U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
 [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 03-15-2016, 05:08 AM
 
Location: Ubique
4,151 posts, read 3,166,045 times
Reputation: 2634

Advertisements

The sustainable way of getting out of this is more Capitalism, much better economic growth, 5% or even higher. Every year.

Bernie, Hillary in no way will give us more growth.

 
Old 03-15-2016, 06:09 AM
 
Location: Ponte Vedra Beach FL
14,628 posts, read 17,947,745 times
Reputation: 6717
Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry10 View Post
Not sure if seniors and national priorities are mutually exclusive. They might be congruent instead. Seniors are an important part of our nation.

The problem here is with the underlining vehicle of retirement, SSI and MC. Some call it the fundamentals, or math. Politicians might not be able to solve the crisis at the 11th hour, as some posters here have suggested. Fundamentals / math might squeeze politicians into a corner where their options might be limited and cuts really be severe.

That's where we're headed if one is to believe math and SS Trustees. So Republicans proposing something is in fact rational, while those who keep driving this train on auto-pilot faster towards the cliff -- those are irrational.
Proposing "fixes" is the rational thing to do. Unfortunately - some of the proposals aren't very practical IMO. For example - "Medicare vouchers". We've seen how well the ACA marketplace is working for people under 65 . Can you imagine being thrown into that (or a similar) mess - voucher in hand - at age 70? Or the idea of paying doctors based on patient outcomes (not the services they provide). How can doctors guarantee outcomes? Especially if - for example - a stubborn patient with congestive heart failure insists on eating a super salty hot dog on the 4th of July and winds up in the hospital (there was actually an article in the WSJ a few years ago about patients like this - they insisted on having their hot dogs even if they knew the meal meant a visit to the ER).

To me - the obvious (and simple) things to do are raising the SS retirement age - perhaps the Medicare age too. Also raising the amount of income subject to SS taxes. Also raising taxes on SS (so people with higher incomes pay tax on 100% of their SS benefits). Also means testing Medicare (which is by far in worse shape than SS). Doesn't make any sense to me that a married couple that earns $165,000/year pays the same for Medicare as a couple earning $45,000.

I think everyone has to be prepared to give a little - especially people with higher incomes. I am one of those higher income people. And - even though I am enjoying my subsidies these days - I know I can afford to pay more. And would be willing to do so if someone comes up with a comprehensive set of reforms designed to keep SS and Medicare solvent. Robyn
 
Old 03-15-2016, 07:08 AM
 
6,307 posts, read 4,755,565 times
Reputation: 12919
I have paid high progressive taxes over decades of working. Those taxes have included income tax with further deductions for social security and medicare, property taxes, sales taxes, all sorts of licenses and fees and hidden taxes such as corporate taxation which is passed on to me for everything I buy. Somehow no matter how much comes in our federal and local governments seem to be able to spend more. It seems that more taxes will never work. It is time to make some cuts in spending and there is a huge and obvious category....the military. Cut military spending by 5% a year for every year for the next 10 years. Stop being the world's policeman and stop with the regime changes and the endless wars. Stop telling the rest of the world how their governments should work. With half the military spending we will still have huge military might dwarfing any other country. We will have more than enough left over to pay for social security, healthcare, and maybe even daycare and other social programs.


Unfortunately in this election there does not seem to be anyone who gets it. Bernie just wants to spend and spend and somehow he tells everyone he will just get the money by "going after Wall Street." That sounds good but means nothing. Hillary is practiced in doing exactly what we need to stop doing. She is great about arguing what we should have done or should do, but has no hint about stopping the nonsense of foreign policy interventions. The Republicans want to build up the military even more and bomb any perceived enemy until the sands glow.
 
Old 03-15-2016, 07:14 AM
 
Location: Tennessee
23,634 posts, read 17,615,071 times
Reputation: 27701
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robyn55 View Post
Proposing "fixes" is the rational thing to do. Unfortunately - some of the proposals aren't very practical IMO. For example - "Medicare vouchers". We've seen how well the ACA marketplace is working for people under 65 . Can you imagine being thrown into that (or a similar) mess - voucher in hand - at age 70? Or the idea of paying doctors based on patient outcomes (not the services they provide). How can doctors guarantee outcomes? Especially if - for example - a stubborn patient with congestive heart failure insists on eating a super salty hot dog on the 4th of July and winds up in the hospital (there was actually an article in the WSJ a few years ago about patients like this - they insisted on having their hot dogs even if they knew the meal meant a visit to the ER).

To me - the obvious (and simple) things to do are raising the SS retirement age - perhaps the Medicare age too. Also raising the amount of income subject to SS taxes. Also raising taxes on SS (so people with higher incomes pay tax on 100% of their SS benefits). Also means testing Medicare (which is by far in worse shape than SS). Doesn't make any sense to me that a married couple that earns $165,000/year pays the same for Medicare as a couple earning $45,000.

I think everyone has to be prepared to give a little - especially people with higher incomes. I am one of those higher income people. And - even though I am enjoying my subsidies these days - I know I can afford to pay more. And would be willing to do so if someone comes up with a comprehensive set of reforms designed to keep SS and Medicare solvent. Robyn
When I was low income a couple years back, I was on the ACA plan. My state was not one that accepted Medicaid expansion, so no state exchange to deal with, but the federal system worked well, I had no problems enrolling, filing claims, etc.

I think the problems over user unfriendliness were dramatically overstated. If you had no idea how to work a web browser, yeah, I could see running into difficulties over the phone, but it was probably one of the easiest government programs I dealt with.
 
Old 03-15-2016, 09:15 AM
 
9,216 posts, read 9,289,216 times
Reputation: 28896
My prediction is after tonight--and the Florida primary--its all over for Marco Rubio. If Rubio pulls out of the race, its down to Trump, Cruz, and possibly Kasich on the GOP side (if he pulls out a win in Ohio). I don't see Kasich as the GOP nominee which is unfortunate. He's the sort of person, I'd be willing to consider voting for.

If the Democrats nominate Hillary Clinton which I fully expect than we are looking at either a Clinton-Trump race or a Clinton-Cruz race.

A few words about "Bernie". While some may believe he is correct in his opinions about the way America is turning into a corporate oligarchy, Bernie's solutions are unworkable. We cannot afford to give every college age student a free education. We may ultimately get national health insurance in this country, but it is going to take years and many issues are going to have to be worked through first. Bernie calls himself a "socialist" and this may, in and of itself, render him unelectable. Bernie is a not a viable candidate. He will lead to a republican victory if nominated.

Cruz is a poster child for the worst part of the Tea Party bomb throwers in Congress. This clown was organized a revolt to default on the nation's debts to prove a point. He has few or no friends at all in Congress. He could hardly be seen as a friend of the seniors. If elected, he will not work or compromise with anyone. Nor, will anyone work or compromise with him. Its a formula for massive gridlock.

Trump is scary and there is no other word for it. I say that no one here really has a clue what he would do if he were elected. He might be good for seniors and he might be extraordinarily destructive. What is clear is that he isn't stable. His opinions change just like the direction of the wind changes. Such a person cannot be allowed to be President of the United States.

This leaves Hillary Clinton. Clinton is not an inspirational candidate. She is not a good speaker. I suspect her performance as Secretary of State is neither as good, nor as bad as many people claim it is. The world is passing through turbulent times. Clinton was not responsible for the "Arab Spring of 2010". Nor, could she have stopped it. The computer email scandal hangs over her head.

Nevertheless, Clinton is the only stable choice available for seniors. The other two candidates are simply too undependable. We have some idea what Clinton would do as President and while it is perhaps not exactly what any of us completely want, it is better than the alternatives.

Hillary Clinton is the only reasonable voting choice for seniors.
 
Old 03-15-2016, 09:26 AM
 
Location: SoCal
13,278 posts, read 6,362,704 times
Reputation: 9903
Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry10 View Post
The sustainable way of getting out of this is more Capitalism, much better economic growth, 5% or even higher. Every year.

Bernie, Hillary in no way will give us more growth.
Exactly more jobs. My sister just found another job at the ripe old age of 62, she expects to get a pension from this job. Who knew?
 
Old 03-15-2016, 09:36 AM
 
Location: Sylmar, a part of Los Angeles
3,995 posts, read 2,550,703 times
Reputation: 8546
Do you think Obama worked or compromised with anyone? He's the most devise president ever!
 
Old 03-15-2016, 10:08 AM
 
5,483 posts, read 2,027,131 times
Reputation: 6945
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrkliny View Post
What convictions?? The banks "settled" these charges. And of course no bankers actually went to jail for illegal behavior because the actual evidence would not lead to convictions.
That's a reasonable opinion. Another opinion, one that I share, is that the Obama administration made a political decision to not prosecute the top dogs because Obama needed Wall St. support and money to get reelected. Goldman Sachs was one of Obama's top contributors.
 
Old 03-15-2016, 10:15 AM
 
5,483 posts, read 2,027,131 times
Reputation: 6945
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
wrong , it wasn't fraud when it came to the cdo's being discussed . the fraud , falsifying documents and all the other stuff are a different issue then being discussed, there was no fraud involved in the cdo's .
Yes there was fraud in CDO's. For example, not only did Goldman Sachs knew the CDOs were bad, they took a short position against their own clients. In other words, they sold you a defective product and then placed a bet that you would lose money on it. People should have gone to jail for this.

"The SEC alleges that Goldman Sachs structured and marketed a synthetic collateralized debt obligation (CDO) that hinged on the performance of subprime residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS). Goldman Sachs failed to disclose to investors vital information about the CDO, in particular the role that a major hedge fund played in the portfolio selection process and the fact that the hedge fund had taken a short position against the CDO."
 
Old 03-15-2016, 11:38 AM
 
6,307 posts, read 4,755,565 times
Reputation: 12919
Quote:
Originally Posted by markg91359 View Post
.......

Bernie's solutions are unworkable....

Cruz is a poster child for the worst part of the Tea Party bomb throwers in Congress. ...


Trump is scary ...
...

Hillary Clinton is the only reasonable voting choice for seniors.
Unfortunately I have to agree with much of what you have to say. I suppose Hillary is the only choice even though I think she has done a poor job as Secretary and has continued the US policy of meddling everywhere in the world. I think she also exudes slime and is underhanded. Anyway with a Republican Congress, Hillary will not be able to accomplish anything. She has the potential to be even less well liked than Obama. For one thing, in addition to the usual differences of opinion and partisan politics, she will have tens of millions against her for wanting to undermine the 2nd Amendment. Her email issues are also not going to go away. Even Bernie and many democrats will not support her because of her fees and campaign contributions from Wall Street firms.


Hillary will never be able to "bring people together." Maybe the ongoing battle between a Democratic President and a Republican Congress is the best we can hope for. That is sad.
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.


Closed Thread

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 > Retirement
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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, 33, 34, 35 - Top