Obama holds upper hand in budget confrontation
The reputations of pollsters Rasmussen and Gallup took a deserved beating in the 2012 election, but if nothing else they are still valuable when judged relative to themselves. Rasmussen, for example, now reports that President Obama’s job approval rating among likely voters is at 55 percent, his highest level in a Rasmussen poll since June 2009.
Gallup reports similar numbers:
That would seem to suggest that Republican denials notwithstanding, President Obama comes into negotiations on the so-called fiscal cliff with a considerable amount of leverage. Newly released numbers from a Washington Post/Pew Center poll confirm that assessment:
Given that reality, it’ll be interesting to see the outcome of today’s secret ballot among House Republicans, who will be asked to elect a new chairman of the House Republican Conference. As we reported Monday, House Speaker John Boehner has thrown his support behind Cathy McMorris Rodgers, who qualifies as a moderate, if only within the very narrowly conservative House GOP caucus. If elected, she would also become the only woman in the House GOP leadership, which currently has no women holding any of the 21 House committee chairmanships.
However, those on the more conservative end of the very conservative GOP caucus are rallying behind Georgia’s own Tom Price. That includes House Budget chair Paul Ryan, fresh off his experience on the losing end of the presidential race.
A Price victory would constitute a pretty serious setback for Boehner and would indicate that when the time comes, the speaker would not be able to deliver GOP votes for the budget compromise that will be needed. It would also suggest that House Republicans have not yet learned the necessary lessons of the 2012 election, including the dangers of extremism and the wisdom of outreach to female voters.
If so, they are courting yet another reminder.
– 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
642 comments Add your comment
Joe Hussein Mama
November 14th, 2012
2:19 pm
Mick — “joe, Sorry, but your “interpretation” doesn’t wash”
Sorry, but it’s not an interpretation. It’s cold, hard fact. SS is insurance. I refer you to my post of 2:11 PM.
getalife
November 14th, 2012
2:20 pm
SS is not even on the table.Reid said so.
Perhaps you cons should focus on solutions for real problems.
Bust your bubble and join the real world kooks.
alex
November 14th, 2012
2:20 pm
Nunna, et al. as of my understanding you are both right, yes the morgage companies quickly sold the products to the investment banks who sold them to the rest of the world with a big profit and yes Freddie Mac a yes/no govt. -supported entity was pushed to make loans available, see Clayton co. and Barnie Frank… No good players here. Read : “Too Big too Fail”. “the Big Short” or any number of tell all books fromm 2009/2011.. Greed was Everywhere as was stupidity EVERYWHERE
@ gRANNY,let’s see you suggest “Boys world” to someone, yet quote the “coneheads”, bit of an intellectual giant are you….? Geeez
Ben Shockley
November 14th, 2012
2:21 pm
Fred ™
November 14th, 2012
2:17 pm
“Wow. Benny found the courage to come back?”
Hi Fred. I still go to work every day, earn my own money, support my own family, and save/invest for my own retirement.
You ought to try it. It delivers positive results quicker than government dependancy every time it’s tried. I guarantee it.
Atlas Shrugging
November 14th, 2012
2:22 pm
I wonder who get hurt more if we go over the cliff; college kids, blue hairs, union workers, non-income tax payers, waders of the Rio Grand, ie Obozo’s base/takers or makers, ie the 2%? If the Republician base is the 2% how much clout do you really think Obozo has over the House?
Joe Hussein Mama
November 14th, 2012
2:22 pm
Nunna Yobinnes — “Alex – weren’t the banks “forced” to lend to unworthy credit risks?”
No. Over 80% of the sub-prime loans made prior to the meltdown were made by lending institutions that were *not* subject to the Community Reinvestment Act.
Ben Shockley
November 14th, 2012
2:22 pm
Wow, Joe Hussein was so quick to jump in and respond to all my posts earlier today. Now all of the sudden he can’t quite muster the courage.
ENTITLEMENT
getalife
November 14th, 2012
2:23 pm
atlas,
Your bs is a perfect example of why you lost.
Keep up the great work son.
Fred ™
November 14th, 2012
2:24 pm
AmericaShrugged
November 14th, 2012
2:15 pm
Fred – I never listen to political talk radio and watch more CNN than Fox, very little of either. I’m also pro choice and in favor of gay marriage among other liberal leanings. What kills me on this blog is the bloggers who goose step to the party line no matter how absurd it might be and the totally irrational arguments they espouse to justify the party line. Or they result to some personal insult.
Your turn. Why are 30 of the governors Republican if this country is so liberal?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Thank you for the answer, I’ve been seeing this “line of reasoning” pop up a lot since Romney lost the election and wondered if it was the new talking point. Apparently you don’t know either. Now to answer YOUR question……….
I don’t know. I’m an Independent and as far as “Governors” are concerned, the only one I care about is the one in Georgia. And he’s a crook. I can’t see a single reason why anyone with an ounce of integrity or brains not only got him nominated to run but voted for him. Thurbert Baker ran against him on the Republican ticket and is a fine, moral man as well as a Conservative. Even that weirdo woman, Karen Handel would have been better than the crook Nathan Deal. But no, The hard core fanatics chose the thief.
The Democrats weren’t much better, they chose Roy Barnes………..
I voted for John Monds. As for the other 29 states in your 30, (if that’s correct, I’ll take your word on it and not check), I neither know nor care, nor see any relevance.
Anything else I can help you with? I mean I can’t tell you why an apple doesn’t taste like an orange either……..
Ben Shockley
November 14th, 2012
2:25 pm
From the social security website, http://www.ssa.gov...
“Apply Online for Retirement Benefits – Boldly Go Online to Retire – It’s So Easy!
Social Security offers an online retirement application that you can complete in as little as 15 minutes. It’s so easy. Better yet, you can apply from the comfort of your home or office at a time most convenient for you. There’s no need to drive to a local Social Security office or wait for an appointment with a Social Security representative.
In most cases, once your application is submitted electronically, you’re done. There are no forms to sign and usually no documentation is required. Social Security will process your application and contact you if any further information is needed. ”
That really doesn’t sound like insurance…………….
Joe Hussein Mama
November 14th, 2012
2:25 pm
B. Shockley — “Joe Hussein trying to tell us Social Security is insurance”
In the United States, Social Security refers to the Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance (OASDI) federal program.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OASDI
“Unfortunatley, that’s not how it works. You pay in, you collect. Entitlement. Not insurance.”
Denied. Insurance. Fail, Benny.
“School’s out for the day Joey, run on home now, little one.”
See me after class, young man. I’m going to have to have a conference with your parents about holding you back a grade next year.
And if you keep up the poor behavior, Principal Jay might just have to put you in detention again.
Ben Shockley
November 14th, 2012
2:26 pm
I don’t see means-testing anywhere here….
How the Retirement Estimator Works
The Retirement Estimator gives estimates based on your actual Social Security earnings record. Please keep in mind that these are just estimates. We can’t provide your actual benefit amount until you apply for benefits. And that amount may differ from the estimates provided because:
•Your earnings may increase or decrease in the future.
•After you start receiving benefits, they will be adjusted for cost-of-living increases.
•Your estimated benefits are based on current law. The law governing benefit amounts may change because, by 2033, the payroll taxes collected will be enough to pay only about 75 cents for each dollar of scheduled benefits.
•Your benefit amount may be affected by military service, railroad employment or pensions earned through work on which you did not pay Social Security tax.
Mick
November 14th, 2012
2:26 pm
joe
Not disputing that it’s called insurance (fica) but I will be collecting at either 62 or 65 – count on it…
mm
November 14th, 2012
2:26 pm
“Hi Fred. I still go to work every day, earn my own money, support my own family, and save/invest for my own retirement.
You ought to try it. It delivers positive results quicker than government dependancy every time it’s tried. I guarantee it.”
These idiots still haven’t learned from their mistakes.
Regnad Kcin
November 14th, 2012
2:26 pm
“I’m telling you the Dems pretty much only win urban areas and gerrymandered districts, because that’s where there constituents live”
Um, yes. They generally DO win the districts “where there constituents live.”
Fred ™
November 14th, 2012
2:27 pm
Ben Shockley
November 14th, 2012
2:21 pm
Fred ™
November 14th, 2012
2:17 pm
“Wow. Benny found the courage to come back?”
Hi Fred. I still go to work every day, earn my own money, support my own family, and save/invest for my own retirement.
You ought to try it. It delivers positive results quicker than government dependancy every time it’s tried. I guarantee it.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
If you can show where I have taken ANY Government assistance rather than working Benny, I will kiss your lying ass on the main street of any town you care to name.
Funny though how you had time for blathering before the election and then hid for a while afterwards.
I see though that in your time off you didn’t find a way to tell the truth…….
Redcoat
November 14th, 2012
2:27 pm
JamVet………so now we can vote more stuff and make the others give it up?
Ben Shockley
November 14th, 2012
2:27 pm
Anybody see anything about insurance or qualifying events or means-testing here???
A secure, comfortable retirement is every worker’s dream. And now because we’re living longer, healthier lives, we can expect to spend more time in retirement than our parents and grandparents did.
Achieving the dream of a secure, comfortable retirement is much easier when you plan your finances.
How The Social Security Retirement Planner Can Help You Now
This planner provides detailed information about your Social Security retirement benefits under current law. It also points out things you may want to consider as you prepare for the future. If you are:
•Looking for information, you can:
◦Find your retirement age,
◦Estimate your life expectancy,
◦Estimate Your Retirement Benefits,
◦Use our other benefit calculators to test different retirement ages or future earnings amounts,
◦Learn about Social Security programs,
◦Find out what happens if you
■Work after you retire or
■Are already a Medicare Beneficiary and
◦Learn how certain types of earnings and pensions can affect your benefits.
•Already near retirement age, you can:
◦Discover your retirement options,
◦Get information about how members of your family may qualify for benefits,
◦Find instructions on how to apply for benefits and what supporting documents you may need to furnish, and
◦Apply for retirement benefits.
•Close to age 65, you can find out how to apply for just Medicare. You may need to sign up for Medicare close to your 65th birthday, even if you are still working.
◦Some health insurance plans change automatically at age 65.
◦If you are getting Social Security benefits when you turn 65, your Medicare Hospital Benefits will start automatically.
Joe Hussein Mama
November 14th, 2012
2:27 pm
B. Shockley — “Ummm, well, no, that’s not how it has been since Day One. It’s an entitlement. You pay in, you collect. You’re ENTITLED. Not insurance.”
Rejected.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OASDI
“Thinking JHM is going to be asked to attend summer school and/or repeat 3rd grade this year.”
No, Benny, I think that’s going to be you. You’re really going to have to bear down and study if you don’t want to be held back yet *another* year.
Nunna Yobinnes
November 14th, 2012
2:28 pm
Fred – Sometimes you can be, well…mean.
Ben Shockley
November 14th, 2012
2:28 pm
Poor Joe. Found the word “insurance” on wikipedia and still doesn’t understand what it means.
stands for decibels
November 14th, 2012
2:28 pm
SS is not even on the table.Reid said so.
well yeah, and Joe Biden “flat guaranteed” they wouldn’t be cutting it.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-l-borosage/game-changer-biden-guaran_b_1789245.html
“I guarantee you, flat guarantee you, there will be no changes in Social Security,” Biden told patrons of the Coffee Break Café in Stuart, Virginia, “I flat guarantee you.”
Alas, these promises and $2.25 will get you a ride on the NYC subway.
JamVet
November 14th, 2012
2:28 pm
You Randians are never going to get a clue, are you AShrug?
Real life is not some pathetic piece of fiction.
Toss that silly, romanticized cr@p out the window and join us in the real world…
Brosephus™
November 14th, 2012
2:28 pm
JHM: I think we were talking about budgety, wonky things because that’s where the thread started.
Gotcha. I think that stuff should be phase two with phase one being jobs.
————–
Nunna Yobinnes: However, since job creation and economic recovery are issues of public confidence, what can be done to create meaningful jobs?
I don’t think it’s a matter of public confidence as much as it’s a matter of the business leaders having confidence in themselves. There used to be common belief in the idea that it took money to make money. Nowadays, business leaders seem to think they can make money by NOT using money.
Look at the progress that has been made in the US in spite of using more money. We have become much more efficient and more productive over the past 30 plus years. Imagine how much more productive we would be with more people working as efficient as our workforce does now. At the same time, more people working gives the public more money to spend. You feed into a positive business cycle that way, and by paying people decent wages, you try to avoid having people over leverage themselves with credit.
————–
John Konop @ 1:23
I would disagree with the idea that a VAT tax would increase jobs and you can look at European countries as proof of that. Their employment is not much better or worse than ours. The big difference is that some of those countries have a much better working relationship between their government and businesses. Here, our government and business are sometimes at war with each other as opposed to working together towards a common cause.
—————
Stevie Ray @ 1:35
I wouldn’t even deal with the matter of whether that money is spent or not. What we’re going through now is a phase where private sector spending is way down. If you also cut public sector spending, you’re basically trying to fly a 747 at 30,000 feet while using full reverse thrusters. In other words, you’re intentionally crashing.
The key is to get the private sector back to doing it’s job of pushing consumption. As you increase private sector consumption, you can cut public sector spending without hurting the economy.
As to the banks and lending, that’s the root cause of our current problem. We need to stay away from credit for a while and spend what we have. Why would you want people borrowing on credit while NOT wanting the government to do the same? It’s much harder on the personal income to borrow when compared to the government.
Ronald Reagan
November 14th, 2012
2:29 pm
The President said “I uh ah ah uh ah i uh uh uh ah ah uh uh uh ah I uh uh ah & thanks!”
Ben Shockley
November 14th, 2012
2:29 pm
Wow…poor little Freddy has his boxers in a knot. Guess my suggestion to pull his owm weight hit a little too close to home.
Fred ™
November 14th, 2012
2:29 pm
Atlas Shrugging
November 14th, 2012
2:22 pm
I wonder who get hurt more if we go over the cliff; college kids, blue hairs, union workers, non-income tax payers, waders of the Rio Grand, ie Obozo’s base/takers or makers, ie the 2%? If the Republician base is the 2% how much clout do you really think Obozo has over the House?
++++++++++++++++++++
Does it make you feel like your dick is longer when you use an anonymous name on a blog to spell so disparaging of the most powerful man on the face of the earth? Does your total lack of respect for America and your fellow Americans somehow make you think folks will take you seriously?
I say drive off that cliff and lets see.
getalife
November 14th, 2012
2:29 pm
ben is having a melt down.
getalife
November 14th, 2012
2:30 pm
Bust their bubble.
Joe Hussein Mama
November 14th, 2012
2:31 pm
B. Shockley — “Mick, I have an opinion on Social security, but JHM is offering his (incorrect) opinion as fact.”
Nope. I’m offering fact as fact, and clearly indicating my opinion as such. You’re coming along late in the game, and — as usual — you haven’t bothered to catch up on the parts you missed.
“There is no means-test for social security.”
Didn’t say there was. I said that IMO there *should be.*
“You pay in, you collect. What you collect is based in part on what you paid in. It’s not insurance.”
Wrong.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OASDI
“It’s an entitlement. Period.”
Wrong.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OASDI
“To argue otherwise is, well, not so bright………………….”
Sorry to burst your bubble, Benny.
JamVet
November 14th, 2012
2:31 pm
Redcoat, English please.
I am not conversant in Republican Ebonics…
barking frog
November 14th, 2012
2:32 pm
SSI and OASDI are two entirely
different programs that are
administered by SSA.
Ben Shockley
November 14th, 2012
2:32 pm
Joe, since wikipedia is your bible, try this…
Entitlement – From Wikipedia
An entitlement is a guarantee of access to benefits based on established rights or by legislation. A “right” is itself an entitlement associated with a moral or social principle, such that an “entitlement” is a provision made in accordance with legal framework of a society. Typically, entitlements are laws based on concepts of principle (”rights”) which are themselves based in concepts of social equality or enfranchisement.
In a casual sense, the term “entitlement” refers to a notion or belief that one (or oneself) is deserving of some particular reward or benefit[1]—if given without deeper legal or principled cause, the term is often given with pejorative connotation (e.g. a “sense of entitlement”).
sounds remarkably like social security to me
Brosephus™
November 14th, 2012
2:32 pm
dB @ 1:59
wait a minute–doesn’t Krugman count?
My bad. I don’t read him that often, so if he’s made that point, then I’ll give him credit for that. At least one person’s thinking.
stands for decibels
November 14th, 2012
2:32 pm
It’s much harder on the personal income to borrow when compared to the government.
wha? you mean interest on my unpaid credit card balance isn’t 0.1%? rut roh.
Fred ™
November 14th, 2012
2:32 pm
Ben Shockley
November 14th, 2012
2:29 pm
Wow…poor little Freddy has his boxers in a knot. Guess my suggestion to pull his owm weight hit a little too close to home.
+++++++++++++++++++++++
Gee Ben, when you can pay my daughters tuition to Woodward, my wife’s tuition to Vanderbilt for her doctorate, and my taxes, I’ll be happy to hear your drivel. Until then, your lies are pathetic.
You lost. Your ideals were rejected. You have nothing but the same reject lies to peddle. It’s sad.
Joe Hussein Mama
November 14th, 2012
2:32 pm
B. Shockley — “You pay in/you collect. ENTITLEMENT”
In the United States, Social Security refers to the Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance (OASDI) federal program.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OASDI
Ben Shockley
November 14th, 2012
2:33 pm
LOL at Joe. really getting desperate now.
Joe, I’ve been paying in for 35 years. I’m entitled to collect retirement benefits, and nothign short of death will prevent that.
Fact or fiction?
Poor little Joey………
Joe Hussein Mama
November 14th, 2012
2:33 pm
alex — “and yes Freddie Mac a yes/no govt. -supported entity was pushed to make loans available”
Neither Freddie Mac nor Fannie Mae actually made loans, if that’s what you’re suggesting.
Redcoat
November 14th, 2012
2:34 pm
JamVet……….I need some money bro…..you got some I know…..you don’t give it up I’ll call you a racist and vote me all your money. Why you get so much and I don’t?……..democracy in action?
Nunna Yobinnes
November 14th, 2012
2:34 pm
Fred tone down the language dude. There might be children reading this blog.
Ben Shockley
November 14th, 2012
2:34 pm
“SSI and OASDI are two entirely
different programs that are
administered by SSA.”
shhhhh…….don’t let JHM hear that….he’ll melt down……
Fred ™
November 14th, 2012
2:34 pm
Nunna Yobinnes
November 14th, 2012
2:28 pm
Fred – Sometimes you can be, well…mean.
+++++++++++++++
I’m sorry, I don’t try to be. I look at it as I’m blunt and to the point. What in particular have I said to you today that you felt was mean?
Mick
November 14th, 2012
2:35 pm
This is all you need to know about social security: You can collect and early benefit at age 62 or full benefits at 65 or 66.8 depending on the year of your birth. You pay in, you collect. If you do not pay in and opt out, no benefit for you…
Joe Hussein Mama
November 14th, 2012
2:35 pm
B. Shockley — “I don’t see means-testing anywhere here….”
Nor should you.
Had you bothered to *read the thread,* you’d have seen that I was *advocating* means-testing.
Ben Shockley
November 14th, 2012
2:35 pm
“Gee Ben, when you can pay my daughters tuition to Woodward, my wife’s tuition to Vanderbilt for her doctorate, and my taxes, I’ll be happy to hear your drivel. Until then, your lies are pathetic.”
You sure have wasted a lot of money on education, because you still don’t know jack.
St Simons
November 14th, 2012
2:35 pm
“Urban areas…”
no dude, you have to stretch it out like ‘Urrrrrr-bun’
and cock your eyebrow and maybe wink.
get the dog whistles right, man
Fred ™
November 14th, 2012
2:36 pm
Nunna Yobinnes
November 14th, 2012
2:34 pm
Fred tone down the language dude. There might be children reading this blog.
++++++++++++++++
I’m speaking English. What language would you prefer i use? I know several.
John Konop
November 14th, 2012
2:36 pm
Bros
. …..I would disagree with the idea that a VAT tax would increase jobs and you can look at European countries as proof of that………..
Europe does not have a payroll tax like us. I am talking about replacing the payroll tax with a VAT or national sales tax. The reason that would spur employment is companies would reinvest the money into their business and workers would consume more with their paychecks increasing ie jobs………
Ben Shockley
November 14th, 2012
2:36 pm
“Had you bothered to *read the thread,* you’d have seen that I was *advocating* means-testing. ”
Had you bothered to think, you would know the difference between insurance and entitlement, regardless of what it says on the label.
Mama Says
November 14th, 2012
2:37 pm
Someone tell me who to vote for that will put in place conservative monetary standards as well as an energy policy that dosent support large subsidies to the energy developers.
You do understand that today’s green energy company is tomorrow’s giant oil like
subsidized company.
Joe Hussein Mama
November 14th, 2012
2:37 pm
B. Shockley — “Poor Joe. Found the word “insurance” on wikipedia and still doesn’t understand what it means.”
Poor Benny. Didn’t bother to read the thread and now stepping all over his crank.
You know, we were having a nice bipartisan discussion for five pages, at least until you came in here and crapped in the punchbowl.
I think I know why Jay gave you a time-out recently.
Stevie Ray
November 14th, 2012
2:37 pm
FRED
The things I will never understand is why did the feds give the banks this pile of dough instead of giving it to homeowners to keep up with payments until this thing blows….more importantly, the RTC worked famously pre S&L debacle…why not now…it really helped the real estate market by gradually putting houses on market over many years…..
TaxPayer
November 14th, 2012
2:37 pm
So. How are Republicans handling their losses. Are they working their way through the denial phase yet.
Fred ™
November 14th, 2012
2:37 pm
Ben Shockley
November 14th, 2012
2:35 pm
“Gee Ben, when you can pay my daughters tuition to Woodward, my wife’s tuition to Vanderbilt for her doctorate, and my taxes, I’ll be happy to hear your drivel. Until then, your lies are pathetic.”
You sure have wasted a lot of money on education, because you still don’t know jack.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Really? How would paying for the education of my wife and daughter equate with me knowing your friend Jack? Does your buddy have a last name? I MAY know him………
getalife
November 14th, 2012
2:38 pm
ben,
You are parsing words and it means nothing.
SS is off the table.
Joe Hussein Mama
November 14th, 2012
2:38 pm
Mick — “Not disputing that it’s called insurance (fica) but I will be collecting at either 62 or 65 – count on it…”
And that’s what we were talking about — preserving it so it would be there for you, Mick.
Benny seems to have missed the entire point of the discussion, but that’s par for the course when it comes to trolls.
Ben Shockley
November 14th, 2012
2:38 pm
“I’m speaking English. What language would you prefer i use? I know several”
Between his bragging on expensive private schools and his supposed knowledge of foreign languages, one gets the impression little freddie has a self-esteem problem. guess that’s why he depends on government and wets the bed at the thought of losing his government-provided security blanket.
Brosephus™
November 14th, 2012
2:39 pm
dB @ 2:32
Shhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!
Joe Hussein Mama
November 14th, 2012
2:40 pm
B. Shockley — “Wow, Joe Hussein was so quick to jump in and respond to all my posts earlier today. Now all of the sudden he can’t quite muster the courage.”
Don’t feel so self-important, Benny. Taking a nice, long whiz is higher on my Hit Parade than responding to you. (giggling)
“ENTITLEMENT”
Sorry, Ben-Jamon.
AmericaShrugged
November 14th, 2012
2:40 pm
Fred – Thanks for the sincere response, too many on here resort to insults and name calling when they face a few unpleasant truths.
I’m with you, over the cliff. We’ve lived beyond our means almost non-stop since Reagan. Let’s bite the bullet, take the recession we’ve earned and build a better future for America and the milleniums. Float the dollar, print $15T of them and pay off the debt. So what if no one has a job and a loaf of bread costs $25!
Nunna Yobinnes
November 14th, 2012
2:40 pm
Fred – If you insist, I think that “Does it make you feel like your dick is longer…” is a tad offensive.
Ben Shockley
November 14th, 2012
2:40 pm
getalife
November 14th, 2012
2:38 pm
“ben,
You are parsing words and it means nothing.”
LMAO. Maybe you better tell JHM, who found the word “insurance” on the SS website and thinks he found the holy grail.
Fred ™
November 14th, 2012
2:41 pm
STEVIE RAY:
I know right? Along the same lines, they gave AIG almost a trillion dollars right? And they took the money and paid off the European banks that invested in them while millions of Americans lost their houses…….
Was it millions? That seems high. I know it was a buttload………
getalife
November 14th, 2012
2:41 pm
ben,
What difference does it make?
Mick
November 14th, 2012
2:42 pm
joe
Sorry, ben may be tart in his responses but they have been on the mark factually regarding social security benefits. It is projected to be 100% solvent until 2033 and can be fixed by raising the cap
Stevie Ray
November 14th, 2012
2:42 pm
Brosephus™
November 14th, 2012
2:28 pm
I’m talking about borrowing to create jobs…many homebuyers, builders, businesses etectera need that capital to move forward..I’m suggesting getting that money to work which creates jobs, tax revenues, and demand…you are either growing or dying…
The feds are borrowing at low rates but what is our return on that investment? Zippo
Brosephus™
November 14th, 2012
2:43 pm
John Konop @ 2:36
That’s my point exactly. Most European countries don’t have payroll taxes, and they have VAT taxes in place. Yet, their employment isn’t much different than ours with our current setup. I don’t see how switching our tax system to some semblance of theirs will spur job creation.
Tinkering with taxes don’t create demand. When somebody’s not working, a tax cut doesn’t put extra money into their pockets. If the government can’t put money into the hands of people to spend, the only other option is for the private sector to give them jobs, therefore putting money in their hands. Nobody seems keen on any type of government stimulus, so that kinda narrows our options when it comes to giving people the money necessary to spur demand, doesn’t it?
getalife
November 14th, 2012
2:43 pm
The President had a press conference on the issues.
Did you cons even bother to listen to him?
Ben Shockley
November 14th, 2012
2:43 pm
Joe still can’t prove SS is insurance. Still pounding his chest though.
Liberals are so funny.
Joe Hussein Mama
November 14th, 2012
2:44 pm
B. Shockley — “Joe, I’ve been paying in for 35 years. I’m entitled to collect retirement benefits, and nothign short of death will prevent that. Fact or fiction?”
Fiction, of course.
Your ideological compatriots are fond of telling us that SS is going broke, so *of course* there won’t be anything left for you.
Silly cons. Can’t y’all even keep your bulldada stories straight? (giggling)
“Poor little Joey………”
Don’t pity *me,* Benny. I’m not the one who had to be put in time-out. (laughing, pointing)
Ben Shockley
November 14th, 2012
2:44 pm
“Sorry, ben may be tart in his responses but they have been on the mark factually regarding social security benefits”
Sorry Mick, Joe is immune to facts.
getalife
November 14th, 2012
2:44 pm
” feds are borrowing at low rates but what is our return on that investment? Zippo”
Total bs and living in a bubble away from the real world.
Brosephus™
November 14th, 2012
2:45 pm
The reason that would spur employment is companies would reinvest the money into their business and workers would consume more with their paychecks increasing ie jobs………
Not likely to happen in the good old USA. Based on past performance, any savings from tax cuts are either going to stockholders or management. Corporations are sitting on record piles of cash, and they’re not reinvesting now, so why would they do so if we give them more money?
JamVet
November 14th, 2012
2:45 pm
Yes, I do have some money. I enlisted in the US Air Force at the age of 17 and learned a very valuable skill set. Among many other invaluable lessons. I then went to work as a civilian at the age of 21 and have made a nice career for myself and have taken good care of my family.
You should have done something similar.
BTW, Redcoat, that is an interesting name.
In the runup to this election I wrote that it would not have surprised me that if today’s Republicans had been around in the 1770s, they would have fought with the British, against the colonialists.
Are you a big King George fan? (And not Bush! LOL!!!)
Joe Hussein Mama
November 14th, 2012
2:45 pm
B. Shockley — “Joe, since wikipedia is your bible”
Fail.
Go back, reread the thread. Return and carry on a polite conversation with the rest of us when you’re prepared to be more the adult you *claim* to be and less the jackazz you’re *demonstrating* yourself to be.
Ben Shockley
November 14th, 2012
2:46 pm
“Fiction, of course.”
Really Joe? enlighten the group and tell me what events will transpire to deny me my social security entitlement.
Poor little Joe…just digging his hole deeper and deeper………
Stevie Ray
November 14th, 2012
2:47 pm
FRED
Just how big is your butt relative to accomodating billions?
The elimination of GStegall, was a significant brick in the crumbling wall…it seemed to work since 1932 or so…in fact, the banks wanted it dead so they could compete with foreign banks…guess that worked out well..
AIG was simply completely defrauded by a handful of traders who were allowed access to the surplus that supported the various insurance operations…this never would have happened if Spitzer didn’t virtually oust Hank Greenberg….he always required CDO’s and similar real estate based investments to be a very minor amount of investment base..
Fred ™
November 14th, 2012
2:47 pm
Between his bragging on expensive private schools and his supposed knowledge of foreign languages, one gets the impression little freddie has a self-esteem problem. guess that’s why he depends on government and wets the bed at the thought of losing his government-provided security blanket.
LOL Benny, you are funny. Don’t quit your day job.
Do you offer anything other than lies or insults? I mean you aren’t funny enough to play with otherwise.
Ben Shockley
November 14th, 2012
2:47 pm
“Go back, reread the thread. Return and carry on a polite conversation with the rest of us when you’re prepared to be more the adult you *claim* to be and less the jackazz you’re *demonstrating* yourself to be.’
Sorry Joe. Calling me names doesn’t change the fact that i have exposed you as a smoke-blower of Clinton-esque proportions.
John Konop
November 14th, 2012
2:48 pm
Ben, Joe is right under our laws SS is not guaranteed. I do think if the safety net ended you would see riots, but clearly if this or Medicare runs out of money the government does not owe it. That is why we must all put the ideologically BS away and solve the problem.
….Regardless of one’s opinion of the recent debt ceiling folderol, the Obama administration’s threat to withhold Social Security checks proved useful, albeit not in the manner intended.
The suggestion that such payments might have not been made should have alerted workers to a painful truth. That truth is that people who have paid into the Social Security system for their entire working lives are guaranteed absolutely nothing insofar as retirement benefits are concerned.
The Social Security Act states in unambiguous and unequivocal terms “(t)he right to alter, amend, or repeal any provision of this chapter is hereby reserved to the Congress.”
This section of the act still is in full force, meaning that as a matter of law, Congress can eliminate the entire Social Security program if it so chooses — a political improbability perhaps, but the legality of such a move is beyond question. Any claims as to workers having “guaranteed” retirement benefits are immediately rendered specious.
Also, a pair of United States Supreme Court decisions held that Social Security is not a contributory insurance program and that workers have no legal or contractual rights to Social Security retirement benefits.
In Helvering v. Davis (1937), the court decided a variety of questions about the Social Security Act, not least of which concerned reserving the revenue generated by the system’s payroll tax for the payment of retirement benefits and the distinction between Congress’ obligation to protect the “general” welfare as contrasted with the “particular” welfare.
Justice Benjamin Cardozo’s majority opinion noted the Social Security Act “lays two different types of tax, an ‘income tax on employees,’ and ‘an excise tax on employers’ … The proceeds of both taxes are to be paid into the Treasury like internal revenue taxes generally, and are not ear-marked in any way.” This means Social Security payroll tax revenue, just like any other tax revenue, is available for Congress to do with as it will.
Cardozo also cited the provision of Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution that Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes to provide for the general welfare. Further, though, he observed “(t)he line must still be drawn between one welfare and another, between particular and general. Where this shall be placed cannot be known through a formula in advance of the event. There is a middle ground or certainly a penumbra in which discretion is at large. The discretion, however, is not confided to the courts. This discretion belongs to Congress. … Nor is the concept of the general welfare static.”
In other words, if Congress decides that in a changed concept of the nation’s general welfare the country is better served by discontinuing the Social Security system, as opposed to the individual worker’s particular welfare of receiving Social Security retirement benefits, it has the legal authority to do so.
In Flemming v. Nestor (1960), the court similarly ruled that workers have neither vested rights nor property interests in payments made into the Social Security system.
Writing for the majority, Justice John Harlan stated “(i)t is apparent that the noncontractual interest of an employee covered by the Act cannot be soundly analogized to that of an annuity, whose right to benefits is bottomed on his contractual premium payments.”
Also, Harlan remarked “(t)o engraft upon the Social Security system a concept of ‘accrued property rights’ would deprive it of the flexibility and boldness in adjustment to ever-changing condition on which it depends.” And finally, he noted “(w)e must conclude that a person covered by the Act has not such a right in benefit payments as would make every defeasance of ‘accrued’ interests violate of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.”
What this means is that payroll taxes paid into the Social Security system are no longer the property of the workers from whom they came, but of the federal government, and are therefore immune to the to the Constitution’s prohibition against governmental “taking” without fair compensation.
Those monthly Social Security checks on which workers are counting are “guaranteed” by political promises only, but not by either statute or case law.
http://onlineathens.com/stories/080611/opi_867419618.shtml
Ben Shockley
November 14th, 2012
2:48 pm
“Do you offer anything other than lies or insults?”
Point out a lie I’ve told.
good luck.
Redcoat
November 14th, 2012
2:48 pm
Who exactly is getting all this borrowed money now? and why? and when is all this borrowed money have to be paid back? and to whom? What Americans are asking for all this borrowed money? and why? What collateral is being used? and what if we can’t pay it back, what then?
I know, just keep doing what your told and pay your taxes! and teach your children the same!
JamVet
November 14th, 2012
2:48 pm
Oh, and forgive my rudeness!
Welcome to the forum, Redcoat!
As you are a new blogger here. (chuckle)
Joe Hussein Mama
November 14th, 2012
2:48 pm
B. Shockley — “Had you bothered to think, you would know the difference between insurance and entitlement, regardless of what it says on the label.”
I thought just fine. And you failed to read.
And I can read the kind of person you are right through the label, as well.
Ben Shockley
November 14th, 2012
2:49 pm
“Joe is right under our laws SS is not guaranteed”
Great, thanks. Just tell us what law and the debate will be over.
Brosephus™
November 14th, 2012
2:50 pm
I’m talking about borrowing to create jobs…many homebuyers, builders, businesses etectera need that capital to move forward..
And with the amount of money needed to get things going, we’d only be setting the next debt bomb to go off eventually. I get what you’re saying, and I somewhat agree.
The primary reason I disagree though, is that we currently have enough money in holding that could be released and do the same thing without borrowing. It’s kind of like the story people here post about the $100 bill going through the town, from the prostitute to the inn keeper, to the grocer, etc… The people who are best positioned to get us moving are the one’s holding back trying to wait and see what’s going to happen.
Fred ™
November 14th, 2012
2:50 pm
Nunna Yobinnes
November 14th, 2012
2:40 pm
Fred – If you insist, I think that “Does it make you feel like your dick is longer…” is a tad offensive.
++++++++++++++++++++
I think slandering America and our highest office is even more offensive. I feel the reason I stated is WHY small impotent little men like that poster do it. Would you feel better had I used the word penis?
Ben Shockley
November 14th, 2012
2:50 pm
Sorry Joe. I know it’s embarassing for a blowhard like you when I expose you in front of your tard lib buddies.
Take it like a man for a change.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
November 14th, 2012
2:51 pm
Ben “I know a MARTA bus driver has a $100K salary, I just don’t have any facts or evidence before I make that claim” Shockley is calling someone a smoke-blower… oh my.
getalife
November 14th, 2012
2:52 pm
You cons did not even listen to the press conference.
You are not informed and still listening to rw media with zippo credibility.
Joe Hussein Mama
November 14th, 2012
2:52 pm
Mick — “Sorry, ben may be tart in his responses but they have been on the mark factually regarding social security benefits. It is projected to be 100% solvent until 2033 and can be fixed by raising the cap”
Ben’s actually quite confused. Having come along late in the discussion, he’s managed to confuse my opinion and fact and, as he is wont to do, has started up an argument with several regulars.
Ben’s neither intelligent nor polite enough to go back and read the thread, as he’s not actually here for discussion. IMO, he’s just looking to troll and knock folks off the topic of discussion, at least until Jay gives him another red card.
Shrug.
Ben Shockley
November 14th, 2012
2:53 pm
Oh my bad…”take it like a man” is probably offensive to a gender-neutral like Joe.
Mick
November 14th, 2012
2:53 pm
konop
Alot of words but I do not know of anyone denied their social security benefits that paid in, so why go there???
Nunna Yobinnes
November 14th, 2012
2:53 pm
No Fred, I just think we should gather around the campfire and sing “Kum ba yah”.
alex
November 14th, 2012
2:53 pm
Nuna, yes quite offensive, your questions are excellent and thank you Joe for the help,I am no economist or banker , I have read several books about this… Joe, of course you are correct that f reddi did not make the direct loans but they did make loans possible by purchasizng the loans made by these companies thus freeing up more cash for more loans, etc. Then you have the securitization issues and then the credit default swaps, ………The issue of AIG has been reviewed in 2 new books reviewed in the “economist”. Yes the administration kept AIG alive to the dismay of the taxpayer and a WHOLE lot more complicated than that..AGAIN, alot of bad players here, but also a lot of flying by the seat of their pants…..Retospective analysiis are always fun , but may not be fair
Joe Hussein Mama
November 14th, 2012
2:54 pm
B. Shockley — “Sorry Mick, Joe is immune to facts.”
Not facts, Ben. Just to you.
Again, go back and read the thread.
Ben Shockley
November 14th, 2012
2:54 pm
“Ben’s neither intelligent nor polite enough to go back and read the thread”
And yet he exposed JHM as a spreader-of-untruths………
Fred ™
November 14th, 2012
2:54 pm
Ben Shockley
November 14th, 2012
2:48 pm
“Do you offer anything other than lies or insults?”
Point out a lie I’ve told.
good luck.
++++++++++++++++++++++++
That was easy. Your first post to me. You implied that I am dependent on the government for my livelihood. That is a lie.
Hi Fred. I still go to work every day, earn my own money, support my own family, and save/invest for my own retirement.
You ought to try it. It delivers positive results quicker than government dependancy every time it’s tried. I guarantee it.
Later you said:
guess that’s why he depends on government and wets the bed at the thought of losing his government-provided security blanket.
Another lie.
So you see Ben, I don’t need “luck” to point out your lies, I merely need to quote you.
DebbieDoRight - Math has a very strong anti-conservative bias
November 14th, 2012
2:54 pm
Why are 30 of the governors Republican if this country is so liberal?
Mainly because the majority of the country are CENTRIST and the repubs pretended to be in the center UNTIL they got elected.
Once elected, their true colors started to show.
that’s why this year, people were pressing the various republicans running for office for more CONCRETE statements. It wasn’t enough for them to say, “I believe that everyone has a choice (buzzword); but I my choice is Pro-Life”.
Moderates started asking pointed questions to these answers. Questions like: “If a person was raped…..and if you were elected…………”; to which we got some crazy, scary answers:
“legitimate rape” seldom leads to pregnancy.
women should be forced to carry their rapists baby to term because forced pregnancy is a gift from God and God intended rape.
Women forced to undergo “probes” before they can have abortions………….
And so on and so forth.
The Republican governor’s that were elected, if they were to have shown their real face first, (good thing ole 47% Mitt did huh!?); then they would NOT have been elected.