Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-18-2011, 12:40 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,026 posts, read 44,824,472 times
Reputation: 13711

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
Oh, "Blame the President" thingy that you (and others like you) can't live without!
Was it or was it not Obama who threatened to not send America's senior citizens their SS checks, but never mentioned withholding welfare checks, food stamps, and other dependent class freebie entitlements?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-18-2011, 12:47 PM
 
22,768 posts, read 30,733,597 times
Reputation: 14745
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Was it or was it not Obama who threatened to not send America's senior citizens their SS checks, but never mentioned withholding welfare checks, food stamps, and other dependent class freebie entitlements?
if it's what i watched about 20 minutes ago..

then the president was asked a question about social security, and he answered the question. He didn't threaten.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2011, 12:51 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,818,277 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Was it or was it not Obama who threatened to not send America's senior citizens their SS checks, but never mentioned withholding welfare checks, food stamps, and other dependent class freebie entitlements?
He was asked about SS, he provided his response about SS. It is something, I wish, participants at C-D would do... stick to what is being discussed than go trolling.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2011, 12:54 PM
 
22,768 posts, read 30,733,597 times
Reputation: 14745
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyclone8570 View Post
Well first of all the notion that "95% of Americans are getting poorer every year" implies that 95% of American's net worth is decreasing every year. This is simply ridiculous.
is it? if i remember correctly we were borrowing more than we were saving for quite some time.

i'm not saying the claim is true, but it is certainly a realistic possibility.

Quote:
Most people's retirement accounts increase from their 20's to retirement. So their net worths should be increasing.
a large number of americans don't have retirement accounts.

i don't have the interest in this topic to dig into the data, but one source I see points out the problem in a way any educated person can understand: the average 401k value is about $50,000, but the median 401k value is about $2,000.

Quote:
Also their savings should also be increasing as they get older. Thus their net worth should be increasing.
Not when they borrow more than they save.

Quote:
Also, the more home payments they make increases the equity in their home which also increases their net worth.
Until they take out a 2nd mortgage, yup.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2011, 01:05 PM
 
Location: Dallas
31,290 posts, read 20,740,494 times
Reputation: 9325
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyclone8570 View Post
Well first of all the notion that "95% of Americans are getting poorer every year" implies that 95% of American's net worth is decreasing every year. This is simply ridiculous.

Most people's retirement accounts increase from their 20's to retirement. So their net worths should be increasing.

Also their savings should also be increasing as they get older. Thus their net worth should be increasing.

Also, the more home payments they make increases the equity in their home which also increases their net worth.

I'd wager it is impossible for 95% of American's net worths to be decreasing consistently every year from 1980 to today.

Income and net worth are very different. Net worth implies wealth, income does not imply wealth.

The OP probably should have phrased it "95% of American's incomes are remaining constant, while the wealthiest incomes are increasing"
Correct.

And I believe even your last statement is a huge stretch. It really depends on what time period is being measured.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2011, 01:18 PM
 
608 posts, read 1,346,660 times
Reputation: 469
Gee I didn't know the president could stop sending out SS payments.

I don't read here in my constitution, its not in the SS Act, must be somewhere around here....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2011, 01:21 PM
 
25,021 posts, read 27,933,813 times
Reputation: 11790
Quote:
Originally Posted by arrgy View Post
Gee I didn't know the president could stop sending out SS payments.

I don't read here in my constitution, its not in the SS Act, must be somewhere around here....
Obama counts on the dumb downed masses' ignorance of the law to scare them
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2011, 01:27 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,026 posts, read 44,824,472 times
Reputation: 13711
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
He was asked about SS, he provided his response about SS.
Only because Obama's Treasury has already floated the option of not sending out the SS checks.
Quote:
If Treasury were to decide to delay some payments, one option could be to postpone a disbursement of more than $49 billion to Social Security recipients that is due on August 3.
Exclusive: Treasury secretly weighs options to avert default | Reuters

The Obama admin's threat to America's senior citizens has been in play since before the interview.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2011, 01:27 PM
 
Location: Dallas
31,290 posts, read 20,740,494 times
Reputation: 9325
Quote:
Originally Posted by oerdin2 View Post
I...Or would you prefer they not pay the military and not feed the troops or give them ammo?

I would prefer that they not pay foreign aid......and UN aid.....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2011, 01:29 PM
 
2,714 posts, read 4,281,921 times
Reputation: 1314
Quote:
Originally Posted by oerdin2 View Post
It's not a threat; it's a mathematical fact because without raising the debt limit (which is a routine government function since the time of Reagan) the money isn't there. Or would you prefer they not pay the military and not feed the troops or give them ammo?
I'd prefer we cut 75% of our military and withdraw from Afghanistan and Iraq and Korea and Germany and Japan... list goes on and on
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:57 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top