You’re gonna cut entitlements? Suuurrrre you are
Granted: The national debt is a serious challenge to our economic prosperity and national security, and according to every budget projection, the problem will become even more serious in the years ahead.
So what are we going to do about it? Cut entitlement spending?
No, you’re not.
Not by enough to matter, anyway. If you want proof, take a look at how quickly that Texas tough guy, Rick Perry, has tried to backpedal on all that bluster about Social Security. And at this point, remember, he’s still running in the Republican primary, where such views are supposed to be popular.
On the other hand, if looking at Rick Perry is more than you can bear, you can also look at this:
Look at those numbers. If your plan for solving the debt crisis is to cut entitlements, you have no plan to solve the debt crisis.
The poll was conducted on behalf of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, which is grounds for approaching it with caution. However, it was conducted jointly by two nationally respected opinion research companies, one with generally Republican clients, one with generally Democratic clients. More importantly, its findings are consistent with poll after poll taken on the subject.
As the poll also found:
“When asked to choose between tax increases on the top 2 percent of income earners or cuts to Social Security and Medicare as a way to reduce the deficit, 94 percent of Democrats, 82 percent of independents, and 64 percent of Republicans prefer tax increase on the top 2 percent of income earners.”
The truth is, entitlements do have to be cut. Medicare’s current path is unsustainable. And with Social Security, a change in how benefits are adjusted for inflation would go a long way to making the program actuarially sound for the next 75 years. That’s not popular with voters — two-thirds of Americans oppose the idea, the poll found — but it probably has to be done anyway. (The poll also found that 71 percent of Americans favor raising the $106,000 cutoff on payroll taxes, compared to just 21 percent opposed).
However, such benefit changes are politically plausible only as part of a much larger package in which the burdens of debt reduction are shared broadly, through tax increases as well as spending cuts. Without such a package, forget it.
(And before you argue that we’ll just cut elsewhere, the so-called untouchables in the budget — defense spending, pensions, Medicare/health spending, Social Security, veterans programs and interest on the debt — amount to $3.1 trillion out of a total budget of $3.7 trillion. You could totally eliminate everything else the government does — environmental protection, federal courts, the FBI, border patrol, food inspections, the State Department, foreign aid, food stamps, Congress, the national parks — and still reduce the deficit by less than half.)
If you truly believe that the national debt is a serious threat, you have an obligation to quit the nonsense and get serious about politically realistic avenues for addressing it. Otherwise you’re contributing to the problem that you claim to abhor.
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
365 comments Add your comment
jm
September 23rd, 2011
1:34 pm
Democrats led by Senator Reid are going to shut down the government. Extremist Dems ruining America.
Guy Incognito
September 23rd, 2011
1:35 pm
This is my problem with the Tea Party. The more recent participants are not willing to sacrifice their entitlements. If they want to be serious, it’ll mean cuts in their programs as well
jm
September 23rd, 2011
1:38 pm
“politically realistic avenues for addressing it”
I’ve said I’d accept tax revenue increases. AFTER entitlements are reformed. And AFTER the tax code is cleaned up to simplify and reduce rates.
jm
September 23rd, 2011
1:39 pm
Senator Reid can’t pass a bill. He’s incompetent.
jm
September 23rd, 2011
1:41 pm
WHEN WE HAVE RUBES LIKE THIS RUNNING THE SHOW, OUR GOVERNMENT GOES IN THE TOILET
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) scheduled a Monday evening vote on an alternative Democratic plan that mirrors the House measure — except for the corresponding spending cuts — but that appears destined to fail.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0911/64264.html#ixzz1YnZOxSau
Get rid of the current bums. We need new bums.
Jay
September 23rd, 2011
1:41 pm
In other words, jm, you have no intention of solving the problem.
Look at those numbers.
Adam
September 23rd, 2011
1:41 pm
CHARTS!!!
Joe Mama
September 23rd, 2011
1:42 pm
The GOP doesn’t have to *actually* cut entitlements. They can just *run* on a promise to do it. Then they can keep their gubmint hands off of people’s Medicare.
I love big gov't!...gimme some more
September 23rd, 2011
1:42 pm
raising taxes on the rich always works! why haven’t we confiscating more for the little guy who’s getting hosed. pure nonsense. Time to cut spending. I’d rather have the 12.4 percent of my pay given to me to invest than let the gov’t dole it out to whoever it wishes. The problem is gov’t hasn’t been a good steward of the peoples money and this is the price we pay now.
btw, Obama care does more to cut Medicare than any plan the Republicans have introduced.
Adam
September 23rd, 2011
1:42 pm
Jay: If your plan for solving the debt crisis is to cut entitlements, you have no plan to solve the debt crisis.
BOOOOOOM! Oh I love it.
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
1:43 pm
Said that yesterday, the GOP isn’t concerned about cutting spending, as they sure as hell aren’t going to touch entitlements — they know they’d be quartered and drawn.
md
September 23rd, 2011
1:46 pm
My guess……..nothing gets done……….major crisis ensues……….crisis management takes over………everybody pays dearly…………..
And probably end up with less than we could of had had we just got our ducks in a row…………
Joe Mama
September 23rd, 2011
1:46 pm
i love — “Obama care does more to cut Medicare than any plan the Republicans have introduced.”
And Obama’s plan puts that cut money *right back into health care,* which no Republican plan does.
Adam
September 23rd, 2011
1:46 pm
jm: I’ve said I’d accept tax revenue increases. AFTER entitlements are reformed.
And what kind of response do you give when a bill is introduced that cuts entitlements “in the out years”?
If you want to get serious about this problem, you can’t make the case that the programs you don’t like have to go FIRST, and THEN (this time, we PROMISE to keep our word) you will raise taxes.
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
1:46 pm
“major crisis ensues……….crisis management takes over………everybody pays dearly…………”
Already happening md.
Adam
September 23rd, 2011
1:47 pm
I’d rather have the 12.4 percent of my pay given to me to invest
Of course you would. As, I am sure, would most people who simply want to keep their money and have no moral decency to contribute to the whole.
jm
September 23rd, 2011
1:47 pm
Jay 1:41 – what, conceding to revenue increases isn’t enough for you? What else do you want?
I know this is a silly question.
Ideally, something like a 60% tax on those that make over $250,000, conceding to running a 6% deficit to GDP ratio in perpetuity, blah blah blah….. would probably be ideal for you.
Or are you saying there has to be a grand bargain? Because if so, I don’t disagree. But TAX INCREASES are not going to get passed BEFORE the budget is fixed. Period.
Brosephus™ - Browning America Since 1973
September 23rd, 2011
1:48 pm
If you truly believe that the national debt is a serious threat, you have an obligation to quit the nonsense and get serious about politically realistic avenues for addressing it.
When you have a segment of the population living in an alternate reality, depending on personal political beliefs, do you really expect anything realistic to happen? We have a Congress who’s approval rating can be measured in micro millimeters, yet they get re-elected around 75% of the time. People don’t want problems solved. They just want to b*tch and moan about stuff. It’s obvious by the sheer volume of jackasses who get re-elected to the same offices and/or promoted to even higher offices.
As an example, look at jm’s approach @ 1:38 as proof. It sounds reasonable to him, but somebody from the opposing point of view will see it as a non-starter. Common sense would dictate that doing all that at the same time would give both parties exactly what they want, but neither jm nor whomever opposes him will take the time to elect someone that will take the “Solomonesque” approach to solving our problems. They will champion and elect someone who will do what “they” want as opposed to what’s best for the country as a whole.
Not to pick on you directly jm, but your idea was the first one that came up.
Adam
September 23rd, 2011
1:48 pm
md: And probably end up with less than we could of had had we just got our ducks in a row…
Huh. And I thought you were AGAINST Obama’s vision of deficit reduction.
Aquagirl
September 23rd, 2011
1:48 pm
the so-called untouchables in the budget — ……….— amount to $3.1 trillion out of a total budget of $3.7 trillion
Somebody help me with the math here…SS and Medicare are only .6 trillion?
jm
September 23rd, 2011
1:48 pm
Oh, and “grand bargains” are hard to come by. Good luck on that.
Janice
September 23rd, 2011
1:48 pm
Jay,
Great article up until the point where you INSIST we must cut these programs to reduce the debt. You fail to mention Social Security has a $2.6 trillion dollar surplus and will be able to pay 100% of benefits for the next 26 years…by all means let cut back on something that we all paid for and actually works! The future minor funding shortfall can be fixed by raising the FICA tax cap or adding more revenue. Clearly you don’t talk to seniors. If you did, you would know that they haven’t received a Cost of Living Adjustment in the past 2 years (despite the fact food and health care costs are rising considerably). I guess a zero raise is just far too generous for you? The current formula is woefully inadequate as it is.
You say Medicare is “unsustainable.” No, health care costs in this country are unsustainable and until we fix the underlying causes why we pay more for health care than every other industrialized country, Medicare will have funding issues. If we paid the same for health care as other European countries, we would have budget surpluses, not deficits. http://www.cepr.net/index.php/press-releases/press-releases/future-budget-deficits-almost-entirely-due-to-rising-private-sector-health-care-costs/
It’s about choices here. Clearly all Americans want to protect Social Security and Medicare. These are core values and programs we cherish and are more than willing to pay for. Why not wind down the wars and allow Bush tax cuts to expire if you’re so concerned about the debt and deficit? Going after wildly popular programs isn’t going to win you any fans and according to this poll, won’t win politicians any votes.
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
1:48 pm
“As, I am sure, would most people who simply want to keep their money and have no moral decency to contribute to the whole”
Which is why we don’t have a voluntary tax system.
(the real) Independent
September 23rd, 2011
1:48 pm
Jay, you must have included Medicaid under the “Medicare/healthcare spending” category. That is one “entitlement” that is frequently targeted, in some ways for good reason. I believe I read that about 1/4 to 1/3 of Medicaid goes to pay for delivering babies to teenage and poor single moms who have no business having kids.
Joe the Plutocrat
September 23rd, 2011
1:48 pm
OK, one more time, and then I am leaving until music time. “entitlements” will NEVER BE CUT because they are “free money” for Big Pharm, Big Ag, Big Med, Big Bank, Big Energy, etc. the wealth is most certainly “redistributed” but not from taxpayers to the poor or the elderly, or the disabled. it merely flows through these human conduits until it ends up on the balance sheets of Wachovia/WellsFargo, Wal-Mart, Archer Daniel Midland, ExxonMobil, Pfizer, or Kaiser Permanente. You know, all these “producer/moocher” and tea party types might want to look at what hedge fund managers “produce” when they short stocks and cause a sell off, or what Wal-Mart, K-Mart or Target executives “produce” when they purchase the goods they sell from China, Nicaragua; and outsource administrative jobs (IT, customer support, accounting) to India, Ireland, Phillipines, etc.). And of course, my personal favorite, when the oligarchs start trading derivitives.
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
1:49 pm
“But TAX INCREASES are not going to get passed BEFORE the budget is fixed. Period”
Or I’m gonna stomp my feet and have a hissy fit.
md
September 23rd, 2011
1:49 pm
“Already happening md.”
No……we are still in the minor stage……..shoot, we have 90% employment.
Wait till that number hits 80, 70, 60……….then you’ll know we have made it to “major”…………
Jefferson
September 23rd, 2011
1:49 pm
SS needs will need funding in the near future, small tax hikes can secure it for years to come. Medicare suffers from providers greed, fraud and overcharges. Single payer health care can solve that problem, with no loss of quality.
Adam
September 23rd, 2011
1:50 pm
jm: But TAX INCREASES are not going to get passed BEFORE the budget is fixed. Period.
As long as you have the Republicans in office that you do, and the House is controlled by them, Tax increases will not pass no matter what. Our only real hope is that Republicans do not gain the House, Senate, AND Presidency. If they do, the Bush tax cuts will not expire. If they don’t, those tax cuts most certainly will expire because Obama will veto any extension.
jm
September 23rd, 2011
1:51 pm
Jay, furthermore, while polls are relevant, they only go so far.
First, that poll question places no context. Such as: “if you have to choose between tax increases and benefits cuts, how much of each?”
Second, while polls matter, running this country is about doing what’s RIGHT sometimes, not just what’s POPULAR. That’s why we have a problem. Empty suit Obama doesn’t have the guts to do what’s right.
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
1:51 pm
” believe I read that about 1/4 to 1/3 of Medicaid goes to pay for delivering babies to teenage and poor single moms who have no business having kids”
YEah, they should just have abortions
— seriously what IS your point?
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
1:52 pm
“will NEVER BE CUT because they are “free money” for Big Pharm, Big Ag, Big Med, Big Bank, Big Energy, etc. the wealth is most certainly “redistributed” but not from taxpayers to the poor or the elderly, or the disabled. it merely flows through these human conduits until it ends up on the balance sheets of Wachovia/WellsFargo, Wal-Mart, Archer Daniel Midland, ExxonMobil, Pfizer, or Kaiser Permanente.”
And Joe gets the gold star!
That is simply lost on our wingnut friends it seems.
Adam
September 23rd, 2011
1:53 pm
jm: Second, while polls matter, running this country is about doing what’s RIGHT sometimes, not just what’s POPULAR
Saved for the next time someone vilifies the ACA on the basis of poll numbers.
jm
September 23rd, 2011
1:53 pm
Its vegetable eating time. And Democrats don’t like vegetables.
Democrats really are the ELF Party. They have four major food groups:
1. Candy
2. Candy Canes
3. Candy Corn
4. Syrup
Aquagirl
September 23rd, 2011
1:54 pm
I read that about 1/4 to 1/3 of Medicaid goes to pay for delivering babies to teenage and poor single moms who have no business having kids.
How did they come by that statistic? Is there a box to check on hospital admission forms “I have no business having this kid?”
Adam
September 23rd, 2011
1:54 pm
Bosch: Have you heard the latest about the Wall Street Occupation? Me neither.
Have you heard the latest about the Tea Party? Me too.
Jay
September 23rd, 2011
1:54 pm
“I believe I read that about 1/4 to 1/3 of Medicaid goes to pay for delivering babies to teenage and poor single moms who have no business having kids.
That may be true, Real. On the other hand, do you think withdrawing Medicaid for that service will cause teenage kids to stop having sex and thus babies? Won’t they continue to have those babies and force us to pay some other way, probably some more expensive way?
I get your point, but I’m just not sure what better options exist.
Adam
September 23rd, 2011
1:54 pm
jm: And Democrats don’t like vegetables.
I heard McConnel and Boehner dont’ like to eat their peas
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
1:55 pm
Adam,
Yeah, that damn liberal media!
Wondrika
September 23rd, 2011
1:55 pm
Last night Gov. Perry was outed as a hypocrite on the entitlement issue. That feeble and disingenuous attempt to defend Texas’ policy of giving in-state university tuition to illegals finished off any chance he had of becoming President.
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
1:55 pm
“Is there a box to check on hospital admission forms “I have no business having this kid?”
Yeah, Aquagirl, it’s right next to the box you check for “I am here illegally and stealing money from taxypaers”
Aquagirl
September 23rd, 2011
1:56 pm
Oh, and never mind my 1:48. All the showering talk downstairs must have distracted me.
Jay
September 23rd, 2011
1:57 pm
Second, while polls matter, running this country is about doing what’s RIGHT sometimes, not just what’s POPULAR
Right, jm. Just trot on up to Washington and deliver that message to congressmen trying to win re-election , and while you’re at it swing by Austin to try to buck up Rick Perry. He probably needs a hug.
(ir)Rational
September 23rd, 2011
1:58 pm
Not sure why a poll that says this really surprises anyone. I don’t have any (yeah, I know, all conjecture) hard data to back this up, but I would be willing to wager that the proportion of the people that answered the poll are currently receiving benefits from one or more of the programs they were asking if they thought should be cut. Like I said, all conjecture, and I’m sure I’ll catch flak for that.
Bro – Didn’t get a chance to respond before Jay called sheets after I got back from lunch. Nice to know you can hit targets that well, but I was possibly giving you heck for missing one at 15 yards. I always try to be “green” when I go to the range and put the .45s through the same hole in the paper (you know, saves paper, and I can re-use the target that way).
Sold my pistols a couple of months ago, and haven’t been able to replace them yet, so I could be a bit rusty right now.
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
1:58 pm
“running this country is about doing what’s RIGHT sometimes, not just what’s POPULAR”
Didn’t Dumbledore say that?
md
September 23rd, 2011
1:58 pm
To cut down on that medicaid spending, let’s just use the education program already in place “No child left behind…….we’re going to tie that sucker around your neck for the next 20 years” so you best think about that before play time…………………..
Adam
September 23rd, 2011
1:59 pm
Bosch: Yeah, Aquagirl, it’s right next to the box you check for “I am here illegally and stealing money from taxypaers”
And the birth certificates have checkboxes for what religion the baby believes in and will believe in for life, and one for “Believes in American Exceptionalism.”
Aquagirl
September 23rd, 2011
1:59 pm
Didn’t Dumbledore say that?
Yeah, and look at what happened to him.
Good little liberal
September 23rd, 2011
1:59 pm
Interesting arguments by liberals.
We support people that live on increasing the size of the government, increasing entitlements and increasing the amount of control that the government has on every one of us, but . . .
The Republicans are sooooo wrong because they aren’t going to reduce what we support by nearly enough.
HUH?
So you know that what the democrats are doing is a disaster, but you still support them because Republicans aren’t different enough.
Leaving the asylum now.
Adam
September 23rd, 2011
2:01 pm
md: To cut down on that medicaid spending, let’s just use the education program already in place “No child left behind…….we’re going to tie that sucker around your neck for the next 20 years” so you best think about that before play time…
Yeah, THAT’LL cut down abortions….
md
September 23rd, 2011
2:02 pm
“That feeble and disingenuous attempt to defend Texas’ policy of giving in-state university tuition to illegals finished off any chance he had of becoming President.”
Hope so……..but doubtful. Don’t know what the masses see in that guy, but they already have the hots for him……so they won’t change their minds. probably thinking with the other brain…………..
(the real) Independent
September 23rd, 2011
2:03 pm
Women (and men) have no business getting pregnant if they cannot pay for the delivery of the baby and be able to support the child after it is born. An no, I am not talking abortion, I am talking being smart with contraception until you want and can afford a child.
Adam
September 23rd, 2011
2:03 pm
GLL appears to have completely missed the point. I know I am absolutely SHOCKED at this turn of events…..
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
2:03 pm
“Interesting arguments by liberals.
We support people that live on increasing the size of the government, increasing entitlements and increasing the amount of control that the government has on every one of us, but . . . ”
Libertarian,
There’s another one for our tally.
md
September 23rd, 2011
2:04 pm
“Yeah, THAT’LL cut down abortions….”
Folks remain uneducated on the subject, that stays the same regardless……………
Adam
September 23rd, 2011
2:04 pm
(the real) Independent : I am talking being smart with contraception until you want and can afford a child.
Glad you’re on board with government subsidized birth control and educational outreach programs.
(ir)Rational
September 23rd, 2011
2:05 pm
Independent – That’s why there are these neat little things called “adoption agencies.”
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
2:05 pm
” I am talking being smart with contraception until you want and can afford a child”
Yeah, because we all know that is so realistic
(ir)Rational
September 23rd, 2011
2:06 pm
Bosch – I was smart with it (still am, don’t want no little me’s running around, scary scary thought).
Adam
September 23rd, 2011
2:07 pm
Bosch @ 2:05: Close one that time!
(the real) Independent
September 23rd, 2011
2:08 pm
(ir)Rational – try to adopt out all the black babies born – or better yet older or medically challenged black youths. They are languishing in no-adoption land.
jm
September 23rd, 2011
2:08 pm
Jay
“swing by Austin to try to buck up Rick Perry. He probably needs a hug.”
jm
September 23rd, 2011
2:10 pm
http://www.politico.com/
The headline at top says it all….
Kamchak
September 23rd, 2011
2:11 pm
I was smart with it (still am, don’t want no little me’s running around, scary scary thought).
Just what the world needs — more Arsenal fans.
(ir)Rational
September 23rd, 2011
2:11 pm
What does it matter what race they’re born? Are you saying that they’re undesirable because they’re black? I tend to agree that people shouldn’t get pregnant unless they can afford it, but I am enough of a realist to know that just isn’t reasonable. There are enough people out there that want to have children that can’t, that should be matched up with people that are having children and don’t want them. Even if they shouldn’t have them, it all comes down to whether they want them or not. It isn’t the state’s responsibility or place to tell someone when they can stop having children.
Normal
September 23rd, 2011
2:11 pm
jm
September 23rd, 2011
2:10 pm
Thank God! Now let them work on a serious bill, instead of a Tea party bill.
(ir)Rational
September 23rd, 2011
2:12 pm
Kam – As opposed to Chelsea fans? Yeah, that’s JUST what the doctor ordered.
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
2:13 pm
I tell ya’ were gonna get irRational on our side yet.
Mick
September 23rd, 2011
2:13 pm
Let’s prioritize here: Fix social security by raising the cap – solved. Medicaid is the first to feel the ax, then medicare should be scrutinized for fraud then fixed..
(ir)Rational
September 23rd, 2011
2:14 pm
Besides that Kam, I’m completely bi(tri)-partisan on this issue. I like Arsenal, Barcelona and Bayern Munich. Really I like Arsenal, Lionel Messi and Bayern Munich, but that’s beside the point.
jm
September 23rd, 2011
2:15 pm
Normal – the Tea Party bill spends $1.5 billion more than they previously agreed to, in order to deal with disaster relief. All they’ve asked is that 1/2, HALF! of the disaster relief get paid for with spending cuts elsewhere.
Democrats are a joke.
(ir)Rational
September 23rd, 2011
2:15 pm
You watch your mouth Bosch. Things like that will get it washed out with soap for cursing.
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
2:16 pm
“I like Arsenal, Barcelona and Bayern Munich”
OMG, irRational is like my soccer doppleganger, but the Bosch house is English divided: Liverpool and Chelsea….
Joe Mama
September 23rd, 2011
2:16 pm
(ir)Rational — “Independent – That’s why there are these neat little things called “adoption agencies.”
Insufficient. There is a significant population of children who take *years* to adopt or who *never* get adopted; IIRC, the population of long-term eligible adoptees not adopted is in the neighborhood of 100K year-over-year.
(ir)Rational
September 23rd, 2011
2:17 pm
Liverpool AND Chelsea? That explains SOOOOO much.
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
2:17 pm
irRational,
Admit it, you agree with more of what we say than the wingnuts. Just saying.
Brosephus™ - Browning America Since 1973
September 23rd, 2011
2:17 pm
Neither party has the testicular fortitude to touch “entitlement” spending. Nothing will be done until the jackasses who are party loyal in DC are replaced with statesmen who are more concerned with the well being of the country as opposed to the well being of the party.
(ir)Rational
“green” target shooting!!! Dammitt, that’s a good one.
While at the academy, I tried to circle the center mass point and knock a hole out of the target when shooting center of mass. When working on head shots, my friends and I tried to put smiley faces on the target.
Lucifer
September 23rd, 2011
2:18 pm
Elizabeth Warren for Prez! At least she has it right; over the last decade the rich have gotten richer and there’s been no “trickle down” effect. Unemployment is high and so are the profits of the rich. And people like the Koch brothers want to thin out the ranks of the middle class even further, until they have all the money and the rest of us become their indentured servants. The Pubs are evildoers and the Tan Man, Cantor and McConnell are the henchmen for the wealthy. But, the bright side is, the chuckleheads running on the GOP ticket are nuts and Obama will win a second term. You heard it here first!
ragnar danneskjold
September 23rd, 2011
2:18 pm
You could raise entitlements if you would abolish all of the Federal regulators. The roaring economy could support increases.
(ir)Rational
September 23rd, 2011
2:18 pm
Joe – I realize that, but at the same time he is talking about people who shouldn’t have kids, as opposed to people who don’t want that. So even so, there isn’t really any reason to expect that these kids will even end up in the care of the state.
(the real) Independent
September 23rd, 2011
2:18 pm
I’M not saying that they are undesireable because they are black, the people doing the adopting are saying that. I am just pointing out that other than white, newborn babies of the desired sex, other children are harder to find adoptive parents for. Look it up.
Better to keep from having the babies in the first place. Especially if public money (Medicaid) is having to pay for the pregnancy and delivery.
Kamchak
September 23rd, 2011
2:19 pm
Yeah, that’s JUST what the doctor ordered.
I wish the doctor would order Drogba fit for play. I did notice that he was available to sub in Wed.’s Carling Cup game against Fulham.
Adam
September 23rd, 2011
2:20 pm
jm: All they’ve asked is that 1/2, HALF! of the disaster relief get paid for with spending cuts elsewhere.
DISASTER RELIEF SHOULD NOT BE PREDICATED ON CUTS.
Brosephus™ - Browning America Since 1973
September 23rd, 2011
2:20 pm
Admit it, you agree with more of what we say than the wingnuts. Just saying.
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
2:20 pm
“Elizabeth Warren for Prez”
I think she will be our first lady POTUS, in 2016 after Obama’s second term is over.
Granny Godzilla
September 23rd, 2011
2:21 pm
Bosch
I’d be on that bandwagon.
She’s marvelous.
(ir)Rational
September 23rd, 2011
2:22 pm
Bosch – (If there was a emoticon for me hanging my head in shame, it should be inserted here) Yeah.
Bro – Yeah, I made myself laugh with that one. I can’t do it with anything but a 1911 though. Those more modern sites don’t work as well for me. I’ll have to work on that idea of cutting out the circle next time I hit a range, smiley face too.
Normal
September 23rd, 2011
2:22 pm
jm,
Why would I want to support a party that would use American people, victims of disaster, hostage just to get their political way?
Has toe GOP and most especially the Tea Party, no heart? No “milk of human kindness” in their veins? They are sad, cruel people. If they want to pay for disaster relief, all they have to do is vote in a tax raise. Simple and done. As I see it, only personal greed stops them.
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
2:22 pm
Mrs. G.,
Yes, she is — she’s not afraid to tell it like it is, which is what lots of people want. She’ll be the next Senate Goddess.
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
2:23 pm
irRational,
“for me hanging my head in shame”
Because deep, deep down there somewhere in the back of your brain….you know I’m right.
Kamchak
September 23rd, 2011
2:24 pm
I think she will be our first lady POTUS, in 2016 after Obama’s second term is over.
That probably won’t happen as she is almost as polarizing as Ms. Clinton.
DebbieDoRight
September 23rd, 2011
2:24 pm
I believe I read that about 1/4 to 1/3 of Medicaid goes to pay for delivering babies to teenage and poor single moms who have no business having kids.
I have a solution. Show those poor teenag moms, etc., etc…..pictures of Rush Limbaugh naked and show those teenaged boys pictures of Karl Rove in panties, bra and garter. The sheer disgust should stop them in their tracks from even thinking about sex — possibly forever.
If that doesn’t work, you can always force them to watch hour after hour of Pat Robertson loosing what’s left of his mind on TV — or Anne Coulter eating food (which is so rare, pictures of it are ensconed in pages of National Geographic)
(the real) Independent
September 23rd, 2011
2:24 pm
(ir)Rational – it should be the State’s decision on whether or not to pay for a pregnancy. Just because a woman “wants” a child, doesn’t mean she should be able to get pregnant and have the rest of us pay for it. She can get pregnant, but she should have the baby on her own dime or naturally, and if she does not have the financial means to take care of the baby, it should be taken away from her.
Or just don’t have them at all.
BTW, I am white and my niece has two children that Medicaid paid to deliver (by a druggie dad), so this is not a black/white issue.
(ir)Rational
September 23rd, 2011
2:24 pm
Bosch – No, you’re left. I’m right, get it straight.
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
2:26 pm
Normal @ 2:22,
Here’s me kissing you (on each cheek of course, you know like dudes in Europe do) — and yes, I’m comfortable enough with myself to say that!
Adam
September 23rd, 2011
2:26 pm
if she does not have the financial means to take care of the baby, it should be taken away from her.
Government subsidized baby theft! Get the government out of deciding who can be a mother!
theyeshaveit
September 23rd, 2011
2:26 pm
Second, while polls matter, running this country is about doing what’s RIGHT sometimes, not just what’s POPULAR. That’s why we have a problem. Empty suit Obama doesn’t have the guts to do what’s right.
What is “right” is in the eye of the beholder. All I see from the comment above is that you are ON the right; not IN the right.
Jefferson
September 23rd, 2011
2:27 pm
Working folks pay for these programs, the GOP act like its payed with “their” money only.
Jay
September 23rd, 2011
2:27 pm
“If that doesn’t work, you can always force them to watch hour after hour of Pat Robertson loosing what’s left of his mind on TV — or Anne Coulter eating food (which is so rare, pictures of it are ensconed in pages of National Geographic)
I’m pretty sure those Coulter photos were photoshopped, Deb.
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
2:28 pm
“Just because a woman “wants” a child, doesn’t mean she should be able to get pregnant and have the rest of us pay for it.”
Oh, my freaking GOD! I did not just read that! My eyes!! MY eyes!!!
(ir)Rational
September 23rd, 2011
2:28 pm
Independent – It isn’t the state’s decision, just like it isn’t your decision. They implemented a health insurance system (medicaid), and because of this, they pay for medical care for the people like your niece. Last I checked, getting pregnant, while not the best idea in the world, is a medical condition, that left untreated can be life threatening. Would you rather all these teenage mothers died instead of helping them give birth safely?
Normal
September 23rd, 2011
2:29 pm
Bosch,
It’s OK…I carry a European “man Bag” too. So…Kiss, kiss
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
2:29 pm
irRational @ 2:24,
Admit it, you have actually thought about this and having denial issues, no?
Kamchak
September 23rd, 2011
2:29 pm
Working folks pay for these programs, the GOP act like its payed with “their” money only.
Cue the “But…but…but… 50% pay no taxes at all!” poutrage in 3…2…1….
Adam
September 23rd, 2011
2:30 pm
I just listened to a conservative radio clip and a dude HUNG UP when asked by the conservative radio host that he had to make up his mind, who is it gonna be, Perry or Romney?
theyeshaveit
September 23rd, 2011
2:30 pm
Bosch,
Elizabeth Warren impresses me as well.
Doggone/GA
September 23rd, 2011
2:30 pm
“if she does not have the financial means to take care of the baby, it should be taken away from her”
and what, pray tell, is the difference between “us” (the taxpayers) helping a mother to support her child when her funds are not adequate, and “us” (the taxpayers) supporting that same child in another (foster care) home? Either way, we pay.
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
2:31 pm
Kamchak,
I don’t think so — I think more people like just the honest to God truth and she is smart and can counter the stoopid with quickness and I think alot of people will be able to relate to what she has to say.
Adam
September 23rd, 2011
2:31 pm
Kamchak: And they always ignore this article I keep posting regarding the 50% false number:
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3505
Kamchak
September 23rd, 2011
2:32 pm
…who is it gonna be, Perry or Romney?
Perry — in a landslide.
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
2:32 pm
“if she does not have the financial means to take care of the baby, it should be taken away from her”
Oh, my freaking GOD! I did not just read that! My eyes!! MY eyes!!!
SERIOUSLY? TAKE THE BABY AWAY IF SHE CAN’T AFFORD IT? GOOD GOD!!!
Normal
September 23rd, 2011
2:32 pm
Bosch,
Is Elizabeth replacing Olympia in your heart?
Aquagirl
September 23rd, 2011
2:33 pm
Would you rather all these teenage mothers died instead of helping them give birth safely?
For god’s sake, don’t ask this at a Republican debate.
Brosephus™ - Browning America Since 1973
September 23rd, 2011
2:33 pm
(the real) Independent
What you’re saying is all fine and good, but your words fall on deaf ears within the borders of the US. People argued over cutting funding to PP because of abortion, when 97% of their services were geared in areas that would help educate people and try to limit pregnacy before conception. There’s a significant voter block that does not want sex ed taught in school. If you don’t teach it at home and don’t want it taught at school, you can not expect kids to learn it from the streets. If we want any significant positive change in pregnacy rates and such, we’ve got to confront our own prudish beliefs in sex ed first.
Adam
September 23rd, 2011
2:33 pm
Kamchak: Well, this guys tarted by saying he hopes Christie gets in. And another guy called and said “between Perry and Romney I’m gonna vote for Ron Paul.”
No one can make up their minds.
(ir)Rational
September 23rd, 2011
2:33 pm
Bosch – I’m not in denial. I’m secure in my manhood. But yeah, I am becoming more liberal socially. Honestly, I’m more in the “get the government out of my life group.” But not quite there enough to truly celebrate the 5th of November.
DebbieDoRight
September 23rd, 2011
2:34 pm
and if she does not have the financial means to take care of the baby, it should be taken away from her.
Then you’ll have another problem – lots of kids in orphanages. That’s not a solution.
Petie
September 23rd, 2011
2:34 pm
The real truth is that anyone who says Social Security must be cut is only looking to bow out of the government’s obligation to pay back OUR money borrowed from the Trust Fund. OUR money did not contribute one damn dime to the deficit. As for Medicare, we pay into it all our working lives and it has done a better job of controlling costs than any of the high-profit insurers ever will. Cutting Medicare will not fix the out of control spending on healthcare but it will cripple older Americans on fixed incomes. Medicaid is a middle class program – it saves children, the disabled and elderly from being tossed out on the street or dying from lack of access to care. It’s time for this writer and others to stop blaming the programs that actually help to keep our country strong.
Trotsky Foxtrot
September 23rd, 2011
2:34 pm
If you truly believe that the national debt is a serious threat, you have an obligation to quit the nonsense and get serious about politically realistic avenues for addressing it. Otherwise you’re contributing to the problem that you claim to abhor.
But what if claiming to abhor the deficit is a useful way for your party to bully your opponents and muscle through a radical agenda with short-term benefits for a narrow band of lucky cronies, come what may in the long term?
getalife
September 23rd, 2011
2:34 pm
Scaring our Seniors for the billionaires is ridiculous
What is wrong with you cons?
Way out of touch with reality.
Wake up cons.
Butch Cassidy
September 23rd, 2011
2:35 pm
So the Democrats who will vote for Obama anyway are totally against the cuts. The independents who need to be convinced that the GOP really is for the people are totally against it. and a large majority of the GOP are against it. This leaves only raising revenues. Sooooo……where does the GOP spin now?
Doggone/GA
September 23rd, 2011
2:36 pm
“So the Democrats who will vote for Obama anyway are totally against the cuts”
Another con with a fuzzy crystal ball. How about some quotes to back that up?
Adam
September 23rd, 2011
2:36 pm
(ir)Rational: But not quite there enough to truly celebrate the 5th of November.
Love the reference. Glad to know you recognize that this continued “get government out” cry is leading straight to making anarchists
(the real) Independent
September 23rd, 2011
2:36 pm
For (hundred’s of )thousands of years, women have been giving birth without the benefit of a hospital. How about this, set up clinics next door to hospitals where these women can give birth on their own, if an emergency arises, she can be wheeled next door. No pain meds, though.
Also, how about reducing the benefits that accrue to women who have babies. I thought that went out with Clintons “end welfare as we know it”, but then I got a look at the EITC.
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
2:37 pm
Normal,
Yes, especially after Olympia’s press release yesterday….it just didn’t do me well.
theyeshaveit
September 23rd, 2011
2:38 pm
By the way…
Out of 45 so called industrialized nations, guess which is the only one without a national health insurance plan?
Hmmm.
mm
September 23rd, 2011
2:39 pm
“Empty suit Obama doesn’t have the guts to do what’s right.”
Obama has veered to the right on almost every contentious bill. I believe Boner said he got 98% of what he wanted on the debt ceiling debate. Yet the righties still claim Obama is a socialist. It’s time for some psychiatirc evaluations for the righties.
Well, it looks like Boner has to let go of the “pay for” BS and do the right thing for FEMA.
Doggone/GA
September 23rd, 2011
2:39 pm
“For (hundred’s of )thousands of years, women have been giving birth without the benefit of a hospital”
And for millions of years women have been dying in childbirth. Well, that would be ONE way to reduce the “surplus” population, wouldn’t it?
Paul
September 23rd, 2011
2:39 pm
So that’s why, whenever I asked some of the bloggers how they’d balance the budget without addressing taxes they wouldn’t answer. They were suffering from SBCS (Sound Bite Conflict Syndrome).
Poll does seem to suggest this is a case of ‘let the wealthy pay” (raising the SS cutofff). But even that does not appear to be necessary (given the information on recalculation the inflation index) unless people just want to provide more revenue for the gov’t to ‘borrow’ for general fund purposes.
This appears to be a case of ‘everyone give a little, we all win.’ Seniors get a recalc on the inflation adjustment. Nonretirees see the age upped a bit. Really, really, really rich people (not those making $110k a year) pay a few points more. Do the bargain all at the same time.
And hope the diehards on the Left and the Right on the Debt Commission get some quick therapy to deal with their SBCS.
Steve - USA
September 23rd, 2011
2:41 pm
The Dems had total control for 2 years but they didn’t touch entitlements.
I don’t blame them because it is just misplaced anger to blame the Democrats or the Republicans when it is the American people. We all want sacrifice as long it is someone else doing it.
NFMW – “Not From My Wallet”
(ir)Rational
September 23rd, 2011
2:41 pm
Aquagirl – I try to avoid debates. I know that, with few exceptions, they’re not going to say anything they actually believe. Just what they think that audience wants to hear.
Bro – No no, PP only wants to kill babies, not educate others about not having them (see Bosch, I can still pull it out occasionally). Oh, and about the “prudish beliefs” in regard to sex ed, I bet (and I’m fairly certain the numbers actually support my conjecture on this one) the more religious and rural an area is, the higher the teenage pregnancy rate is per capita.
out of the blue
September 23rd, 2011
2:41 pm
The word “entitlements” offend me! Entitlents are freebies. I believe most people have Earned their Social Security.
Brosephus™ - Soundbite Rhetoric, I put that s**t on everything!!
September 23rd, 2011
2:42 pm
They were suffering from SBCS (Sound Bite Conflict Syndrome).
If we had single payer, we could probably get it under control much faster.
Kamchak
September 23rd, 2011
2:42 pm
Bosch — Ms. Clinton is the smartest woman in politics, yet she makes the opposition uncomfortable with her intelligence. Same with Ms. Warren. I agree, Ms. Warren would make a fine POTUS, I just don’t see it happening. The first woman POTUS will be someone like Kay Baily Hutchison.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Adam — I can accept the Half truth of the poutrage, IF THEY WOULD JUST SAY “INCOME TAXES”.
But they continue to repeat the “50% pay no taxes at all” soundbite they have been programmed to say.
Oh, and CBPP? That bunch of liberals?
Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)
September 23rd, 2011
2:43 pm
You fail to mention Social Security has a $2.6 trillion dollar surplus and will be able to pay 100% of benefits for the next 26 years…
Well, Bookman needs to do a better job of picking these newcomers to this blog.
Sure, there’s a big SS surplus on paper. But we borrowed and spent it all. And the fact is, we don’t want to pay it back because that would cost alot of money we don’t have. So what we need to do is, find some way where we don’t spend so much money paying for SS checks so we don’t have to pay what we borrowed back. Same thing goes for Medicare.
Sheesh! I’m sick of explaining all this to newcomers. We all know this stuff, but people new to this blog need to be edumacated all over again.
Peadawg
September 23rd, 2011
2:43 pm
So basically people who are using Medicare, SS, and other entitlements don’t want them cut and want the rich to pay for them. Yup…we’re screwed.
When, and ONLY when, we cut entitlements, raise taxes, and cut military spending will we start to bring down our debt. Some people are just too dumb to realize that.
mm
September 23rd, 2011
2:43 pm
Lift the cap on payroll taxes and SS is good forever.
We spend 3 times more on miliary spending than the #2 country (China). Cut military spending and Medicare is no longer a problem either.
Adam
September 23rd, 2011
2:43 pm
The Dems had total control for 2 years
Republicans: Never let a good lie die!
Doggone/GA
September 23rd, 2011
2:44 pm
“The word “entitlements” offend me!”
It’s meant to. It’s meant to cloud the fact that we PAY for SS & Medicare. It’s something like businesses that sue to get out of their obligations to retirees. They cloud the issue by claiming it’s their money when it isn’t. It is the RETIREES money – part of their deferred wages, but the courts seem to fall for the false argument everytime.
(ir)Rational
September 23rd, 2011
2:44 pm
Adam – On a completely academic level, I can’t help but love and admire what he tried to do (recognizing that he went about it in the completely wrong way, and that had he succeeded, he would have managed to only create a younger version of the same problem). On a realistic level, I understand that that is the only logical conclusion to where people are pushing, and I can’t support that.
DebbieDoRight
September 23rd, 2011
2:44 pm
If we want any significant positive change in pregnacy rates and such, we’ve got to confront our own prudish beliefs in sex ed first.
I read somehwere, can’t remember where, that sex ed is taught in classes in Europe, (wich results in a lower teen pregnancy rate than America), as well as Europeans have a more open view of sex than Americans, in regards to your prudish statement. It seems that all of our “prudishness” is only holding back our children’s progress and leaving a hole in our economy; because the old adage “pay me now or pay me later” comes to mind when you talk about teenaged pregnancies and the children born of said pregnancies. Either way, like Doggone said, the tab is going to be picked up by someone — if the kid is from a poor household, that someone is the public.
Adam
September 23rd, 2011
2:44 pm
Kamchak: Oh, and CBPP? That bunch of liberals?
I don’t even get THAT much from them when I post it.
Trotsky Foxtrot
September 23rd, 2011
2:45 pm
Steve – USA : “We all want sacrifice as long it is someone else doing it.”
Wrong. The only people who want sacrifice generally speaking are the wealthy ruling elite, who want greater and greater sacrifice from everyone else and none for themselves. They and their ghoulish political allies — mostly but not exclusively in the Republican party — are busy privatizing profit and socializing risk by shifting it onto the backs of the working classes.
(ir)Rational
September 23rd, 2011
2:45 pm
Independent – Would that be because they couldn’t afford hospitals and doctors or because they didn’t have access to them?
JohnnyReb
September 23rd, 2011
2:46 pm
No time to read 3 pages of posts, so this may be a duplicate.
The poll question(s) are just like Mediscare. The question was too broad. The proper question is – do you favor keeping SS and Medicare as-is for people 50 and older, but revising benefits to address the deficit for those younger?
Joe Mama
September 23rd, 2011
2:46 pm
R. Danneskjold — “You could raise entitlements if you would abolish all of the Federal regulators. The roaring economy could support increases.”
Here’s what happens when you don’t have Federal regulations or they aren’t enforced aggressively.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triangle_Shirtwaist_Factory_fire
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Georgia_sugar_refinery_explosion
Kamchak
September 23rd, 2011
2:47 pm
Kamchak: Well, this guys tarted by saying he hopes Christie gets in. And another guy called and said “between Perry and Romney I’m gonna vote for Ron Paul.”
Neither Christie’s nor Ron Paul’s name is gonna be on the primary ballot.
Butch Cassidy
September 23rd, 2011
2:47 pm
Doggone/GA – “Another con with a fuzzy crystal ball. How about some quotes to back that up?”
Except that I’m not a con. The charts above clearly show that everyone who votes, whether DEM, IND or GOP are overwhelmingly against the cut side, and Jay has pointed out that they are definitely in favor of the revenue side. My question isn’t partisan or irrelevant. Since the GOP continues to claim that they speak for Americans, I was merely wondering which tac they will take now.
Adam
September 23rd, 2011
2:48 pm
Kamchak: Neither Christie’s nor Ron Paul’s name is gonna be on the primary ballot
Exactly. But primary voters are CONFUSED.
Richard
September 23rd, 2011
2:48 pm
Actually, I agree here. Repubs should trade defense spending for entitlement reform. It’s a nice compromise and the real winners there are the taxpayers. However,
“When asked to choose between tax increases on the top 2 percent of income earners or cuts to Social Security and Medicare as a way to reduce the deficit, 94 percent of Democrats, 82 percent of independents, and 64 percent of Republicans prefer tax increase on the top 2 percent of income earners.”
This statement is totally flawed. Of course people would rather tax the rich, a tax that wouldn’t touch 98% of Americans, than cut programs that they use. The problem with the statement is that it is presented as a choice between something that will marginally help the deficit (unless Obama blows it all on more stimulus) and something that must be done to keep from burying ourselves in debt. It may be that both things will need to happen. Time will tell.
(the real) Independent
September 23rd, 2011
2:49 pm
Sure, there’s a big SS surplus on paper. But we borrowed and spent it all.
We also borrowed all this money from Americans (savings bonds and Treasury Bonds) and all that money from overseas investors (and spent it all). Do we want to default on that debt, too, like you are talking about defaulting on the money owed to Social Security?
Brosephus™ - Browning America Since 1973
September 23rd, 2011
2:49 pm
(ir)Rational
If numbers proved your theory on rural areas as true, it would not surprise me one bit. I know what the weekend entertainment was when I was growing up, and there wasn’t much to do other than park your car on a deserted street/empty park. There’s still not much to do entertainment wise at home, so I seriously doubt things have dramatically changed.
Steve - USA
September 23rd, 2011
2:49 pm
Trotsky – Why do you continue to act like there is no wealthy Democrats, No Corporations owned by Democrats and that Democrats don’t take corporate donations.
I know you are smarter than that, so why do you say it?
jm
September 23rd, 2011
2:50 pm
Americans also oppose tax increases, in poll after poll. So there. I guess we do nothing Jay and just watch it all blow up.
DebbieDoRight
September 23rd, 2011
2:50 pm
So basically people who are using Medicare, SS, and other entitlements don’t want them cut and want the rich to pay for them.
WTF?!
Brosephus™ - Browning America Since 1973
September 23rd, 2011
2:51 pm
I guess we do nothing Jay and just watch it all blow up
Isn’t that was many of your fellow conservatives were cheering for in mid 2010? I distinctly remember many a conservative cheering for obstruction and gridlock in DC. You get what you ask for, even when you really don’t want it.
Paul
September 23rd, 2011
2:52 pm
Can someone please tell me what I’m missing?
We have a budget deficit for 2011 of $1.3 trillion.
SS has enough to pay at current levels for a while now.
SS is funded thru a separate revenue stream than the rest of the federal budget.
Why does SS have to be cut to balance next year’s budget?
Joe Mama
September 23rd, 2011
2:53 pm
Aquagirl — “For god’s sake, don’t ask this at a Republican debate.”
Wrong. ASK IT.
I want to know what they say.
(the real) Independent
September 23rd, 2011
2:54 pm
“and what, pray tell, is the difference between “us” (the taxpayers) helping a mother to support her child when her funds are not adequate, and “us” (the taxpayers) supporting that same child in another (foster care) home? Either way, we pay.”
If we take the children away from these moms, then other women may be dissuaded from getting pregnant.
Adam
September 23rd, 2011
2:54 pm
jm: Americans also oppose tax increases, in poll after poll
Pants on Fire! Seriously, why do you do this to yourself?
Brosephus™ - Browning America Since 1973
September 23rd, 2011
2:56 pm
Why does SS have to be cut to balance next year’s budget?
Because the GOP had a mandate from the Tea Party to do it!!! Besides, do you really expect the GOP to say that defense needs to be cut, when that’s where most of taxpayer’s money really goes. SS has it’s own separate income stream, unlike defense spending.
Ronnie Raygun
September 23rd, 2011
2:57 pm
Why cut SS and medicare? Americans actually PAY into these systems. If you want to start cutting real entitlements, let’s start with the gold plated military retirement entitlements which is entirely paid for by U.S. taxpayers. Where else can you draw retirement pay from age 37 until death? What a scam on taxpayers.
out of the blue
September 23rd, 2011
2:57 pm
That may be true, Real. On the other hand, do you think withdrawing Medicaid for that service will cause teenage kids to stop having sex and thus babies?
Jay……But, but Rick Perry says abstinence works! Big Smiley emoticon…..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngiJhmoFKkw
Doggone/GA
September 23rd, 2011
2:59 pm
“If we take the children away from these moms, then other women may be dissuaded from getting pregnant”
Uh huh. And the death penalty has prevented all future murders too. I think I want whatever it is you’re taking.
Paul
September 23rd, 2011
2:59 pm
Brosephus
Sounds about right. But the fact ten minutes has gone by and no one from the Right can answer such a simple, non trick question tells me it’s more mantra than anything.
Steve - USA
September 23rd, 2011
3:00 pm
Adam@2:54
That has to be the most absurd polls I have ever seen. Why not just ask “Do you support more taxes for people that make more than you”
That response was just sad, I actually feel sorry for you.
Please tell me that was a joke.
Adam
September 23rd, 2011
3:02 pm
Steve: He didn’t say “do you support your own taxes being raised” was the question, but said people don’t support raising taxes, poll after poll. This is not true. But hey, move the goal posts if you want.
Trotsky Foxtrot
September 23rd, 2011
3:02 pm
Steve: “Why do you continue to act like there is no wealthy Democrats, No Corporations owned by Democrats and that Democrats don’t take corporate donations.”
That’s exactly why I specifically stated “mostly but not exclusively in the Republican jparty”. Of course I’m aware that the Democratic party has been a party of big finance and considering that the Republican party has been taken over by a Tea Party junta, we could be about to see the Democratic party become THE dominant party of big finance (because make no mistake, the Tea Party are wild-eyed extremists whose childish anti-debt positions, if pursued to the end, will land you in an anti-capitalist posture, and the financial markets know it — see Standard & Poor’s downgrade). If the extremist Tea Party faction succeeds in permanently taking over the GOP, then we’ll see a further a bigger swing in big money/finance interests flocking to the Democrats.
So believe me, I’m under NO illusions about the purity or righteousness of the Democratic party.
Brosephus™ - Browning America Since 1973
September 23rd, 2011
3:04 pm
Paul
How many of your non-trick questions have been answered honestly and truthfully? I think you have a much better chance of training a frog not to bump it’s ass everytime it hops as opposed to getting an actual honest answer from any of those questions.
Steve - USA
September 23rd, 2011
3:04 pm
Adam – The questions in your poll was a joke.
I am guessing that you don’t own a home. Every time property taxes go up the entire County goes crazy. Not just Republicans…EVERYBODY.
Trotsky Foxtrot
September 23rd, 2011
3:06 pm
jm: “Americans also oppose tax increases, in poll after poll. So there. I guess we do nothing Jay and just watch it all blow up.”
The notion that Americans oppose tax increases is a Republican fable, and it’s a lie by exclusion.
What Americans opposed is tax increases on the middle classes but what they most wholeheartedly support is tax increases on the top income brackets.
Jefferson
September 23rd, 2011
3:06 pm
Ronnie, my main !!! Testify bro…
Paul
September 23rd, 2011
3:07 pm
Brosephus
Sadly, very few.
Makes me want to ask, “my gosh, people, don’t ever think about what you hear before you repeat it as the gospel truth?”
jm
September 23rd, 2011
3:07 pm
Jay. Here’s a better resource.
mericans Blame Wasteful Government Spending for Deficit
Prefer cutting spending over raising taxes as way for Congress to reduce deficit
by Frank Newport
PRINCETON, NJ — The large majority of Americans say spending too much money on unneeded or wasteful federal programs is to blame for the federal budget deficit, while 22% say the deficit is a consequence of not raising enough in taxes to pay for needed programs.
April 2011: Which do you think is more to blame for the federal budget deficit — spending too much money on federal programs that are either not needed or wasteful, or not raising enough money in taxes to pay for needed federal programs?
http://www.gallup.com/poll/147338/americans-blame-wasteful-government-spending-deficit.aspx
Doggone/GA
September 23rd, 2011
3:07 pm
“training a frog not to bump it’s ass everytime it hops ”
Well, we could always have fun with this bit of homely wisdom! Because it’s sort of like falling off a cliff. It’s not the fall that kills you, it’s the sudden stop at the end. A frog doesn’t “bump his ass” when he hops, he bumps it when he LANDS!
Steve - USA
September 23rd, 2011
3:07 pm
Here is a question, how many people thought Adams poll @2:54 should be taken seriously?
Trotsky Foxtrot
September 23rd, 2011
3:07 pm
jm, what Americans cheerfully support are greater taxes on the wealthy — and they’re going to get them.
jm
September 23rd, 2011
3:08 pm
Bro 2:51 – I never advocated for gridlock.
Jay is just wrong time after time. Adam doesn’t know who posted what and has a reading problem. Poor souls…..
jm
September 23rd, 2011
3:09 pm
Only 22% say the government doesn’t get enough revenue. 73% say it spends to much.
Chew on that Jay.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/147338/americans-blame-wasteful-government-spending-deficit.aspx
jm
September 23rd, 2011
3:09 pm
Trotsky in your dreams
St Simons - we're on Island time
September 23rd, 2011
3:10 pm
Medicare for All – solved
Eliminate 90K FICA tax cap – solved
Everybody knows it. Keep standing in the way of Progress & solving problems, fringe cons. Demographics and disgust are about to wash you away like a wave from a nor-easter.
then we can move on to really hard questions like –
When that 1st guy, that set that 1st clock, the very 1st time – how did HE know what time it was?
and for the cons, lets eliminate some regulations –
OK, remove that warning on toddlers tylenol that says “Do Not Operate heavy machinery”
If a cop arrests a mime, he does NOT have to say “you have the right to remain silent”
We can hopefully remove the Braille from the Drive-thru ATMs
Steve - USA
September 23rd, 2011
3:10 pm
Trotsky – For what it is worth I support those taxes on the wealthy.
jm
September 23rd, 2011
3:11 pm
Liberals hate facts….
Kamchak
September 23rd, 2011
3:11 pm
Here is a question, how many people thought Adams poll @2:54 should be taken seriously?
Here’s a question, when are you gonna quit deflecting and address the fact that you moved the goalpost?
(the real) Independent
September 23rd, 2011
3:11 pm
“Uh huh. And the death penalty has prevented all future murders too. I think I want whatever it is you’re taking.”
If we had a death penalty (applied rigorously, timely, and commonly), I believe it would prevent SOME murders, anyway. Such as those from robberies involving guns. Criminals might be too scared to bring a gun.
jm
September 23rd, 2011
3:11 pm
Adam. read this
http://www.gallup.com/poll/147338/americans-blame-wasteful-government-spending-deficit.aspx
Peter
September 23rd, 2011
3:11 pm
Some of the funniest stuff was seen on the debate last night was how all were going to redo an entire department of the Government.
All that said, Obama promised allot, similar to that malarkey, and really I am still waiting.
I do have to say another Failed Bush policy, that the GOP wants gone is “No Child Left Behind”… of course it was never funded, but it did cause allot of the testing issues we have today.
When Bush invaded Iraq, and never had a plan to pay for it….the entire generation was left behind, via having to pay for his War Bill.
Obama may not have that much going for him, as the GOP fights him so the country can fail……….but wow the choices they have ….I don’t think they will beat Obama.
jm
September 23rd, 2011
3:12 pm
Kamchak read this (I know the hole in the ground is preferable, but consider it)
http://www.gallup.com/poll/147338/americans-blame-wasteful-government-spending-deficit.aspx
Brosephus™ - Browning America Since 1973
September 23rd, 2011
3:14 pm
Paul
It’s far easier to demonize others instead of confronting your own internal demons.
Doggone
My only retort for that gem of intelligent brilliance is, if the frog never hops, does he ever land?
Jay
September 23rd, 2011
3:14 pm
Sure jm. If you let the American people believe they can solve the debt problem by “cutting wasteful spending”, then of course they will take that option.
But you know better and I know better. Any honest look at the problem — see the list of “untouchable” programs above — will quickly tell you that cuts of the magnitude required are not possible without entitlement cuts. When you ask them THAT — when the question moves from the theoretical and rhetorical to the real life issue of where those cuts come from — everything changes.
Just ask Rick Perry.
(ir)Rational
September 23rd, 2011
3:16 pm
Adam – I couldn’t take your poll seriously because Steve told me not to.
Really because I didn’t see any source info for who they polled or anything like that. Just a tiny picture. For all I know, that was an office poll.
Joe Mama
September 23rd, 2011
3:16 pm
jm — “Liberals hate facts…. ”
No, we just hate how y’all try to use them. Often, you can’t, won’t or just plain don’t produce any evidence to support your claims. And often, even when you *do* produce some support, it doesn’t say what y’all claimed it did.
Finally, some of y’all have a bad habit of misrepresenting what you *do* present. Doom lambasted Nancy Pelosi a couple of weeks ago for “cherrypicking” and claimed that Politifact had called something she had said “false” when they had called it “half true” — then Doom turned right around and posted as supporting evidence something that he even *admitted* was cherrypicking.
If y’all had a better track record of honesty and presenting supporting facts rather than saying stuff like ‘look it up yourselves,’ then I think you’d find that we all would get along a whole lot better.
Thomas
September 23rd, 2011
3:18 pm
The liberal game is to get 51% of folks to have a) a tax federal tax refund or b) pay no federal taxes. End of story. Very close to completion by the way.
I love the agenda of states need money but the WH plan does away with muni interest tax exemption.
“Specifically, the bill would cap the value of the tax exemption for high-income
investors at 28%. This change would, in our view, increase state and local borrowing
costs significantly, and for the first time, create a retroactive change to tax
exemption.
While this provision is unlikely to be enacted in its current form, it cannot be ignored,
because it could come back again as deficit reduction and/or tax reform moves
forward.
Ironically, one of the purported reasons for this change is to pay for an Infrastructure
Bank, a less effective way to support state and local financing than the muni market
itself.
A key problem for supporters of tax-exempt financing is that the cost of such
financing to the Treasury is consistently overstated. A recent study in the National
Tax Journal explains why”
utter madness
jm
September 23rd, 2011
3:18 pm
Jay 3:14 – yes, I acknowledge obviously something has to be done about entitlements.
Point is, if one governed purely by the polls, we’d be in big trouble. Ask Mitch Daniels.
(ir)Rational
September 23rd, 2011
3:20 pm
Independent – Criminals might be scared? Is that because they respect the law so much?
And I see we’ve moved the bar (dag-nab-it, I am starting to sound like Bosch) from preventing things to preventing some things maybe.
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
3:20 pm
“I think I want whatever it is you’re taking”
Doggone,
I don’t, because it obviously makes the taker retarded.
Kamchak
September 23rd, 2011
3:20 pm
Kamchak read this (I know the hole in the ground is preferable, but consider it)
So — one poll is now equal to — how did you put it? — …in poll after poll.
Congrats, you’ve just mounted that goalpost on Tony Pedregon’s funny car.
jm
September 23rd, 2011
3:20 pm
Yes thomas, it is.
Jefferson
September 23rd, 2011
3:21 pm
For some that know it all , they sure are unhappy with it all…you would think they would have it going their way.
Ayn Rant
September 23rd, 2011
3:21 pm
Great article, Jay! Compared to the social services of other developed countries, the US federal “entitlements” offer paltry benefits. But it’s nonsense to say that the US cannot afford barebones pensions and medical coverage for our elderly. We are not a poor nation, just a badly managed nation with poorly distributed wealth.
The “problem” with Social Security is political posturing, not reality. The program is self-sustaining into the near future, and can easily be “fixed” far into the future by lifting the cap on payroll taxes. Why shouldn’t the overpaid, under-performing Big Business executives pay the same rate as their low-wage employees?
The problem with Medicare is that US medical care in general is unsustainable. Even if medical care for the elderly was paid directly by sons, daughters, and grandchildren, instead of Medicare, it would be unsustainable. The solution to the Medicare problem is to fix US health care. Since we can’t seem to do that for ourselves, let’s just contract the management of the medical mess to the British or French medical services!
It would be a good idea to “cap” both Social Security and Medicare at a fixed percentage of gross national income so that the elderly bear some of consequences of their bad parenting skills and foolish political choices.
Jay
September 23rd, 2011
3:22 pm
The liberal game is to get 51% of folks to have a) a tax federal tax refund or b) pay no federal taxes. End of story. Very close to completion by the way.
Of course, the fact that so many lower-income Americans pay no federal INCOME tax (they do pay significant payroll taxes) has been driven largely by the earned income tax credit (a GOP idea enacted under Ford and expanded under Reagan, Bush I and Bush II) and the Bush II tax cuts.
But hey, never let reality interfere with a good emotional rant, right?
(ir)Rational
September 23rd, 2011
3:24 pm
That’s right Jay! Thanks for your permission.
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
3:24 pm
“dag-nab-it, I am starting to sound like Bosch”
irRational,
See? You will soon see the light.
(ir)Rational
September 23rd, 2011
3:25 pm
I’ve been taught to run away from the light (especially in train tunnels).
Kamchak
September 23rd, 2011
3:26 pm
Of course, the fact that so many lower-income Americans pay no federal INCOME tax (they do pay significant payroll taxes)
Not to mention federal excise taxes.
John Birch
September 23rd, 2011
3:27 pm
First force all government employees to have the same pension and health care plans the rest of us have. Second cut all the bridge to nowhere pork out. Third, if entitlements are to be cut then the funding for them should be considered a tax with no relationship with the theoretical future benefit so….eliminate the $106,000 cap on SS tax. Fourth, cut everything left 5% a year every year until the budget is balanced.
Mick
September 23rd, 2011
3:28 pm
jm
Don’t you get it? Americans love their social security, fix it move on and in a couple of more decades you’ll be loving it too. Medicare and medicaid are more complex and they definately have to be addressed. The absolute wrong solution would be the ryan plan which is just another tax cut giveaway, enough of that b.s. already!!
Trotsky Foxtrot
September 23rd, 2011
3:28 pm
Thomas: “The liberal game is to get 51% of folks to have a) a tax federal tax refund or b) pay no federal taxes. End of story. Very close to completion by the way.”
What’s a “liberal” game ? I really don’t know what that word means. Please explain.
George P. Burdell
September 23rd, 2011
3:28 pm
We will end up fixing the SS and Medicare debacle like we always do, by working over the middle class. There will be talk about raising retirement age, raising the tax, taxing higher than the current minimum, and means testing. The thing that won’t be mentioned is that we will also probably have to print dollars and try to find a way to make sure that the inflation from the printed dollars does not work its way into the calculation of benefits. Any way you slice it, the poor are going to be taken care of beyond what they put into the system. The rich aren’t depending upon it in the first place even if they never get a dime. That leaves the good old middle class to basically make up the difference between what they probably deserve from the system and what has to be paid out to help the poor. There simply is not enough money in the top brackets to make up for the shortfalls on the low end. The people that will really be mistreated are the above average middle class that have the audactiy to pay their 15% of wages in and are responsbile enough to also save for their own retirement. If you are in your 30s or 40s now and are saving for retirement, if you are successful in meeting that goal, you can forget getting any significant contribution from SS. Herein lies the danger in using polls to guide public policy. I bet something like 90% of Americans believe they work harder than the average American and 95% believe they deserve to be able to retire whether they save or not. 100% of us will be sinking on the same boat but lets not worry about that, we’ll just keep believing Marley when he sang “Everything is gonna be alright”.
(ir)Rational
September 23rd, 2011
3:29 pm
I could get behind that idea John Birch.
too little time
September 23rd, 2011
3:30 pm
Sad to say, you are on the money here, Jay. Everyone in this country who is older than 40 or 45 (and especially those close to 55) has had their money taken by the Feds for their entire working lives.
Now they are told by Republicans that its a Ponzi scheme (Perry) or that we need to gut Medicare for those under 55 (Ryan), and a legion of Republicans say they are behind the push. But you know what? Those programs have already stolen billions… if not trillions… from people.
Your average 54 year old who has made an average $50k per year (i.e. PURE middle class, no “wealthy” here) has paid $285,000 actual dollars into the system. Had that same person been able to save that money at a modest 5% interest rate, he would have about $770,000, and would be set for a decent retirement. The average person will never get his original contributions back.
Raising a family on $50k per year, it is simply not possible for that person to save much more than the 15% that is already being taken from his salary. At 5% savings, (s)he will have about $200k in the bank right now. That person will have no home equity (it was wiped out by the Great Recession), and it is likely that the person has/will be unemployed and will reduce/eliminate his future contributions.
So, this person has $200k in the bank, an (with the economy the way it is), no real possibility to increase that in the near future. Interest rates are near zero, and the economy has stagnated. Commodities prices have sky rocketed. The Fed has devalued that $200k by half over the last 10 years. Ageism makes it likely that this person will lose his job over the next few years, and it is unlikely that he will ever work in his field of expertise again.
So what do you have? This person has done EVERYTHING right. He worked hard, paid his taxes, saved some money, and the economy… led by reckless banks and unregulated derivatives… killed his chances of retiring comfortably. The government, by stealing his money for the last 36 years, has left him unable to finance his own retirement.
And now, the Republicans want to remove the safety net. After the late-boomer/genX generations paid for the early boomer/”greatest generation” to live a wealthy retirement, the Republicans are asking them to live in poverty for the sake of future generations. In other words, they are asked to foot the bill for their grandparents, parents AND their children by living in poverty.
NOW you know why the polls that Jay is citing say what they do. It is untenable to steal the life savings of everyone born between 1956 and 1975, and force them to live in poverty in retirement, so that their parents, grandparents and children can live a comfortable life in retirement. There is too little time and a horrible economy for that group to do anything significant about their status, and that says nothing about the investing environment that they have experienced over the last three decades:
http://moneywatch.bnet.com/retirement-planning/blog/retirement-beat/late-baby-boomers-the-worst-off-401k-generation/490/
Rick Perry is in denial if he thinks an entire generation of people who have forked over hundreds of thousands of dollars to these “ponzi schemes” are just going to walk away from the table with nothing.
(ir)Rational
September 23rd, 2011
3:30 pm
George P Burdell! WHAT’S THE GOOD WORD?!?!?!
Joe Mama
September 23rd, 2011
3:30 pm
Thomas — “The liberal game is to get 51% of folks to have a) a tax federal tax refund or b) pay no federal taxes. End of story.”
Why? Because then we can call out “Uno?” Because we stick the GOP with the “Old Maid” card?
cosby smith
September 23rd, 2011
3:30 pm
Yep you are correct Jay. The citizens ahve been sucked into government control of their lives. they will allow the elite DC crowd to dictate their well being. Kind of a shame, but I guess down the road, when the citizens tire of living meger lives while the elite take lavish, Mrs. Obama, vacations, then and maybe then, they will decide it is not worth it….A sad state of affairs for onnce a great nation. Sad!!
DebbieDoRight
September 23rd, 2011
3:31 pm
We can hopefully remove the Braille from the Drive-thru ATMs
I always wondered about that……….
1811/0311
September 23rd, 2011
3:31 pm
Hey ………….. a “bar chart” this time ………….. impressive !
jm
September 23rd, 2011
3:32 pm
Mick
“Americans love their social security”
Everyone loves getting a check from the government when they’re not paying for it.
Adam
September 23rd, 2011
3:32 pm
(ir)Rational: Good point. I actually pulled that up and closed it too fast to have the link I found it from. I am pretty sure if you Google the questions you’ll find the poll’s source though.
It was a reputable poll, but the specific questions aren’t what my point was. My point was that people DO favor tax increases in some cases. Of course no one wants their own taxes to be raised if they are having a hard time paying for things as is, but that doesn’t mean that raising taxes in areas that would be least hurt by the change isn’t a good idea. People recognize that, and it is reflected in polls like this one.
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
3:33 pm
“Rick Perry is in denial if he thinks an entire generation of people who have forked over hundreds of thousands of dollars to these “ponzi schemes” are just going to walk away from the table with nothing.”
Word.
As someone in that category (age 40-45) that ain’t gonna fly in my world.
jm
September 23rd, 2011
3:33 pm
Mick..
….. and they don’t understand that 40 cents of every dollar in that check is being borrowed from the Chinese, destroying the wealth of this nation.
josef
September 23rd, 2011
3:33 pm
irRational
“dag-nab-it, I am starting to sound like Bosch”
There are a lot worse you could sound like…
Nice graphs…but why bother? The whole mess is gridlocked into mutually antagonistic camps who have no further plan/agenda than stopping whatever it is the other side wants…
Brosephus™ - Browning America Since 1973
September 23rd, 2011
3:33 pm
I never advocated for gridlock.
I’m not saying you personally did. You tend to take the conservative view on most things, and many conservatives here did just that. They cheered and begged for gridlock. That’s what we have, and that’s what caused our ratings drop. That’s what’s gonna continue to screw with our recovery. Ask and ye shall receive.
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
3:33 pm
“Everyone loves getting a check from the government when they’re not paying for it.”
They’ve ALREADY paid for it — it’s a loan payback.
carlosgvv
September 23rd, 2011
3:33 pm
50 million people are on Social Security. That is a huge voting bloc that no political party can either ignore or abuse. Since this is common knowledge, why are certain Republicans telling their electorate that entitlements must be cut? Do they think their supporters are so simple that anything they are told will be believed? And, on top of that, the Republicans are moving heaven and Earth to protect the rich from any tax increases. Do you Republican diehards have any idea how stupid your politicians are making you look?
1811/0311
September 23rd, 2011
3:34 pm
“We’re the country that built the Intercontinental Railroad,” Barack Obama.
Now ………… in my younger days I worked my way through college as a brakeman on the railroad but I never heard of the New York to Paris run ???
jm
September 23rd, 2011
3:34 pm
“What’s a “liberal” game ? I really don’t know what that word means. Please explain.”
A game that has very unclear rules.
Rule 1: Pay me now, pay me again later.
Rule 2: Whatever you do now based on current rules may be upset later
Rule 3: All rules subject to change any time
Mick
September 23rd, 2011
3:35 pm
too little time
@
September 23rd, 2011
3:30 pm
Nice work
That is the most concise, clear argument about how I feel regarding the repub drive to dismantle social security – H3LL NO..
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
3:35 pm
“There are a lot worse you could sound like…”
Thanks josef! Yeah, like Mr. “lets just take away babies from their moms if they can’t afford it”
I’ve been blogging here a long time, and I’ll be damned if that didn’t make my mouth drop from the stoopid. And I’ve seen alot of stoopid.
Adam
September 23rd, 2011
3:35 pm
jm: Everyone loves getting a check from the government when they’re not paying for it.
So… people don’t pay for social security? Who knew?
1811/0311
September 23rd, 2011
3:35 pm
Ah ………………. the truth of the libs. finally comes out !
“Michael Moore Threatens The Rich: Let’s “Deal With It Nonviolently Now”
(ir)Rational
September 23rd, 2011
3:36 pm
Yeah, josef, there are worse people I could sound like. I could sound like a Man. U fan.
Bosch – That guy is dropping a lot of stupid.
jm
September 23rd, 2011
3:36 pm
Bro, I will say, given the choice between this mess, and Obama’s ideal situation, I will take gridlock. I’d prefer they learn to compromise, but Obama hasn’t gotten religion yet.
If Obama had his way, we’d be a high tax, high debt, high deficit country forever until we ended up in utter ruin. Seriously. Read Mitch Daniels new book.
Paul
September 23rd, 2011
3:37 pm
As I understand it so far, when people speak of ‘entitlements’ they mean SS, Medicare and Medicaid:
SS is on pretty good ground and will be okay years out with minor adjustments. It has its own funding stream thru payroll taxes, not income or other tax sources.
Medicare, which funds old folks health care, is funded thru payroll taxes and other sources. This is the one gobbling megadollars that poses the most serious financial risk.
Medicaid, which funds poor folks’ medical care, is a joint Federal/state program States pick up about half the tab. Features vary widely by state.
Biggest near-term problem is Medicare, so emphasis on SS is not proper. But… emphasizing Medicare near-term problem means solutions can’t be explained as shifting onto the younger generation. Cuts will most likely affect current beneficiaries, who comprise a vocal, active and high-voting block.
Am I incorrect on any of that?
Adam
September 23rd, 2011
3:37 pm
jm: If you’re going to continue down this path of demonizing anyone who doesn’t think like you, I sense a ban in your future.
DebbieDoRight
September 23rd, 2011
3:37 pm
Everyone loves getting a check from the government when they’re not paying for it.
We pay for it every paycheck — no one is giving anyone anything.
Mick
September 23rd, 2011
3:37 pm
jm
You are a foolish, selfish, lame excuse for an american – that’s a check I paid into for close to 40 years now – you are pathetic….
Kamchak
September 23rd, 2011
3:38 pm
I always wondered about that…
It’s for the guy/gal in the backseat.
Geez…
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
3:38 pm
irRational,
It practically oozes from his pores….ewww….
Jefferson
September 23rd, 2011
3:38 pm
How do you get a SS check without someone related to you DIDN’T pay in? Maybe they are mad because they don’t understand because they were running the gumms…
josef
September 23rd, 2011
3:39 pm
Bosch, Irrational
Glad y’all are here to do it…I’m not allowed to counter stupid…
Brosephus™ - Browning America Since 1973
September 23rd, 2011
3:39 pm
First force all government employees to have the same pension and health care plans the rest of us have.
I’m a federal employee who pays into a 401k and have been doing so since I was hired. My insurance company is Aetna, and just like everyone else, my premiums have gone up 280% since I first signed up. What else do you want from me? And contrary to popular opinion, federal pensions have been geared just like private sector pensions since Reagan’s administration. My pension is dependent on my SS income, my TSP (fed 401k), and a defined pension from the gov’t. If I don’t contribute to my TSP and manage that right, I’ll be working well beyond retirement age because I won’t be able to afford to retire.
Adam
September 23rd, 2011
3:39 pm
Scout: “We’re the country that built the Intercontinental Railroad,” Barack Obama
I’m adding this to my list of things that disqualifies you from rational discussion. Right up there with “teleprompter” and “57 states” and “CORPSEman”
It’s like you never flubbed a word in your life!
DebbieDoRight
September 23rd, 2011
3:39 pm
Read Mitch Daniels new book.
There’s your sign.
Doggone/GA
September 23rd, 2011
3:40 pm
“So… people don’t pay for social security? Who knew?”
See, here’s how what passes for logic in that crowd goes: because the money was paid DIRECTLY TO YOU, it’s not REALLY your money, it’s your company’s money. So (per the logic) NO, YOU don’t pay for SS – your company does.
Trotsky Foxtrot
September 23rd, 2011
3:40 pm
jm:
“Rule 1: Pay me now, pay me again later.
Rule 2: Whatever you do now based on current rules may be upset later
Rule 3: All rules subject to change any time”
I agree!
1-Pay me now, pay me later — a perfect description of capitalism as it moves progressively towards a “rent” based model of ongoing payments
2-Whatever you do now based on current rules may be upset later — exactly, especially when you have the SCOTUS in your pocket and they are gutting consumer protections and other protections the middle class depends on
3-All rules subject to change any time: see #2
Yep, I agree. It’s a perfect description of life under late capitalism if you ask me.
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
3:41 pm
Paul,
Not to mention that once this current generation is gone, the younger generations that are much smaller won’t cost as much because there are fewer people.
Doggone/GA
September 23rd, 2011
3:41 pm
OOps! “because the money was paid DIRECTLY TO YOU” I meant is NOT paid directly to you!
Granny Godzilla
September 23rd, 2011
3:42 pm
jm
honey, you don’t have to swing at every pitch
defense spending untouchable? what?
September 23rd, 2011
3:43 pm
Why is defense spending untouchable? We’re out of control in that area.
josef
September 23rd, 2011
3:43 pm
PAUL
Really enjoyed that play-by-play from y’all last night..beat the h3ll out of watching the game…
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
3:43 pm
“If Obama had his way, we’d be a high tax, high debt, high deficit country forever until we ended up in utter ruin.”
Based on what jm? Is that what the little voices in your head tell you?
Paul
September 23rd, 2011
3:44 pm
Bosch
So the real issue in entitlement reform is how to cut medical care for older American, correct?
No wonder those here want to discuss anything but that -
(ir)Rational
September 23rd, 2011
3:45 pm
josef – Why can’t you counter stupid? You’re plenty smart.
Bosch – Yeah, he should take a shower, it could help. Oh, and you mentioned something about the younger generations being smaller, I’m not smaller, ask the Mrs.
(I am in a REALLY good mood today, and I can’t figure out why).
jm
September 23rd, 2011
3:45 pm
Adam (whatever) and Mick
Say what you want. Social Security, other than being legalized by the government, exactly resembles a ponzi scheme. You can demonize me. You can call me un-American all you want. It does not change the math.
Today’s beneficiaries are paid out of the taxes I pay, every day, TODAY. Not from taxes they paid 40 years ago. Period. The End.
md
September 23rd, 2011
3:45 pm
“The whole mess is gridlocked into mutually antagonistic camps who have no further plan/agenda than stopping whatever it is the other side wants…”
Ah Jo, but they do have a plan………..each has this wonderful idea to convince enough independents to their “side” in order to win a 3 segments of gov’t during the next vote and then they can implement their “mandate”.
It’s the dang mandates that are killing us………………….
Both have this revolving 4 year plan………and screw the time in between.
1811/0311
September 23rd, 2011
3:45 pm
Adam:
Just being fair ………….. if that had been Bush, Jay would probably have made it a thread ……………………………….
generation x/y
September 23rd, 2011
3:46 pm
I have zero desire to pay into a system where all of my money goes towards a bunch of old retired people. Just b/c they were stupid enough to go along with that system for all these years and had no foresight to see the problems with the system doesn’t mean that I should have to keep going along with it.
Thanks a lot Boomers. You’re a smart bunch of spoiled brats.
Brosephus™ - Browning America Since 1973
September 23rd, 2011
3:46 pm
If Obama had his way, we’d be a high tax, high debt, high deficit country forever until we ended up in utter ruin. Seriously. Read Mitch Daniels new book.
Mmmhmm, yeah right.
You’re talking about the same Obama that threw his own party under the bus in the debt limit negotiations? You’re talking about the same Obama that has caved to damn near every GOP demand over the past 2+ years? Whatever you’re smoking/chewing/inhaling/injecting, I’d suggest you decrease the amounts very slowly so that your hallucinations don’t turn violent on you.
Obama’s been a better GOP president than Bush was. In regards to the GOP, Obama’s like that little puppy that rolls over for a tummy rub every time you walk by. He has the spine of a sour gummy bear.
out of the blue
September 23rd, 2011
3:46 pm
JM……as I have said many a time…you are a hoot! But, the following quote is proof you are more then a hoot. You are a either insane, don’t know what your talking about, or an idiot!
“Americans love their social security”
“Everyone loves getting a check from the government when they’re not paying for it.”
I won’t even bother debating that idiotic statement!
Paul
September 23rd, 2011
3:46 pm
josef
Thanks. I aim to please!
(read that on a wall over a toilet)
Adam
September 23rd, 2011
3:46 pm
jm: Now you’re just trying to get attention.
Kamchak
September 23rd, 2011
3:47 pm
Social Security, other than being legalized by the government, exactly resembles a ponzi scheme.
There’s your sign.
1811/0311
September 23rd, 2011
3:47 pm
Adam:
All aboard !
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFRy4f73HTg&feature=related
Adam
September 23rd, 2011
3:48 pm
Brosephus: He has the spine of a sour gummy bear.
Damn. You owe me screen cleaner.
josef
September 23rd, 2011
3:48 pm
FNM and early….!
Adam
September 23rd, 2011
3:49 pm
There’s travelin sheets btw
DebbieDoRight
September 23rd, 2011
3:49 pm
Have a nice weekend folks. I’m out — here’s to the argument I’m going to be a part of in about 2 hours, it’s also my Friday Night song selection, called Harper Valley PTA — saw the movie last night on cable– good movie.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOZPBUu7Fro
Later Gators.
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
3:49 pm
Paul,
That’s how I see it because the Boomers represent the biggest amount of people who will be on it at once. After them, then my group and there ain’t near as much as us.
Paddy O
September 23rd, 2011
3:51 pm
entitlement cuts, at least on ss & medicare, would be last on the list. I do think you need to means test SS, and probably severely curtail all the disabled payments from SS. There are plenty of other places to reduce spending prior to getting to the entitlements. I would imagine you can shave at least 50 billion from medicaid.
(ir)Rational
September 23rd, 2011
3:52 pm
Bro – I’m going to steal that “spine of a sour gummy bear” saying and start using it. And Adam, pass me the screen cleaner.
Paddy O
September 23rd, 2011
3:53 pm
brosephus – I guess you wholeheartedly concur with an earlier Obama Luckovich cartoon, where Obama is wrestling with the elephant & the ref tells Obama “you gotta stop yelling uncle before the match starts”. Last two years puts us in Sep 2009, with democrats in control of both houses. Why was Obama conceding to Repubs back then? Practicing?
Joe Mama
September 23rd, 2011
3:54 pm
jm — “Say what you want. Social Security, other than being legalized by the government, exactly resembles a ponzi scheme. You can demonize me. You can call me un-American all you want. It does not change the math.”
Nope. It doesn’t change the math. The exact same math that every other INSURANCE company in the country uses.
When you pay insurance premiums, money’s not held in an account in your name. Your premiums are mingled with the premiums of others and invested or lent out so that the insurance company can make money on the margin.
Reserve funding is maintained, based on actuarial expectations of how many customers are likely to make a claim in the near future. The other funds are used for investing, for acquisitions, for funding ongoing operations, etc. But State Farm’s not a Ponzi scheme and neither is Social Security. They both work the same way.
I’m really getting tired of the SS-as-a-Ponzi-scheme canard. I think it plays on the fact that most Americans have no idea how insurance works and exploits the fear of going bust. It’s a dishonest argument, and I think that most people here who use that argument are smart enough that they shouldn’t be fooled by it.
Paddy O
September 23rd, 2011
3:55 pm
gen x/y – the self absorbed generation continues its pursuit of narcissism perfection.
jm
September 23rd, 2011
3:56 pm
bro
“You’re talking about the same Obama that has caved to damn near every GOP demand over the past 2+ years?”
Yeah, cause the GOP demanded them. Otherwise, never woulda happened.
Ok, it’s Friday at 4. I’m putting the sword down for the day.
Don’t worry all you retirees. You’re getting your check every month for a good long, long while.
When’s Fri music come up?
joe
September 23rd, 2011
3:57 pm
Best way to cut entitlement spending is to get jobs to those people, or at least those who actually want to work. Obama’s plan has done ZERO to create jobs, so…the means to an end would be vote out Obama and get a new POTUS who can actually do something to create jobs (such as drill for oil and natural gas…then process it here at home), and the net effect is lower entitlement spending. Elementary, Watson!
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
3:57 pm
“I’m going to steal that “spine of a sour gummy bear” saying and start using it. And Adam, pass me the screen cleaner”
Yes, Brosephus, I third that and will also add that to my lexicon.
bookman parrot
September 23rd, 2011
3:57 pm
tax libs more and see if it works. then if does then cons can follow suit if needed.
Paddy O
September 23rd, 2011
3:57 pm
Joe – the ponzi scheme notion is the same half baked opinion advocacy that you saw when discussing DADT – the people pushing their opinion don’t understand the subject they are pontificating about.
MrLiberty
September 23rd, 2011
3:57 pm
Complete and total collapse of the dollar and the economy are the alternatives. Then you cut by default. Just ask Greece, Argentina, Zimbawe, etc. You cannot alter the laws of economics by majority vote. You can only postpone them and we have been postponing them for over 80 years now and the bill is coming due very soon.
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
3:58 pm
“and I think that most people here who use that argument are smart enough that they shouldn’t be fooled by it”
And by the same token, those that keep saying it are dumb enough to believe everything they hear.
Paddy O
September 23rd, 2011
3:59 pm
sadly, far too many inept federal judges are also apparently NOT too conversant with the military and the US Constitution.
Joe Mama
September 23rd, 2011
4:01 pm
Paddy — “Why was Obama conceding to Repubs back then? Practicing?”
At times I think the man’s got no stones.
Jimmy62
September 23rd, 2011
4:02 pm
We can only play with the candidates we have. Which is why I’m looking at Ron Paul, the only one with principles he will stand by.
Kamchak
September 23rd, 2011
4:06 pm
(such as drill for oil and natural gas…then process it here at home)
This crap again?
Just like all commodities, they are sold on the open market.
FEAR (False Evidence Appearing Real)
September 23rd, 2011
4:08 pm
If Medicare obtained the same drug prices as the VA, it would save $510 per beneficiary per year or a total of $14 billion per year (2009 prices).
It’s just a drop in the bucket however +14B/yr isn’t pocket lint either.
Lucifer
September 23rd, 2011
4:08 pm
I don’t know why I’m getting off track but someone mentioned Limbaugh. You know every time I hear the opening theme song to his radio show I visualize him coming out on stage wearing only a diaper, with one of those wide colorful ribbons across his chest that babies are shown with in ushering in a new year, with a lit cigar in one hand and a milk bottle in the other … with his lard belly bouncing to the tune of his music and his chubby legs pouncing up and down like a gazelle. God, this is a horrible vision; somebody please make it stop!!
duder
September 23rd, 2011
4:10 pm
Why is there no opt-out for SS or Medicare? I’m sure I can better invest my earnings than Uncle Sam.
midtownguy
September 23rd, 2011
4:10 pm
The only sensible plan is to raise the retirement age. The real culprit is that the average life expectancy has increased dramatically since it’s inception. Social Security was not designed for citizens to collect benefits for 20 years or more.
Raise the SS age to 70 in increments based on date of birth. Those who plan financially will still be able to retire early and the “foolish virgins” will still be taken care of.
This is not a Democrat vs Republican issue nor is it related to the current resident of the White House.
Strawman
September 23rd, 2011
4:10 pm
Those polls reflect the fact that people – especially those who have been paying into the benefits programs for years – don’t want to get short shrifted down the road. That is understandable. A way has to be found to at the same time modify these programs while keeping them as equally beneficial as they are now. Some form of the Chilean model (something Bush tried to implement) really needs reconsideration.
Joe Mama
September 23rd, 2011
4:12 pm
Lucifer — “God, this is a horrible vision; somebody please make it stop!!”
What has been seen . . . cannot be un-seen.
Clearly you need Brain Bleach.
Trotsky Foxtrot
September 23rd, 2011
4:17 pm
Joe Mama: “I’m really getting tired of the SS-as-a-Ponzi-scheme canard. I think it plays on the fact that most Americans have no idea how insurance works and exploits the fear of going bust. It’s a dishonest argument, and I think that most people here who use that argument are smart enough that they shouldn’t be fooled by it.”
It’s pure demagoguery. As with 98% of the black slime ooze that issues from the Republican propaganda apparatus. They deal in foul lies. Period.
Rich
September 23rd, 2011
4:18 pm
Lucifer: Crap, now you’ve got Limbaugh dancing in my head. It’s not a nice picture. Thanks a lot!
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
4:21 pm
“Clearly you need Brain Bleach”
No, I need it after reading that.
midtownguy
September 23rd, 2011
4:26 pm
Joe Mama: I am quite certain Obama’s “stones” left town in Nancy Pelosi’s clutch bag.
too little time
September 23rd, 2011
4:26 pm
generation x/y wrote I have zero desire to pay into a system where all of my money goes towards a bunch of old retired people. Just b/c they were stupid enough to go along with that system for all these years and had no foresight to see the problems with the system doesn’t mean that I should have to keep going along with it.
Thanks a lot Boomers. You’re a smart bunch of spoiled brats.
Really? Do you have a job? Then you are paying it too. Welcome to the stupid/spoiled brat club. And if you think you can be “smart” and not be stupid or spoiled brat, stop paying those taxes. See how long it take for the IRS to take everything you own and put you in jail. Then you will realize that paying wasn’t a choice/option. Do not call the victim a crime stupid/a brat because he forked over his wallet when a gun was put in his face. In theory, you might see a choice. In reality, the choice is your wallet or your life, so you hand over your wallet.
For the late boomers (those born after 1950 and especially 1956), they had no vote and no choice in the matter… just like you. We were ALWAYS outnumbered and never had even the slightest opportunity to vote it down. Those born from the great depression to 1950, along with liberals, the poor, etc, voted for it and prevented changes to. You cannot blame everyone in a democracy for the sins of the current/temporary majority. But once someone has been subjected to the will of the majority (and paid his taxes), you can bet he will take whatever return he can salvage from the situation. You will , too, if you pay another 30 years into the system.
Brosephus™ - Browning America Since 1973
September 23rd, 2011
4:28 pm
Damn. You owe me screen cleaner.
Adam, my bad…
I get tired of hearing the crap about Obama being some uber-liberal monster when he’s thrown the far left under the bus more than Bush did. If/When Obama acts like some uber-liberal, I’ll call him on that. Until then, Obama’s superliberalism like the legend of Bigfoot. It’s some scary campfire story to scare the poop out of conservatives when no such monster exists.
Skeptic
September 23rd, 2011
4:28 pm
the real) Independent
September 23rd, 2011
2:03 pm
Women (and men) have no business getting pregnant if they cannot pay for the delivery of the baby and be able to support the child after it is born.
OH MY!!!! Jesus, Mary and Joseph!!!!
Brosephus™ - Browning America Since 1973
September 23rd, 2011
4:32 pm
I guess you wholeheartedly concur with an earlier Obama Luckovich cartoon [...] Why was Obama conceding to Repubs back then? Practicing?
I thought that was Luckovich’s funniest one since he did the squirrels and Jesse Jackson. I have not a clue as to why Obama was conceding so much. I can honestly say he’s a dumbass for believing he could form a consensus with a party who’s sole objective is to remove him from office. Maybe Obama believed that he could actually accomplish something in office, either that, or he’s really a “Manchurian Candidate” planted by the GOP to keep Hillary from office.
Common Sense
September 23rd, 2011
4:32 pm
So those that are collecting benefits did not contribute enough as they went to actually fund the payments they would receive later in life.
Therefore it is now the responsibility of they younger generations to A) keep paying into this system and B) accept cuts in benefits down the road because they are not contributing enough to fund the benefits they would receive later in life? That’s the American way?
The argument is really about who is going to be forced to make the sacrifice.
To force future generations to pay is the greatest miscarriage of justice possible.
Sometimes the right thing to do is not the popular thing to do. A concept the majority will not comprehend here.
There were simply not enough funds withheld from those that are today collecting benefits. Their benefits must be cut.
They screwed up. They trusted government. Future generations should take note before they think they are going to get benefits at a level that is not supported by their contributions.
Bad choices have bad consequences. If bad choices have no consequences, then there will never be an incentive for real change.
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
4:32 pm
Oh Skeptic, just wait, it gets better….
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
4:34 pm
“since he did the squirrels and Jesse Jackson”
OMG! I love that one! “Quick, hide the nuts!”
Brosephus™ - Issuing Spineless Sour Gummi Bears Since 2011
September 23rd, 2011
4:34 pm
(ir)Rational & Bosch
Feel free to use that one. I won’t even require licensing approval for it. Consider that my reduction in regulations.
md
September 23rd, 2011
4:38 pm
generation x/y?…….I thought it was generation m/e
Skeptic
September 23rd, 2011
4:38 pm
If we take the children away from these moms, then other women may be dissuaded from getting pregnant.
Put down the PIPE!!!!
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
4:42 pm
Skeptic,
I told you it got better…
Joe Mama
September 23rd, 2011
4:43 pm
Brownsephus — “If/When Obama acts like some uber-liberal, I’ll call him on that. Until then, Obama’s superliberalism like the legend of Bigfoot. It’s some scary campfire story to scare the poop out of conservatives when no such monster exists.”
This.
(the real) Independent
September 23rd, 2011
4:43 pm
OK Skeptic, lets try it your way – let’s pay these women more and more for every child they have. Support them and their children without requiring them to work or do anything but conceive and delivery. You can call them “delivery women”. The Octomom is a good place to start, Pay her lots of money to support her herd. “Welfare Queen” is also a good name, women using their kids to get increased payments from the Govenment.
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
4:45 pm
Somebody has gotten into the stash of Hyperbole Sandwiches…and overdosed.
Brosephus™ - Issuing Spineless Sour Gummi Bears Since 2011
September 23rd, 2011
4:46 pm
md
Generation m/e would include most of America. Just sayin…
Joe Mama
I can only call it as I see it.
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
4:47 pm
Isn’t it just super great when somebody gets their crap called out and they go overboard with more crap that nobody said — I guess that’s what happens when you get embarrassed.
Joe Mama
September 23rd, 2011
4:48 pm
Independent — “women using their kids to get increased payments from the Govenment.”
If you can substantiate the existence of these alleged individuals, then kindly do so.
Otherwise, you’re talking about purple unicorns. They’re conjectured to exist, but no one’s ever actually *seen* one in the wild.
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
4:50 pm
“Otherwise, you’re talking about purple unicorns. They’re conjectured to exist, but no one’s ever actually *seen* one in the wild.”
Yeah, for f’real — they are hanging with Bigfoot and the Superliberal Obama.
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
4:50 pm
…oh, I forgot….they also drive Cadillacs and shop at Whole Foods with their EBT cards and wear big expensive bling.
Waheema
September 23rd, 2011
4:54 pm
This just iin:
In a proposed rule from Secretary Kathleen Sebelius and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the federal government is demanding insurance companies submit detailed health care information about their patients
I don’t want the federal government to have my health information. This is an unaccpable intrusion and a dangerous one at that. All of you silly people who got excited becasue the Patriot Act wanted to see your library card should be freaking out at this.
(the real) Independent
September 23rd, 2011
4:54 pm
I don’t personally know any other than my niece, but cut off all the TANF, the SNAP, and the EITC, and see if poor women still have the same number of children.
(the real) Independent
September 23rd, 2011
4:56 pm
My daughter also works at Kroger and tells us stories of the people who pay for their food with their EBT cards and then their smokes with cash. Not illegal, you understand. She didn’t say what kind of car they drove.
GOP Voter
September 23rd, 2011
5:00 pm
I’m a conservative Republican. The most embarassing moment of the GOP Presidential debates so far, was when they asked the candidates if they would accept $10 in spending cuts for $1 in revenue and none of the candidates would go for it.
It’s time the adults took over in Washington, however Americans — collectively — are dumb as dirt, as Jay’s survey above just reinforces.
md
September 23rd, 2011
5:01 pm
“…oh, I forgot….they also drive Cadillacs and shop at Whole Foods with their EBT cards and wear big expensive bling.”
Right on…….it’s like all those evil rich people scheming to pee on people…………….
real john
September 23rd, 2011
5:01 pm
Jay:
Two things: First, I’m glad you mentioned the entitlments do have to be reformed, particularly Medicare and S.S.
Second: One idea that is a little misleading the the intrest on debt which I beleive is now running over $400 billion a year. If we cut the debt, that number will go down as well.
Third: Raising the taxes on the weatlhy will just hurt the middle class and the poor. A lot of small business owners who have worked their tails off aren’t going to keep giving more and more to the government. Guess what will happen, they will simply cut salary and lay people off. It has been proven that in many cases, tax cuts have actually increased revenues. If people complain about the unemployment now, just wait until tax increase hit (a little hint, its not going to help the cause).
Fourth: While I know many Repubs who could support a tax increase, that will ONLY happen if serious, major cuts are made. That is a major reason why big business are not hiring. They know this house of cards is falling, but unlike the Federal Government, they can’t just keep borrowing and borrowing. If a company makes a bad business mistake, they pay for it dearly. That is why when taking on a major loan or risk, it is well thought out in advance.
Paddy O
September 23rd, 2011
5:03 pm
Those who try to pretend / downplay / manipulate popular perception with the gross lie that Obama is NOT an uber liberal, are just pushing propoganda FOR Obama. Can’t talk about the knee jerk (althought cutting off drilling after one platform that his admin gave permit approval to does lean that way), but tax & spend is Obama’s calling card – sadly, it is tax/spend & borrow. Both Bush & Obama have spent LIBERALLY, which prompted the TEA party – it is not just a response to Obama, but also to Bushes TARP. Entrenched GOP officials who jump the fiscal conservative ship and up end the market, as happened with AIG/Goldman Sachs, and which is generally personified by Saxby Chambliss, need to voted out.
Paddy O
September 23rd, 2011
5:04 pm
It would be a good public policy to ask food stamp applicants: Do you smoke? If they say yes, tell them sorry, they have too much disposable income to NEED food stamps.
Paddy O
September 23rd, 2011
5:06 pm
If the FEDS need extra money, why not impose import tariffs? A buck a unit plus 5% of selling cost.
Kamchak
September 23rd, 2011
5:08 pm
…oh, I forgot….they also drive Cadillacs and shop at Whole Foods with their EBT cards and wear big expensive bling.
Five kids, all of them wearing $200 Nikes, talking on iphones…
Joe Mama
September 23rd, 2011
5:17 pm
Independent — “I don’t personally know any other than my niece”
Your concession is noted and appreciated.
“people who pay for their food with their EBT cards and then their smokes with cash.”
Which is in accordance with the law. You can’t buy smokes with SNAP, nor should you be able to. Come up with cash or go without.
Your complaint here seems to be that some folks on SNAP also happen to smoke. How *terrible* for you.
Joe Mama
September 23rd, 2011
5:19 pm
Paddy — “they have too much disposable income to NEED food stamps.”
How about requiring them to participate in ongoing smoking cessation programs as a condition of receiving SNAP? Not just a 6-8 week program, but the whole time they’re on SNAP?
Kamchak
September 23rd, 2011
5:22 pm
How about requiring them to participate in ongoing smoking cessation programs as a condition of receiving SNAP?
Making them pay for it, of course.
md
September 23rd, 2011
5:26 pm
“Your complaint here seems to be that some folks on SNAP also happen to smoke. How *terrible* for you.”
I’m in that camp…..it’s called needs vs wants……….if folks can afford their wants, they should be able to afford their needs.
ATLien052
September 23rd, 2011
5:27 pm
Typical liberal nonsense: we have a problem, stick your finger in the air to see which way the wind is blowing and use that to justify your position. The problem with entitlements is that, once given, people fee “entitled” to them. Of course no one on Medicare or who receives/is about to receive Social Security wants it cut, but that doesn’t mean that cuts should not be made.
More importantly, whose definition of entitlements limits them only to Social Security or Medicare? Only a person who argues against cutting entitlements. There are many entitlements (i.e. welfare, unemployment benefits, etc.) that can and should be cut, and I believe there would be strong support from the people.
In the end, I would argue for keeping (most) entitlement programs if Washington would cut or eliminate unnecessary departments, like the EPA, the Department of Energy, or the Department of Education. None are called for in the Constitution and all are now a morass of bureaucracy which hinder the American economy and educational system.
M
September 23rd, 2011
5:27 pm
Yes, Medicare spending should be reduced. But Medicare coverage should not. How is this possible?
The real issue is healthcare costs. The U.S. spends 2-4X more than other comparable counties because of the intense focus on profits rather than healthcare outcomes. Put people before profits and this problem fades in significance. We need some honesty in this discussion rather than protecting the influcential status quo health and insurance industries.
Kamchak
September 23rd, 2011
5:30 pm
Put people before profits and this problem fades in significance.
Every penny of profit is a penny of healthcare denied.
(the real) Independent
September 23rd, 2011
5:32 pm
“Your complaint here seems to be that some folks on SNAP also happen to smoke. How *terrible* for you.”
My complaint is that they use our tax money to pay for their food when they could pay for at least part of it with the cash they use for their cigarettes.
HUH?
September 23rd, 2011
5:34 pm
Social Security is something that is supposed to be paid in through ssa taxes. If you pay for it, it is not an entitlement unless you are an Illegal alien. If the crocked politicians had left it alone. It might be paying for itself.
(the real) Independent
September 23rd, 2011
5:39 pm
This is how the word “Entitlement” came to be a curse word: when people felt they were “entitled” to free food, free money, free healthcare, free housing. Free as in they did not pay for them. Not free to you and I, of course. Some things we should be entitled to, such as Social Security payments after we pay into the system for a lifetime.
md
September 23rd, 2011
5:39 pm
“Put people before profits and this problem fades in significance.”
And so will the quality of care…………..sure, there will be those that find their calling in the profession, but any in it for the money/lifestyle will simply move to other more lucrative industries………
Folks do it everyday when they study the career salaries charts prior to beginning a course of study…………do you think all those attorneys found their calling?
HUH?
September 23rd, 2011
5:39 pm
Go back to the days of “If you don’t pay taxes or own property then you don’t vote”. This will straighten this mess out.
Joe Mama
September 23rd, 2011
5:45 pm
Independent — “My complaint is that they use our tax money to pay for their food when they could pay for at least part of it with the cash they use for their cigarettes.”
Are you saying that a person on public assistance shouldn’t be permitted to purchase any sort of convenience or ‘luxury’ item — not even a pack of cigarettes?
Perhaps you don’t actually understand how SNAP works. You can’t have much more than a poverty-level income and still receive it — and most states impose time limits on how long you can receive it. At least one state even imposes a lifetime benefit amount limit.
Perhaps you could consider giving this a try.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_stamp_challenge
I’m out, all drive safely and be well.
Kamchak
September 23rd, 2011
5:47 pm
My complaint is that they use our tax money to pay for their food when they could pay for at least part of it with the cash they use for their cigarettes.
OK fine, we grant your wish and your complaint tomorrow will be what? Your tax dollars are paying for their food while they’re wearing Nikes instead of Keds?
md
September 23rd, 2011
5:47 pm
“Are you saying that a person on public assistance shouldn’t be permitted to purchase any sort of convenience or ‘luxury’ item — not even a pack of cigarettes?”
If others are subsidizing them………..then no. Why should that person get to spend on wants when the one subsidizing isn’t afforded that option?
md
September 23rd, 2011
5:48 pm
“Your tax dollars are paying for their food while they’re wearing Nikes instead of Keds?”
Possibly………i’ve never owned a pair of Nikes in my life……….K-Mart blue light special.
Again, needs vs wants……………..
M
September 23rd, 2011
5:50 pm
To md: “Put people before profits and this problem fades in significance.”
Your comment: And so will the quality of care … for the money/lifestyle will simply move to other more lucrative industries………”
Answer: Let them go into other fields. Perhaps to the “financial innovation” field where they can scalp unsuspecting retirees-to-be. They will be quickly replaced by others without missing a beat. And cheaper healthcare will be so much more readily available that he health of the nation will be much better off overall. No one’s irreplaceable.
Kamchak
September 23rd, 2011
5:53 pm
No one’s irreplaceable.
No one except John Galt.
Give me a break
September 23rd, 2011
5:55 pm
Enter your comments here
Kamchak
September 23rd, 2011
5:59 pm
Enter your comments somewhere else
That Black guy
September 23rd, 2011
6:05 pm
Bosch
September 23rd, 2011
2:17 pm
irRational,
Admit it, you agree with more of what we say than the wingnuts. Just saying.
Bosch, although you didn’t ask me, I also agree with alot of what you guys say.
“I tell ya’ were gonna get irRational on our side yet.”
Again, with out being asked, what keeps me off “your side” (we’re all Americans)is the nasty way people who don’t agree with your side are treated (wingnut, teabagger). I’m not saying some conservatives don’t treat liberals nasty, but from personal experience, your side takes the cake. Being a Black conservative, it would make you blush to hear some of the things that I have been called and accused of. And the teabagger thing, how would liberals like it if a group went around calling their mother or wife c@(ksuckers? Yet liberals do it all the time (not so much here anymore).
BTW, I haven’t joined “their side” either.
John Galt
September 23rd, 2011
6:06 pm
Social Security and Medicare are supposed to be insurance programs, not entitlements. The left has completely hijacked the vernacular.
John Galt
September 23rd, 2011
6:07 pm
And not even I am irreplaceable.
Kamchak
September 23rd, 2011
6:08 pm
And the teabagger thing, how would liberals like it if a group went around calling their mother or wife c@(ksuckers?
Don’t really care.
An insult is like poison or strong drink. It can’t effect me unless I accept it.
Jay's Brain
September 23rd, 2011
6:31 pm
Cut everything and everywhere. Just cut and laugh at the ignorant regressive leftist that says oh my
you are only cutting 1% of the budget.
Well dummy a few million cut here and a few more million cut there and it all adds up.
Do a budget one day for yourself and you just might figure it out.
yuzeyurbrane
September 23rd, 2011
6:58 pm
Jay, I agree overall but would choose a different modification to set SS straight for another 75 years. The chained COLA you are referring to is really a cut in benefits, even for those currently on SS, because it does not accurately measure cost of living increases for Seniors. Proponents argue it is more accurate than the current COLA formula (based on general population) but it is under the current formula that there has been no SS cost of living increase for 2 years. Actually, the most accurate COLA for SS would be 1 based on the senior population. If you still insist on chained COLA, then call it what it is–a benefit cut for all SS recipients present and future. The better choice is the 1 you briefly refer to in your article—raise the wage level subject to FICA above the present $106,000 and expand it to include income from interest, dividends, etc. which now allows many mega-wealthy to totally avoid FICA taxes. Just raise it to the level needed to assure SS’s solvency for another 75 years.
ODD OWL
September 23rd, 2011
9:32 pm
The Republicans have been attempting to defund and dismantle all the social programs since the ’30’s, when President FDR created social security and other entitlement programs. The right wing, neo-con Republican corporate bosses and their propagandist news media pundits, who claim that President Obama is anti-business are liars. They lie when they say that ObamaCare is driving up the price of health insurance today. Health Insurance prices were skyrocketing long before ObamaCare. Republican obstructionism blocked most of the Obama Admin. efforts to regulate free market capitalism. Republican lies, lies, lies. The corporate bosses that scape goat and Blame President Obama for their screw ups are the same corporate bosses (Koch Bros.) that fund and control the Tea party Republicans. Corporate profits and the personal income of the corporate bosses are the highest in history. So what is motivating the corporate bosses’ modus operandi ??? Is it race ??? Share the wealth, TAX THE RICH, pay down the debt.
ODD OWL
September 23rd, 2011
9:40 pm
We Democrats place Non rich Black Republicans in the same category as non rich White Republicans……… BIG HOUSE !!!
Mr. Right
September 23rd, 2011
10:45 pm
Share the wealth, TAX THE RICH, pay down the debt.
Yea, they didn’t earn their money on their own so take it from them, it’s just as much mine as theirs! Them greedy rich people! I mean they used the roads we helped pay for and they think they can keep the money they earned. How stupid can they be! Grrrr
Joel Edge
September 24th, 2011
6:53 am
How about we start with the sixteen dollar muffins, Jay? I watched some of President Obamas speech on education. He was praising work done for eduction by states, teachers and schools. The general tone was that much of the good and serious work was done at the local level. I’m sitting there thinking ‘why do we need the Department of Education again?’
Mighty Righty
September 24th, 2011
10:51 am
This is a real life example of Darwinian theory. the stupid will die as a result of their own greed. There simply isn’t enough money to continue these programs without modification. The population growth is among the ignorant and foreign invaders who for the most part are non producers is the source of future contributions. The benefit system is based on the future wage earners paying for the present recipients. (Can anyone say Ponzi) The invaders are already benefiting from belefits to which they have not contributed and will not. The Republicans and a few smart Democrats will save, invest and move their own money over seas while the few remainig non prodicers will divide a dwindling pot. Good luck to the rank and file Democrats who are counting on their benefits being paid by growth in illegal immigration. Remember, “survial of the fittest.”
Faithfu Servant
September 25th, 2011
6:08 am
The day the American people, allowed the federal government to automatically take money out of their paychecks was a sad day! The day, We The People lost our way! Look at that amount taken out of your check, is it more than your house payment? Hows the sales tax,, your property taxes, insurance, income tax! We own Fannie and Freddie they tell us, lucky American people, we own everything, united together!
Who really is above the law? And what laws do we all follow?
I want a raise, and you deserve one too, I love you! http://mommylife.net/archives/2011/03/history_lesson.html Do you feel secure? The only peace I have is that I know Gods plans, from the beginning, and anxiously wait for Jesus our Bridegroom, our Savior.
How better off we would all be, to have the say of how and where we want our money spent! How differently would you look at this fruit of your labor, with a peaceful heart, integrity, and confidence knowing you wrote with pride and honor to each of your laboring brothers and sisters for the good of mankind! “I labor to you in peace and love, to bless God our Father, whom I trust and love. I pray we all come together, stand and protect each other, in love for Lord Jesus, who paid our debt on the cross, and left the promise of the Holy Spirit, all we have to do is ask and it shall be given. With God on our side, who can be against US! May my share of the debt be paid in the glory of You Lord!”
Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. _Abraham Lincoln_
“We are important and significant” Learn all your history, starting with the Word as all was spoken. Truth should be held sacred, at whatever cost. The truth shall make us free some day. Oh, deep in my heart, I do believe. The truth shall make us free one day!
By idolizing those whom we honor, we do a disservice both to them and to ourselves…We fail to recognize that we could go and do likewise. _Charles V. Willie_
What passes for identity in America is a series of myths about one’s heroic ancestors. _James Baldwin_
The history of a nation is, unfortunately too easily written as the history of its dominant class. _Kwame Nkrumah_
Ten men in our country could buy the whole world and ten million can’t buy enough to eat. _Will Rogers,,, 1931_
The power to rise in the world is not within the reach of everyone. Our we masters of our own fate, can you mold your life into any form you please?
As long as you are convinced you have never done anything, you can never do anything,. _Malcom X_
When information which properly belongs to the public is systematically withheld by those in power, the people soon become ignorant of their own affairs, distrustful of those who manage them, and–eventually–incapable of determining their own destinies. This said by Richard Nixon. Do you think Nixon wasn’t getting all the information? How is your destiny looking for you and your loved ones? Are you, yourself, trustworthy!
We see things not as they are but as we are. _Anais Nin_
We have to face the unpleasant as well as the affirmative side of the human story, including our own story as a nation, our own stories of our peoples. We have got to have the ugly facts in order to protect us from the official view of reality. _Bill Moyers_
To study foreign affairs without putting ourselves into others shoes is to deal in illusion and to prepare students for a lifelong misunderstanding of our place in the world. _Paul Gagnon_
What did you learn in school today, dear little boy of mine? I learned our government must be strong. It’s always right and never wrong. That’s what I learned in school. _Song by Ton Paxton, 1963_
Once you have learned to ask questions–relevant and appropriate and substantial questions–you have learned and no one can keep you from learning whatever you want or need to know. _Neil Postman and Charles Weingartner_
Awaken peoples curiosity, teaching and opening the gift of knowledge, and share the truth! May our minds all be opened, but not overloaded.
He is a lover of his country who rebukes and does not excuse its sins. _Frederick Douglass_
I know that I am a sinner and by grace I am saved. To get into heaven, it’s who you Know that counts! Jesus asked, ” Do you know what I have done for you.” Are your feet clean?
May we all have the aim of the historian, then is to know the elements of the present by understanding what came into the present by understanding what came into the present from the past, for the present is simply the developing past…The goal of the historian is the living present! _Frederick Jackson Turner_ The historian must have no country. _John Adams_
The future of mankind lies waiting for those who will come to understand their lives and take up their responsibilities to all living things. _Vine Deloria, Jr._
God has not been preparing the English speaking and Teutonic peoples for a thousand years for nothing…he has given us the spirit of progress to overwhelm the force reaction throughout the earth. he has made us adept in government that we may administer government among savage and senile peoples…And of all our race He has marked the American people as His chosen nation to finally lead in the redemption of the world. _Sen, Alvert J Beveridge, 1900_
Americans see history as a straight line and themselves standing at the cutting edge of it as representatives for all mankind. _Frances FitzGerald_
It is becoming increasingly apparent that we shall not have the benefits of this world for much longer. The imminent and expected destruction of the life cycle of world ecology can only be prevented by a radical shift in outlook from our present universe as a comprehensive matrix of life forms. Making this shift in viewpoint is essentially religious, not economic or political. _Vine Deloria, Jr._ “Religion is man made, Christianity comes from God!”
The study of economic growth is too serious to be left to economists. _E.J. Mishan_
It should be left up to you, Us, together we Stand, divided we will fall. Thank you for your labors.
“A country without God, is a country gone under” _Ronald Reagan_
We need Statesmen and Faithful Servants!
May we never fail divided, but succeed united together for eternity!
May God love, bless, and keep you always.
Sideline Dude
September 25th, 2011
3:06 pm
Amen. Please cut entitlement spending. I have enough of a time supporting myself without having to support “entitled” others.
TruthBe
September 25th, 2011
3:29 pm
Get rid of Obama, Career Corrupt Politicans, and vote in REAL Conservatives that actually care about America.
thewindwhistler
September 25th, 2011
3:38 pm
My great grampa got a disability pension after the Civil War. It was $12.00. Now you begrudge him that pittance for doing his bit to defeat the Southern rebels. He was sailing off Key West when he caught a bit of dysenteria.
The real problem is there is a monopoly by the Social Security Administration. If private investment companies were allowed to compete for the workers social security then we would have something.
vicki
September 25th, 2011
4:57 pm
The problem with social security is not the benefits to the elderly, but the disability payments. A large number of people get disability from social security – I personally know some. And they can work at a job – they just dont want to.All you need is a doctor to sign the forms. This is where we should cut back….just because someone cant work as a brick layer or a house painter, doesnt mean he cant work at some other job. We, as a nation, just keep giving money away – and we do not have it to give away any more. Famiies should help each other, churches help the needy, and friends help friends. Leave government out it.
Ronin
September 25th, 2011
5:01 pm
Social Security is not an entitlement program. You pay a premium (well most people do) for coverage and receive a benefit (a very poor return if a high earner). The problem is government bureaucrats, liberal and conservative have spent any reserves that were saved by past generations. Otherwise, most people would retire millionaires if they worked 40 years and saved 13% (individual and company match totals) of their income, tax deferred.
Javon
September 25th, 2011
5:07 pm
I’m tired of the government telling me what I can and can’t by with my ebt card. I should be able too get whatever I want
southside
September 25th, 2011
5:15 pm
the racists in the tea party want to cut government benefits and give the money to rich white fatcats. I’m getting tired of this!
Atlanta1
September 25th, 2011
5:36 pm
Just the comments written in response to the article says it all. The left doesn’t want one penny cut – the right doesn’t want one penny in tax increases. (Please get away from revenue increases – it is a tax increase – call it what it is).
Here’s the truth – the Democrats have no plans to reduce the debt. Nor do the Republicans. The only honest approach is coming from Connie Mack.
He wants the current year’s budget frozen and then a 1% reduction each year over the following 6. What’s the reward? A balance budget.
So he has ‘big time’ support from the Republican Party right? Wrong. Democrats? Nope…
They are both dishonest and both positioning for a Power Play…
And who pays for this… The American People (literally)…
We all need to recognize that we are literally on a path of destruction. We have to cut folks… We have to cut… That will require cuts in the budget and it will require some increase in taxes…
Last comment – the Winner of the last Presidential Election was pretty much guaranteed ‘one and done’. That’s pretty much a done deal The ‘left may as well begin to accept that’.
The right thought they had a mandate in the early part of this century. The left thought they had a mandate when President Obama was elected. The truth is, it is almost always ‘less’ about what they like about your party and ‘more’ about what they dis-like about the other party.
Neither side appears to have learned a thing over the years They had better learn to work together or we ALL will pay a terrible price..
Olderandwiser49
September 25th, 2011
5:56 pm
The best place to start is a full repeal of Obamacare, which is already exceeding Obama’s stated claims of its cost, and employers are dumping their better policies because it’s cheaper to pay the fine. Thus, people aren’t “allowed to keep their current coverages,” as Obama promised. We need to audit medicare and social security to eliminate the fraud and waste, estimated at over $100 Billion per year. We need to start weaning people away from SS, allowing younger people to start 401k programs to fund their retirement, allowing some lump-sum benefits a percentage of what they have contributed) to middle-aged people to transfer into self-managed retirement funds. To think the Federal government can manage our funds for us better than we can ourselves is to deceive ourselves. The government has shown their financial ineptitude in every program they have instituted. It always costs more, and returns less, than they say it will. We need to get government out of our private lives, and limit their powers to those set forth in the Constitution. And while the dissolution of the EPA, NLRB, Dept of Energy, and Dept of Education might not save much in the budget, the first three will eliminate the burdensome regulations standing in the way of business growth, and the last one will improve the quality of education in this nation.
Jack
September 25th, 2011
6:13 pm
Moral decency the man said: Reminds me of Bill Clinton. I think withdrawing Medicaid from single mothers wouldn’t stop teenage sex, but it’d stop my money from being spent on their indiscretions.