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)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 03-10-2016, 06:37 AM
PDD
 
Location: The Sand Hills of NC
8,774 posts, read 14,877,508 times
Reputation: 11886

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry10 View Post
I agree that voters have caused a lot of this. But the solution is not to basically shut up and pay up, even more, which means -- I entrust more of my money to some temporary politician, who has proven that he / she can cause permanent damage. That's irrational.

The solution is to reform SSI, return it to its original intent -- which was a safety net, and not retirement. The solution is not more socialsm, but more capitalism, higher economic growth. Capitalism made SSI successful, while socialism is destroying it. Bernie and Hillary are socialists of a different shade, but socialists nonetheless.
But isn't Socialism the backbone of a strong economy?

Strong military to defend us.

Good infrastructure consisting of,

Rail
Highways
Bridges
Open waterways
Airports.
Public education for all
Law enforcement

After we have all those items payed for by taxes then the Capitalists can go about their business as long as they employ Americans.

When corporate profits come before the basic needs as it is now our country declines.

Right now our roads, bridges, rail system need a lot more work than a tax break for Capitalists sending our jobs overseas.

 
Old 03-10-2016, 06:39 AM
 
Location: Florida
5,923 posts, read 2,750,376 times
Reputation: 7158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry10 View Post
I agree that voters have caused a lot of this. But the solution is not to basically shut up and pay up, even more, which means -- I entrust more of my money to some temporary politician, who has proven that he / she can cause permanent damage. That's irrational.

The solution is to reform SSI, return it to its original intent -- which was a safety net, and not retirement. The solution is not more socialsm, but more capitalism, higher economic growth.

Capitalism made SSI successful, while socialism is destroying it. Bernie and Hillary are socialists of a different shade, but socialists nonetheless.
#1: I disagree because who benefits more from "capitalism, higher economic growth"? Donald Trump or somebody retiring from a "job" over 40 years?

#2: How does "Capitalism made SSI successful? There are "Caps" as to how much money people or businesses have to pay into SS on a yearly basis.
Let's not even start on how many businesses get tax breaks for hiring minorities at Minimum wage jobs to begin with.

#3: It's amazing that nations like Germany who are more "Social" in their Retirement & Worker programs are robust in their Economies while America thinks a fair Minimum Wage is detrimental to the economy.
 
Old 03-10-2016, 06:54 AM
 
5,825 posts, read 13,322,905 times
Reputation: 9300
IMO it doesn't matter who gets in. No one will touch Medicare, especially Senators and Congressman who need votes. Maybe if they would stop using Medicare as a slush fund, seniors would get an increase.
 
Old 03-10-2016, 07:42 AM
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
3,745 posts, read 4,220,203 times
Reputation: 6866
Quote:
Originally Posted by RiverBird View Post
We know enough about the "candidates" to vote tomorrow.
Always the optimist...
 
Old 03-10-2016, 08:53 AM
 
13,923 posts, read 7,416,674 times
Reputation: 25432
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellwood View Post
IMO it doesn't matter who gets in. No one will touch Medicare, especially Senators and Congressman who need votes. Maybe if they would stop using Medicare as a slush fund, seniors would get an increase.
You're sadly mistaken. Right now, there are about 4 3/4 working people for every retiree. In 2050, it projects to be 2 3/4 working people for every retiree. Health care costs have done nothing but gone up in our lifetimes and there's no reason to expect that trend to change. What Medicare costs and what Medicare covers are both going to change dramatically. Will it be in the next 4 years? Probably not. Will we have the same level of coverage at the same costs 30 years from now? Absolutely not. It's simply not possible.

If you're 80, you probably don't need to care since you'll be dead and buried when the changes happen. If you're 50, it's a very big deal. All that expensive last 6 months of life coverage is going to vaporize. Everything is going to be rationed and held to very tight cost-benefit analysis with the cheapest outcome-based treatment chosen every time. Hard to say if that's 10 years from now, 20 years from now, or 30 years from now but it's coming. You'd better have an enormous pile of cash if you want better than that.
 
Old 03-10-2016, 09:17 AM
 
13,923 posts, read 7,416,674 times
Reputation: 25432
Quote:
Originally Posted by PDD View Post
But isn't Socialism the backbone of a strong economy?

Strong military to defend us.

Good infrastructure consisting of,

Rail
Highways
Bridges
Open waterways
Airports.
Public education for all
Law enforcement

After we have all those items payed for by taxes then the Capitalists can go about their business as long as they employ Americans.

When corporate profits come before the basic needs as it is now our country declines.

Right now our roads, bridges, rail system need a lot more work than a tax break for Capitalists sending our jobs overseas.
That's not socialism. In a socialist system, the means of production are owned by the community as a whole. There are no capitalists because they aren't allowed to own anything.

We live in a social democracy. In a social democracy, the government collects taxes to provide both infrastructure and public services.
 
Old 03-10-2016, 09:38 AM
 
Location: Nebraska
1,886 posts, read 2,301,174 times
Reputation: 5327
I see this is reverse.

Which candidate do we know already has a record of not getting anything done.

Sanders = long history of conflict and lack of negotiating skills in congress, his way or the highway.

Clinton = Long history of left wing politics as quoted as saying that republicans are the enemy.

Cruze = No one likes him now and no one will work with him on anything.

Rubio = short history of avoiding critical votes to further his interests. (same as BO)

Trump = Has a life time of getting things done and success in the private sector (unknown in government sector)

Kasich = has proven history of getting things done in government.

So the question is do you want some one in the Oval office that can't get anything done or do you want some one in the Oval office that has a chance at getting something done?
 
Old 03-10-2016, 09:39 AM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,093 posts, read 72,534,315 times
Reputation: 27566
Quote:
Originally Posted by PDD View Post
But isn't Socialism the backbone of a strong economy?

Strong military to defend us.

Good infrastructure consisting of,

Rail
Highways
Bridges
Open waterways
Airports.
Public education for all
Law enforcement

After we have all those items payed for by taxes then the Capitalists can go about their business as long as they employ Americans.

When corporate profits come before the basic needs as it is now our country declines.

Right now our roads, bridges, rail system need a lot more work than a tax break for Capitalists sending our jobs overseas.
Production is the backbone of a strong economy.

Socialism can only exist when there is money to feed it.
 
Old 03-10-2016, 10:39 AM
PDD
 
Location: The Sand Hills of NC
8,774 posts, read 14,877,508 times
Reputation: 11886
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garthur View Post
I see this is reverse.

Which candidate do we know already has a record of not getting anything done.

Sanders = long history of conflict and lack of negotiating skills in congress, his way or the highway.

Clinton = Long history of left wing politics as quoted as saying that republicans are the enemy.

Cruze = No one likes him now and no one will work with him on anything.

Rubio = short history of avoiding critical votes to further his interests. (same as BO)

Trump = Has a life time of getting things done and success in the private sector (unknown in government sector)

Kasich = has proven history of getting things done in government.

So the question is do you want some one in the Oval office that can't get anything done or do you want some one in the Oval office that has a chance at getting something done?
Your kidding on Trump.

Besides Apt buildings and golf courses please list his other money making accomplishments.

Everything else with Trumps name on it has failed.

He is the best politician out there because he has convinced a lot of people that he has all the answers.

He hasn't convinced me.
 
Old 03-10-2016, 11:56 AM
 
Location: SoCal
13,237 posts, read 6,340,776 times
Reputation: 9854
I don't see how this is not a political thread. It should be closed IMO. It's under a false pretense of retirement.
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