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)
 
 
Old 02-19-2013, 09:28 PM
 
3,047 posts, read 1,836,031 times
Reputation: 654

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979 View Post
No we do not. Please back up your asinine assertion.

Hint, social security and Medicare aren't welfare.
Yes they are!
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-19-2013, 09:30 PM
 
3,047 posts, read 1,836,031 times
Reputation: 654
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979 View Post
In my mind, this is what it boils down to with medicare.

The program was started becasue private insurers wouldn't cover, or charged to much money for seniors to be covered under a private sector plan. This created a public sector need.

Since private insurance now has to cover, despite preexisting conditions (ie, you're old), and they are limited on what they can charge under Obamacare, why do we still have medicare at all?

I think the program should be abolished, perhaps continue it at a reduced rate gradually until extinction, and folks under 40 years old like myself will have to continue to buy private insurance through our old age. Just pay us back the money we've paid into the system already. Or, set it aside like social security so that we can tap that pool of money to buy our own private insurance at whatever age we decide to retire.
The money you paid in is GONE.
The money your parents paid in to SS is GONE. There is no pool of money.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2013, 09:33 PM
 
3,047 posts, read 1,836,031 times
Reputation: 654
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
The federal government's spending is essentially like a big insurance company with an army. The big five are: Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid, Defense and interest on the debt. If one is talking about trying to make meaningful debt reductions by cutting spending in other areas, one doesn't know what one is talking about.
Cuts need to be made in the above but other programs too.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2013, 09:37 PM
 
3,047 posts, read 1,836,031 times
Reputation: 654
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoJiveMan View Post
Please define your ideas of what welfare is.
Food Stamps
Housing Assistance
Cash Assistance
Social Security
Medicare/Medicaid
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2013, 12:32 AM
 
Location: west mich
5,740 posts, read 5,012,700 times
Reputation: 2106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jean71 View Post
Food Stamps
Housing Assistance
Cash Assistance
Social Security
Medicare/Medicaid
Corporate subsidies and tax breaks.
Welfare Statistics: Government Spends More on Corporate Welfare Than..
Excerpt: "About $59 billion is spent on traditional social welfare programs. $92 billion is spent on corporate subsidies. So, the government spent 50% more on corporate welfare than it did on food stamps and housing assistance in 2006".
Excerpt (this could come from Fox): "There's so much suffering in the world. It can all get pretty overwhelming sometimes. Consider for a moment the sorrow in the eyes of a CEO who's just found out that his end-of-year bonus is only going to be a paltry $2.3 million".

As Limbaugh said - the wealthy (including himself) are suffering under Obama's (first term) economy.
Does the boy look like he is missing a lot of meals?


Low capital gains taxes and loopholes.
How Buffett Saves Billions On His Tax Return - Forbes
Excerpt: "Buffett and Bill Gates asked other billionaires to sign their pledge to donate half their net worth to charity in similar fashion. Others are not as wealthy as Buffett, so figure 50 billionairesí times $5 billion of tax savings equals $250 billion of taxes diverted from the IRS and states. Thatís a meaningful amount of taxes and it should be considered for repeal in pending discussions for tax reform".
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2013, 02:03 AM
 
7,372 posts, read 3,797,898 times
Reputation: 3117
Quote:
Originally Posted by detwahDJ View Post
* Republicans have always preached about balancing the budget - during democratic presidencies.
* What "balancing" did they do 2000-2008 at the times they had control?
* During repub administrations did we ever hear any complaints about spending or the unbalanced budget? [crickets]
* Cheney said "deficits don't matter".
* They do not care about balancing the budget, and if in power, they will again spend like crazy, with not a word about "balance".
And this is why we have terms like RINO and Establishment Republicans, to differentiate them from conservatives. This is why Republicans have been receiving primary challenges at increased rates.

I have no problem agreeing with the points you made. I agree there are a lot of Republicans out there who are too much like you. And I oppose their hypocrisy, abandonment of the constitution, and fiscal irresponsiblity the same way as I oppose the same qualities in you.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2013, 03:30 AM
 
Location: Fort Worth Texas
12,482 posts, read 7,501,035 times
Reputation: 2519
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
I don't see that evident from the graph:



It sure looks like there is growth regardless but Obama has flattened that growth.
seems your graph shows from 2008 and on spending drastically increased , even more since 2006 when Dem's took congress
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2013, 04:45 AM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
14,331 posts, read 17,431,036 times
Reputation: 18436
Default Excellent post.

Quote:
Originally Posted by markg91359 View Post
I am in favor of cutting the budget. I am in favor of both reducing spending gradually and increasing some taxes gradually.

What makes me think the GOP is full of nutcases is when I hear people like Marco Rubio constantly holler about "balancing the budget". Balancing the budget, right now, would require a combination of a trillion dollars in budget cuts and tax hikes. If that were done immediately, 99 out of 100 economists will tell you a simple truth. It will throw this country back into the recession that we are struggling to climb out of. In fact, unemployment would probably increase to 15% according to the index its currently measured on.

Cutting all that government spending would greatly reduce demand for goods and services and the private sector is in no shape to make up what government would instantly stop purchasing. The only net result that could flow from that would be record numbers of firms going out of business and a record number of unemployment claims.

I don't dispute the essential truth that--over time--spending has to be cut and that borrowing by government is a problem. But it can't be done over night and anyone who think it can be without a near catastrophic effect on the economy, doesn't know what he/she is talking about.

Rubio only shows his ignorance and utter partisanship by saying the President ought to do this. I wouldn't vote for this clown to be dogcatcher.
Rubio a major joke, now making an early play to be the eventual GOP nominee for the next presidential election. The GOP only screams about "balanced budgets" when a Democrat is in the White House. While Dubya was turning a SURPLUS in a RECORD DEFICIT, the Regressives were sitting around in warmongering bliss, picking their noses, and ignoring the black hole of military spending.

Pubs are incredibly pathetic, especially on matters concerning budgets and the economy. They know nothing about either, except to navigate these areas to benefit only the rich.

Your post is spot on.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2013, 08:53 AM
 
Location: Fort Worth Texas
12,482 posts, read 7,501,035 times
Reputation: 2519
Quote:
Originally Posted by A_Lexus View Post
Rubio a major joke, now making an early play to be the eventual GOP nominee for the next presidential election. The GOP only screams about "balanced budgets" when a Democrat is in the White House. While Dubya was turning a SURPLUS in a RECORD DEFICIT, the Regressives were sitting around in warmongering bliss, picking their noses, and ignoring the black hole of military spending.

Pubs are incredibly pathetic, especially on matters concerning budgets and the economy. They know nothing about either, except to navigate these areas to benefit only the rich.

Your post is spot on.
Your post shows you dislike Rubio because he is Hispanic
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2013, 09:05 AM
NCN
 
Location: NC/SC Border Patrol
18,787 posts, read 18,485,719 times
Reputation: 20717
I heard the best explanation of what the government is calling a balanced budget yesterday by a reporter. I might get the name of the reporter wrong but his example was right on target.

If you say you are going to lose weight and stop eating 1/3 of what you eat but you are still eating 200 calories a day more than you use, you are not on a diet and you will gain rather than lose weight.

Our government is talking about cutting spending but they are not cutting it enough to make it possible to stop borrowing money; therefore we are still going broke.

And I don't care what the result is for the private sector. We cannot continue on this downward spiral. Spending has to be cut and taxes have to go up. I suggest that everyone in the United States should have to pay some taxes then everybody would understand there is a problem that needs to be solved.

I suggest closing the borders, deport all that are not citizens, put taxes on products coming into this country that were not made here, and no more credit card type welfare at the checkout counter. Have government distribution centers for those that need food. No more money sent to other countries that is being paid for by our taxpayers. We can only afford to pay for our own citizens. Other countries need to adjust their own affairs.

And on the OP question, I will go back to the statement, "You can't fix stupid." If you have to ask why the Republicans talk about a balanced budget then you are too stupid to understand any explanation as to why they mention it. Basically it is because we know we will be the ones that in the end have to pay for the interest and the debt and we don't want it getting so high it destroys the country.
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.


 
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 $99,000 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.

© 2005-2017, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - 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 - Top