS trust fund and read the actual history. It was a scam, it is a scam and if you want to fix it you better quit voting for socialists. You ar right that neither party will ever change it and start means testing but we can always hope. Are you goint to turn back the checks when you are 65? I sure hope so or you will be the world's biggest hypocrite.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-04-15 AT 03:19PM (MST)[p]
What is killing social security is baby boomers. Plain and simple. They are the pig in the python.

ssecurty_zps1c6782c2.jpg


It could be fixed today if the boomers gave damn but good luck with that. They want what they are owed.

Glen,

Instead of reading blogs and tea party websites. Go read the actual data, none of it supports your contentions regarding the SS Trust Fund.

How about this answer a simple question. What is in the SS trust fund?

I am not saying social security is solvent, a great program or that it could have been done differently or not at all. What I am saying is just facts. There is an actual trust fund filled with Government bonds, it pays interest and it is convertible to cash.

It is the fault of the program that the boomers will swamp the system. Boomer have been in power since 1991 and have done nothing to address what everyone with opposable thumbs understood.

So cry me a river that you can't get your money back. I have far more already in there and my kids will be debt slave due to boomer greed and not caring about the future of the country.



Nemont
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-04-15 AT 04:09PM (MST)[p]It's not Boomer greed, it's rightwing greed, because overall boomers are rightwingers. That's why they say we are a right-wing country.

They are in power now and have basically controlled the agenda since Reagan, tax cuts without spending cuts ect. Nemont blame the party you say you always vote for president.

Yes. the ones that gave the Clinton budget away.

There doesn't have to be a big deficient. Raise taxes pay the bills, if people don't like high taxes, they will demand cuts.
It's your party that pioneered tax cuts as a cure all, remember that.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-04-15 AT 04:27PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Mar-04-15 AT 04:26?PM (MST)




Glen,

If I ever get a dime I will donate it to a worthwhile cause, perhaps your alzheimer care, oh wait that will be covered by Medicaid and Medicare. So I will donate it to a cause that helps old people.

http://www.salon.com/2014/10/20/bab...laming_millennials_is_misguided_and_annoying/

Now answer my question, what is in the Social Security Trust fund? And how is it different than cash?

Piper,

Clinton did zero to make to fix the coming boomer crisis. It is an equal opportunity cluster. Democrats don't want a single dollar cut and Republican won't raise a single dollar more of revenue. Boomers of all political stripes want it that way. They don't care what happens next in the country as long as they get what they were told was coming to them.

http://www.phillymag.com/news/2013/12/13/baby-boomers-worst-generation/

baby-boomer-cartoon-1qzbymy.jpg


Nemont
 
I'm a boomer and it certainly has nothing to do with me. I don't get squat from the government.

No children no taxbreaks here. Fertility problems so got the full wrath of America's wonderfull ultra costly heathcare. I have gotten a couple hundred dollars of insurance benefits in my entire life, of course I have paid tens of thousands in.

Been working for close to 40 years, and have much more to go, real work too, stuff you can feel and see, no pencil thin fingers here.

Now I'm supposed to feel bad because of when I was born? Not a Chance, it's not when you were born, its how you think, who you support, and what you believe. Partly why I really dislike many republicans.
 
No DW, I forgot to mention when my dad died I wrote a check to help pay for the funeral. No inheritance, so voting republican wouldn't have helped my tax situation at all.
 
What do u mean all republicans do is cut taxes how do u know if u hadn't voted for them more u would have got more tax cuts?
 
As high as the dems have driven the death tax there isn't much left over anyway piper
 
Really? I could only imagine getting a half a million dollars in tax-free money for nothing. Cry me a river DW.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-04-15 AT 06:24PM (MST)[p]

....so only republicans get big inheritances????....better check with your fellow sterile lefty buddy 440 on that....
 
It has nothing to do with being jealous, good for 440. Some really good people have lots of money, and they do good things because they can. We have had good presidents who were wealthy.

There is a balance, I just don't believe in the same one most current rightwingers subscribe to.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-04-15 AT 07:11PM (MST)[p]http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0912/81529.html
Here's a prime example of those greedy republicans compared to those compassionate and generous democrats piper.
 
Romney is a good person, I have never doubted that, he had to play to the primaries and it cost him and tainted his character.

Of course it's easier to give more and at a higher percentage when you make more, so none of those figures are bad.

There is a lot more than personal giving that bothers me about politicians.
 
The trouble with most of em, D or R, is they're bought and payed for by the time they get in office. It shouldn't take a billion $'s to become president. U gotta do more than kiss babies for a billion!
 
Well, we have resolved little on this thread other than Nemont is a liar when he says he will donate his share of SS. He also is full of crap on the boomers taking up all the disability. 46 is not a boomer and you can bet that the majority of new disability claims are from healthy people Nemont's age.
 
>Well, we have resolved little on
>this thread other than Nemont
>is a liar when he
>says he will donate his
>share of SS. He also
>is full of crap on
>the boomers taking up all
>the disability. 46 is not
>a boomer and you can
>bet that the majority of
>new disability claims are from
>healthy people Nemont's age.
+1
 
Really that is all you learned? Figures boomers won't face the fact that they were given the largest creditor nation in history and turned it into the largest debtor nation in history in a single generation. Then have balls to call those who are saddled with their bills liars. Typical self centered boomer actions.

Glen unlike you I didn't plan my golden years around what the government will give me.

Prove I lied on any of this

What was proved is that you won't answer a direct question and like every boomer I know,you are a hog at the trough.

You whine and moan about social security except when you get your direct deposit confirmation from them. So taking the money then you should be thanking those your generation has put into debt prison.


Nemont
 
And you will be the next hog at the trough. We all know an accountant will never give up a dime to the government.
 
Raise taxes and cut spending. The majority of the people would agree, but they know it's a big lie. Raise taxes and spend 5 times as much. And even if they did reduce the national debt it would be a green light to go on a binge spending spree.

If all the boomers died tomorrow, it would only take about a year to commit that money to something else. Then what would you cry about NeMont?

Eel

It's written in the good Book that we'll never be asked to take more than we can. Sounds like a good plan, so bring it on!
 
How about just having any boomer admit that they are part of the problem. My generation and the my kids generation all have problems we have to deal with.

Never once can a boomer admit they have failed to lead when their time came and never will one admit that perhaps they should be willing to give up just a little something in order to ease the burden on those who have now pay for all the promises made.

I don't want boomers dead and I really don't want them destitute. What I would like is for boomers to step up to plate and make some sacrifices for the good of the country.

Means testing for medicare and social security. Buying long term care insurance to pay for their own nursing home stays. Cutting back the growth in Medicare spending and Social Security disability. All the votes and political power are held by boomers, who can out vote every generation below them combined.

It isn't crying, it is stating facts and for some reason boomers hate facts. I don't know why they are scared of facts or why when confronted with facts they resort to calling people liars but the facts are that without any changes boomers are going to doom the rest of us to a lower standard of living, lower social mobility and lower future growth just to keep them alive and cared for.

There isn't a conservative in office today with the nads to take on boomers and ask them to sacrifice some of their future benefits for the good of the country. There is no hope for getting liberals on board because they just like to spend. So tell me who is to blame for not being willing to take on the challenges the boomers present to the country? The leaders in DC or people who elect them?

Nemont
 
Your story is a bad one Eel, the same one all right wingers use as an excuse to ring up the debt, the same one talk radio produces.
When Nemont brings up the debt. I hope he listens to your tale, because that's where it all comes from.
 
Your last post was right on Nemont. Politicians cannot take on the big money, they lose.

The heart and soul of the rightwing is greed, and that's what it boils down to. The greatest inheritance generation the world has ever seen is greedy.

There is no desire to fix the mind numbing cost of healthcare, no desire to control the military industrial complex, no desire to balance the budget, no desire to pass down a clean environment.

Let's just get some more guns and fix things that way.
 
To most people money is like sex, the more you have, the more you want.

So tell me Nemont, where is all the money these days?
 
All the money? I have some, you have some, the real money is in politics but I can't bring myself to lower my standards and become a politician.

Let me ask you this: How much money has the Affordable Care Act shoveled into the Medical/Health Insurance/Pharmacy complex? The ACA is viewed as a left wing signature achievement. If that is what the left wing stands for and supports, what good are they?

Nemont
 
Blah, blah, blah. Every one of you is going to cash the SS checks when they start coming. You know it, I know it and your kid's know it.
 
The dems are Scum, no doubt about that. The ACA is the best most progressive thing they could do though, Reagans arguments against government still resonate in America, not unjustifiably either. Its not what's right it's what can be done.

Welcome to American politics. We are a morally lesser people, one cue is that we are the only industrialized country who doesn't have universal healthcare for all citizens.
You think the argument about illegal immigration is about morality in America? Don't make me laugh, it's about cheap labor, especially in the home building and construction industry.
 
True dat. If 85% of all brick masons in the country are illegals then wonder why the middle class has gone away. When I was a kid a brick mason, framer or drywaller was a good middle class job.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-05-15 AT 11:14AM (MST)[p]NeMont, what percentage of your clients are boomers purchasing Medicare supplemental Insurance, for Part A, B and part D? Aren't those subsidized by the federal Government, depending on one's means?

We're all in this boat together, and I have hope at some point steps are taken to keep it afloat. History holds not much to be optimistic about though.

Eel

It's written in the good Book that we'll never be asked to take more than we can. Sounds like a good plan, so bring it on!
 
If a kid didn't want to or couldn't go to college he could do construction and make a decent living.

Wonder why half the kids are on drugs and half sell them? Tell a politicial that and they look confused, Of course you have explain it better and slowly, then they look really confused.
 
Yea, what is the average household income in America. 52 thousand? That rings a bell, but I'm not sure.
They are going to put lots of retirement money away, have a savings plan for their kids college,and of course buy supplemental insurance for their old folks home. Yes sir, that's how it works, and then of course they should also feel bad about taking the future away from generation x and all the others.
 
Exactly we are all in this boat together but boomers don't want to share the upper decks with the next generation. We are relegated to the steerage compartment where we have to work to pay for the boomers lifestyle above us. At least you could let some of us up on deck to get some fresh air and sunshine


Medicare supplements get zero subsidy from the government, commission on part D is $2 a month per head, I don't sell any medicare advantage plans . A far bigger subsidized piece of my business is those getting a Tax Credit in the Exchange. Since commissions are subject to the Loss Ratio calculations I took a 40% haircut on commission from the exchange. Hopefully the government will stop helping at some point.

I have a ton of friends who are clients and I tell them the exact same things about boomers that I say here and they laugh about them. You guys are too serious.

Nemont
 
Do you have any employees? They think they are working to subsidize your lifestyle just like you are subsidizing older folks. The American way. You know you will be the first one at the trough when you turn 65.
 
>Yea, what is the average household
>income in America. 52
>thousand? That rings a
>bell, but I'm not sure.
>
> They are going to put
>lots of retirement money away,
>have a savings plan for
>their kids college,and of course
>buy supplemental insurance for their
>old folks home.
> Yes sir, that's how
>it works, and then
>of course they should also
>feel bad about taking
>the future away from generation
>x and all the others.
>
>

Piper,

At least you admit you are taking the future away from other generations. If you don't feel bad about it I guess that is your right.

I will have three kids in college next year and I get zero help with their schooling. We had them, We raised them and we did without to build college funds for them, they all three work in the summer, none of them sell drugs and none of them are derelicts. All three of them have the potential to have great and rewarding careers in their chosen fields however paying for their school was a choice my wife and I made. I didn't look to uncle Sam for any of it.

Due to the tax burden they will have to endure in order to pay off the debts of the boomer generation they won't have the freedom to do the things even you take for granted. Like you said you have no guilt in stealing the future from the next generation but they are the ones who will pay.


Nemont
 
Glen piper and eel I think the only solution is were gonna have to walk some of ya out behind the barn. Who's first?
 
>Do you have any employees? They
>think they are working to
>subsidize your lifestyle just like
>you are subsidizing older folks.
>The American way. You know
>you be the first
>one at the trough when
>you turn 65.


Glen,

Explain how my employees are subsidizing me? That may be the dumbest thing you have said yet. They willing trade their labor for wages and benefits I pay them. I risk the capital, I have to make payroll. That is called capitalism not being subsidized, they are all free to do the same things.

Here is where you are showing how little you know. I don't get everything at 65 like you do.


It doesn't surprise me you don't understand how capitalism works or that it doesn't involve a subsidy.

Nemont
 
I had no idea since I own a 34 year old business. Point is other people work so you can enjoy your lifestyle just like my employees do. I guess you must be a public employee if you get nothing when you are 65. You will get SS as well as Medicare and I will bet the farm that you are first in line to gobble up your share. If you are a pensioner you will be a burden to the followers as well. Just leave all your checks uncashed if you are so altruistic.
 
May want to check your facts because you incorrect

The only time I was paid by the taxpayers was in the Army


Nemont
 
Why would you qualify for less than me then? SS has an escalator so you should get more. Maybe less income earned? I hope you get more than me but that is the difference between us.
 
LAST EDITED ON Mar-05-15 AT 01:31PM (MST)[p]First off I was born after 1960 which means age 65 isn't my magic number. Secondly the trough will be meaningless by the time I get there. So let us bet your farm about what I will be doing.

There is more than one thing different between you and I. I want to leave a functioning country to them, one that doesn't involve simply working to pay taxes.

If you were in business for 35 years and had the attitude that capitalism is the same as a government subsidy you missed the entire point of being a capitalist.

Nemont
 
The trough will have money when you get there. 11 years will go very fast for you. You will then have a choice to either claim benefits on SS and Medicare or give it back for the future of your kids. My bet is you will take every penny you can and then leave the estate to your kids. You have been making a fool's arguement IMO.
 
I wasn't born in 1960 I was born way after that. Anyone born after 1960 gets to wait that is just a fact. Go look it up.

Fool's argument about what? You are caught up in whether I will take anything, okay I said I will donate it. Who is right? You bet I will and I bet I won't.

You bob and weave on the facts about the impacts of boomers and what their generation has done. Lot's of good has come with the boomers but now the bill is due for all the good times and the next generations simply cannot pay what was promised. It isn't their fault what was promised. They didn't get to vote on it.

So let me ask you this: Do boomers adversely impact the demographics of every major government program that pays benefits? If answer is yes, would you take less or pay more to keep the thing solvent?

Nemont
 
NeMont, I would.

Another way to look at it, and I think piper and 440 will agree, is that all this money "doled" out to boomers feeds the economy. We spend it all somewhere and that's good for the economy. Kind of like borrowing money to keep unemployment compensation viable.

A lot of businesses depend on us. The company that manufactures "Depends" might be bankrupt without us.

Eel

It's written in the good Book that we'll never be asked to take more than we can. Sounds like a good plan, so bring it on!
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

20220608_220013.jpg
802DB358-4E05-4684-90F3-AB66D6897ADF.jpeg
IMG_0427.JPG
ABD086C5-4D34-41F7-AAEA-12E28C546772.jpeg
IMG_1466.jpg
0104F41A-CFF1-4738-AFDD-9520C663C686.jpeg
B9DB58CD-076A-4DD9-A623-15C05115ED64.jpeg
VideoCapture_20211114-072838.jpg
50C00B0B-3C0F-4662-8580-29387C3278C0.jpeg
3A5557B8-7372-49B0-83D8-5B507D7F958B.jpeg
2022 Deer 3.png
STC_0121 - Copy.JPG
Back
Top Bottom