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.
What IS going to happen with Social Security funds in the future?
I would like to see a sensible analysis of how the Feds' latest announcement will affect (or propel) everything from inflation to consumer loans, business loans, national debt . . .
ETA: Never mind. Hubby just gave me some info to read.
Last edited by brokensky; 09-19-2012 at 08:16 PM..
Reason: added sentence
If one considers the number of people that depend on SS all of a sudden being cut off ! There would be an armed uprising the next day!!
We could have a similar effect if the dollar collapses, high inflation or even hyperinflation results, and government payments just aren't adjusted. But SS recipients are old; we need to see welfare and SSI destroyed. There'll be a bloody adjustment period but it will put the economy back on track.
Well it just a fact that FED policy punishes savers and QE forces people into equities that are at higher risk than many want.Its even seen a making bonds more of a risk.It also lowers the value of the dollar which is hard on fixed income that include SS.Seeing that the FED sees no time in sight to raise rates its very hard on anyone of fixed income who can't afford to risk any income in markets especailly equities.The current policy is to force people into equities and has subsatntial risk of inflation.In lowering the value of the dollar it even make labor at same rate lower in cost .Most doubt that any of the rates get to main street except for home purchases at lower rates.
Hmmn...talk about tin-foil survivalist doom-and-gloom collapse...and with a foreword by Newt it's got to be good.
Its a decent read/work of fiction.
This particular guy works for NASA doing secret squirrel computer "Stuff" and consequently has an interest in the threat of EMP.
It fit.
Having been in other countries, 3rd world/warzones etc... I find one line to be particularly telling:
The one where the father figure bemoaned not having a single sack of rice which could if fed his family for some time.
The ultimate cause here is Obama. I didn't read the article because I'm already aware of how bad the economy is, and how bleak our future is. Greece is our future if we don't get a new President and a different direction in leadership. Debt is bad. More debt is worse.
It seems to be a regular favorite sport of some posters to attack viewpoints out of hand, without any supporting sources to their own viewpoint. That is a thread-killer, or at least their attempt at it. These regulars just love to pounce on what they call "tinfoil hats" and "doomsayers" without any credible backup of their own. Let's remember that EVERY source is touting an overt or hidden agenda, whether it's the economic collapse websites pushing gold, or other sources pushing stocks. Agendas abound, and very rarely is there a truly objective (agenda-free) source to be found in the media or anywhere else.
In the meantime, can the real thread killers stand up and offer their counter-argument in an adult way.
The above is bizarre reasoning at best. It is a normal adult thing to disclose one's source at the outset. A couple of times I have started a thread with a link to a Los Angeles Times article. The thread title started with the words, "Los Angeles Times:" and continued with the subject matter of the article. Or for example if someone is quoting the well-known economist Paul Krugman, it is common practice to start the thread title in the same manner, with the name "Paul Krugman". So when I added the source in my post #2 in this thread, it was for the knowledge and convenience of other readers; it was neither non-adult nor a favorite sport.
Nor was it a thread killer, unless everybody else shares my disdain for the particular website. This thread seems to be doing just fine. Your argument that all sources are more or less equal because they are all biased is worse than bizarre; it is downright idiotic and dangerous because it implies there is no way to make rational choices. The New York Times is not "equal" to the EconomicCollapseBlog even if the New York Times has not acheived a probably unachievable perfect objectivity. The NY Times is a credible source and the other is not. Would you give equal billing to the site for the American Nazi Party? After all, in your book, "EVERY source is touting an overt or hidden agenda", so we can just go ahead and lump the American Nazi Party right in there with "every source", making it the equivalent of the New York Times.
And besides you have contradicted yourself. You accuse the posters whom you are attacking (me, for one) of lacking any "credible back-up of their own". Therefore, you admit there is such a thing as credibility. I have read the EconomicCollapseBlog a number of times and concluded that it lacks all credibility and that its bias is extreme; therefore, I will not read it again. That is not the same as saying all claims for possible economic collapse lack credibility; there is such a thing as the rational discussion of the matter.
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 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.
There would be an armed uprising the next day!! 
There'll be a bloody adjustment period but it will put the economy back on track. 
Bias, credibility, objectivity, and rationality
