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.
Absolutely. One of the slickest manuvers was spinning FNMA off as a GSE and taking it off blance sheet back in the 60's. Then the government created FHLMC in 1970 to compete with FNMA.
But the maneuver I referred to, was even worse.
The govt has been taking in payments from taxpayers, to put into various Federal "trust funds" such as a the Social Security "trust fund".
And when they take those payments in, they count them as "Receipts", and put them in the "Receipts" column.
But then they immediately turn around and "borrow" them back out, put them in the General Fund, and spend them on everything from Defense to Medicare to OSHA to EPA to Obamaphones. And when they "borrow" them back out this way, they count them as "Receipts" again!"
The books are being carefully cooked in this way. Any private company or corporation who did this, would immediately be charged with fraud, and their financial people thrown in jail for a very long time. But not the government itself.
Every administration since FDR has been doing this. It's the reason the National Debt goes up even when the govt claims to be running a "surplus". They are actually taking in less than they pretend to be, while spending goes through the roof.
Conservative citizens (not elected officials) have always been on the right side of this argument. We have been clamoring for years trying to get America on board with fiscal sanity through balanced budgets. BUT, Liberals have told us time and again that the government budget should not be ran like a household budget. Because there are so many people who feed off the government trough, the liberal argument wins every time.
So how is it that anyone, anywhere can give liberals any sort of credibility in the fical discussions in this nation? How many times have we been told to keep our hands off your government programs, Dems? Meanwhile, we spend our way into oblivion.
This is why liberalism has no credibility. We can NEVER expect a liberal to come forth and proclaim that it's time to get our fiscal house in order. Too many votes from the leeches are at stake.
Medicare and our whole entire health-care delivery system is a wreck, not Social Security. To lump SS in with medicare is ignoring the bigger picture. Having lived and worked in the DC area my whole life I'm even suspect of the amount stated what our military budget is. Ships to build cost billions and billions to maintain let alone fighter jets. Wars instituted, secret intel agency budgets etc. Billions spent on contractors, one huge money spending machine. But some oldy, whose days are numbered, collecting SS in which they paid for is breaking the bank because they're ill. I say BS.
They paid for? Is that what you really think? If that is the case then SS should be rolling in the cash, as it is a one for one pay out, right? More like Person X contributes $1000 a year on average, then turns around and collects $20,000 a year as payout. That is the problem. It is and always was a ponzi scheme that relies on about a 10 to 1 payee to payout sustain itself. We're approaching a 3 to 1 ratio now, which is why it will collapse.
Anyone who uses the term "entitlements" has an agenda (usually a radical right wing one). The correct business term would be "obligations."
The government has lumped everything into an "entitlement" category now.
So you have to say means tested entitlement to describe TANF and just entitlement to describe SS.
The USG would never use the word "obligation" because that means they owe us for all that money we contributed to them in our paychecks over the years.
They paid for? Is that what you really think? If that is the case then SS should be rolling in the cash, as it is a one for one pay out, right? More like Person X contributes $1000 a year on average, then turns around and collects $20,000 a year as payout. That is the problem. It is and always was a ponzi scheme that relies on about a 10 to 1 payee to payout sustain itself. We're approaching a 3 to 1 ratio now, which is why it will collapse.
No, the person today will collect less than they contributed.
The boomer generation is the first generation to have paid into the SS system since the day they started working.
Your SS payment is based on what you contributed over your working years.
It's not a fixed "$20K per year" for everyone.
No, the person today will collect less than they contributed.
The boomer generation is the first generation to have paid into the SS system since the day they started working.
Your SS payment is based on what you contributed over your working years.
It's not a fixed "$20K per year" for everyone.
You seem very misinformed about SS.
The average SS collection is about $1200 per month. Yep, lap of luxury they are living in.
No, the person today will collect less than they contributed.
The boomer generation is the first generation to have paid into the SS system since the day they started working.
Your SS payment is based on what you contributed over your working years.
It's not a fixed "$20K per year" for everyone.
You seem very misinformed about SS.
If you write to the Social Security Administration, they will send you a list of all the "contributions" you have made throughout your life.
Double each amount, since your employer matched every payment. Money he paid to employ you, only instead of giving it to you, he was forced to send it to the govt instead.
Then imagine you had made those payments to any of the normal investment accounts run by various companies. Includig the accounts that took major hits during the Great Depression, and various recessions since, including the Obama Recession of 2009-2013. Many of those investment accounts paid interest rates in the range of 5%-7% or more.
If all those SS payments had been deposited into a normal retirement account instead, do you know how much money you'd have by the time you retired?
(hint: can you say "Millionaire"?)
I'm not kidding. Get your own list of payments you made, and run the numbers. You'll be astounded.
When you retired, you could live on the interest alone from that account, getting five times (or more) the money SS will "give" you, forever, and never reduce the principal that's in the account.
Social Security has dispossessed more Senior citizens than all the (other) ponzi schemes, con artists, etc. in history.
We need to quit calling them entitlements and call them for what they are which is handouts. The only exception being our military benefits since they worked for them ans social security/Medicare.
Medicaid, SNAP, free housing, phones are handouts period. Here's some free stuff vote for me!
We need to quit calling them entitlements and call them for what they are which is handouts. The only exception being our military benefits since they worked for them ans social security/Medicare.
Medicaid, SNAP, free housing, phones are handouts period. Here's some free stuff vote for me!
Spoken like a true neo-con. Full of lies, but sounds good and appeals to angry white men.
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.