Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not a glitch at all. You never want to walk into the Big Cheese's office saying, "You know that big crisis we said was five years away? Well, it's actually coming next week." In some countries, you get your head cut off for delivering messages like that. You don't mind conveying the opposite message at all though, so all projections are drawn using pessimistic baseline assumptions.
That's all well and good for those who know what's going on, but it's a different story when dishonest propagandists try to use the face-value of projections to scare dummies into supporting stupid policy.
Didn't Pres. Clinton do away with welfare-as-a-way-of-life?
Yes. In fact one of the more controversial features of welfare-to-workfare reform was the imposition of time limits on receipt of welfare benefits. Time limits became a central feature of federal policy in the 1996 law that created the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families block grant. That law prohibits states from using federal TANF funds to assist most families for more than 60 months. But as you can plainly see, there are plenty of folks here who still have not gotten the message.
The purpose of SS is not really clear and probably needs to be restated.
The Social Security Act and related laws establish a number of programs that have the following basic purposes: to provide for the material needs of both individuals and families, to protect aged and disabled persons against the expenses of illnesses and other threats that might otherwise use up all their savings, to keep families together; and to give children the chance to grow up healthy and secure.
The Social Security Act and related laws establish a number of programs that have the following basic purposes: to provide for the material needs of both individuals and families, to protect aged and disabled persons against the expenses of illnesses and other threats that might otherwise use up all their savings, to keep families together; and to give children the chance to grow up healthy and secure.
Better post that to the Retirement forum. I would say that the vast majority of people there, and in the wild, view SS as an entitlement and a key part of one's retirement income. I don't see that as consistent with the statement above. Although I guess "material needs" is pretty vague and perhaps covers it if you use your imagination. The above sounds more like a safety net purpose rather than a retirement program.
Full disclosure: I am one of those people who is counting on SS income as part of retirement.
Location: New Albany, Indiana (Greater Louisville)
11,974 posts, read 25,473,841 times
Reputation: 12187
I think the core issue is CEOs used to have more patriotism and chivalry. Henry Ford voluntarily increased pay and benefits dramatically and never relocated a factory to a cheaper area. Baby Boomer and younger CEOs are much more self centered and view their workers are chess board pieces. In the 1950s more govt. wasn't needed to reduce income inequality, today that is not the case.
I think the core issue is CEOs used to have more patriotism and chivalry. Henry Ford voluntarily increased pay and benefits dramatically and never relocated a factory to a cheaper area. Baby Boomer and younger CEOs are much more self centered and view their workers are chess board pieces. In the 1950s more govt. wasn't needed to reduce income inequality, today that is not the case.
This is the truth with MOST.
There are exception - like Costco that pays retail workers $20 an hour.
There are also many companies that refuse to move work overseas.
As I often say - quoting the founders - our system can ONLY work with a moral populace. We don't have one. So the system is gamed in EVERY way from the do-nothing Congress to the billionaires who lobby for tax breaks to those who move their money to tax havens...to those who work and pay under the table.
Again, Treasuries are the safest investment vehicle in world history. They are the yardstick by which the safety of everything else is measured.
And a 100% non-diversified portfolio is highly risky. Even US Treasuries are safe - until they aren't. Moreover, absolute safety is the wrong yardstick. It only makes sense in politics, not economics. In politics it makes perfect sense, as the government is loaning money from one pocket to another.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pub-911
...There is an annual appropriation to cover interest on the public debt. Maturities are paid off with proceeds from the sale of new securities...
Ah yes, borrow from Peter (sale of new debt) to pay Paul (the old debt holder). What's the old saying? Something that cannot go on forever won't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pub-911
I was perfectly clear in noting that they were being pessimistic -- as they should have been. One always wishes to err on the side of caution when doing projections for policymakers. But many uninformed general public-type casual readers of the data may be unaware of the situation and its implications.
So you agree... massive incompetence on a scale that only makes sense to public sector employees who cannot lose their job for incompetence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pub-911
Yes, it was.
No, it wasn't. This is fun.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pub-911
The Great Recession was produced through the licentious greed of cowboy capitalists on Wall Street in combination with the blind-as-a-bat failures of deluded laissez-faire "regulators" in the Bush administration.
LOL! Everyone knows the seeds were set during the first Clinton administration by Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Henry Cisneros and Roberta Achtenberg, Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity. If this were a just country, these two would be prosecuted for Crimes against Humanity.
In their ill-conceived attempts at social engineering, these two bureaucrats concocted a plan to twist the arms of lawful banks and mortgage originators to issue mortgages to those farther down the economic ladder, and in particular (according to Achtenberg) those farther down the ladder who were people of color (her words). The hope was to help them get onboard the home equity train, as the price of housing only goes up, right? Banks, knowing these people wouldn't get mortgages but for federal arm-twisting, did the logical thing to get them off their books, selling them to entities who would securitize them... insert a bunch of federal regulators responding to the siren's song of social engineering, and we had the whole alphabet soup of financial products. The first sale by Bear Stearns of these alphabetized securities occurred in January of Clinton's 2nd term.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pub-911
The hogs at the top have been getting a free pass on everything after $118,500. Why is that?
Why should a high income earner pay more FICA premiums when the SS program gives him no more upon retirement?
LOL! 50% is a grossly out of date number, and the reason people PAY no federal income taxes in any year is that they OWE no federal income taxes in that year. [/quote]
Can you actually hear yourself say that? That they OWE no federal income tax is the problem.
This does nothing but just leaves people to starve and die if there are no opportunities out there to take advantage of in the first place. And that is only considering if we are currently in a downturn to begin with which we apparently are not.
So blaming and hating the poor is just as much of a simple-minded solution as blaming the rich.
Both the coast and the south have been improving since the recession but midwest is struggling. The question is what has the south been doing so effectively that the rust belt hasn't?
There is work everywhere, all around us. I have infinitely more respect for somebody who picks tomatoes and oranges in order to feed their family than somebody who waits for all of their government goodies to come in. The government has destroyed the very core, the indomitable human spirit to seek success, of the latter.
I do not blame the poor one bit, I blame the evil government programs that make being poor a realtively easy existence in exchange for their votes.
Why should a high income earner pay more FICA premiums when the SS program gives him no more upon retirement?
Because Social Security is not an investment.
The question you should be asking is, why should a high income earner receive Social Security benefits when he doesn't need the additional income upon retirement?
The question you should be asking is, why should a high income earner receive Social Security benefits when he doesn't need the additional income upon retirement?
This goes back to the question I asked another poster above: Is SS a retirement program or is it a safety net? Follow up question to that is what do most Americans expect SS to be?
I think there is a disconnect between the original purpose of SS and what most Americans think it is and what they expect from it. That disconnect needs to be resolved by Congress.
My observation is that SS needs to be both a safety net and a retirement program, i.e., an annuity of some sort. Opt in, or opt-out. Your choice. But if you opt out, you don't get squat in any circumstances. If you opt-out you can sign up for one of Ryan's private Wall Street programs and see what you get. If you opt-in and if you are a high earner you will likely get less than what you put in, but you will always have the safety net. If you opt-in and are a middle class person who has contributed to SS your working life, you get a guaranteed annuity for the rest of your life (just as SS is now). If you opt-in and are at the bottom of the barrel, you get a minimal guaranteed annuity for life (more than what SS gives now) funded by the high-earners.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
