GOP willingness to swallow defense cuts is historic
In hindsight, President Barack Obama made one major if understandable miscalculation in the 2011 budget-sequester process. Needing something that would force congressional Republicans to negotiate when the time came, he and his advisers crammed some $500 billion in defense-spending cuts into the bill, believing that congressional conservatives would compromise to avoid implementation of those cuts.
He was wrong. Some Republicans — led by John McCain in the Senate and by House Armed Services chair Buck McKeon, among others — have indeed tried to rally great outrage at the cuts. For example, according to a fact sheet put out by McKeon’s committee:
“In the midst of the most dynamic and complex security environment in recent memory, sequestration would severely diminish America’s global posture. An additional 100,000 soldiers, sailors, Marines, and airmen would be separated from service. Those reductions would lead to:
– The smallest ground force since 1940
– A fleet of fewer than 230 ships, the smallest level since 1915
– The smallest tactical fighter force in the history of the Air Force.… Cuts to spending for the acquisition of military equipment alone would lead the loss of over 1,000,000 private sector jobs. These cuts could push unemployment back up to 9%. Cuts to active-duty and DOD civilian
personnel would amount to over 350,000 jobs lost.”
(According to data released by McKeon’s committee, Georgia alone has 37,000 civilian defense employees, and furloughs will cost the state some $203 million in payroll between now and October.)
However, despite such dire warnings and in a surprise to the Obama administration, congressional Republicans in general have found defense cutbacks far more acceptable than the revenue increases that would be needed to avoid them. And if even Republicans no longer see the Pentagon as invulnerable, that’s historic.
In fact, that change of attitude will have consequences far beyond the immediate short-term spending battle between Republican and Democrats. It represents a national turning point, with potentially major long-term implications not just for defense spending but for how the United States of America conducts itself overseas. It would seem that the American people are no longer content to spend more on defense than every other major country on the planet combined.
The politics behind the change are fairly conventional. In a recent poll by The Hill, 49 percent of likely voters said they would support cutting defense in order to reduce the deficit, while only 37 percent were opposed to the idea.
Contrast those numbers with a similar question asked about entitlements:
To be honest, I first saw inklings about that change in attitude regarding defense not in polls, but in comments on this blog over the past few years. When a number of conservative Georgians began to voice support for making cuts in the Pentagon budget, I realized that public opinion was changing quickly at the grassroots level, in ways that official Washington had not even begun to understand.
But that too is changing, as the sequester demonstrates.
– 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
407 comments Add your comment
Fred ™
March 4th, 2013
12:30 pm
Bosch; And what’s funny is that I suspect the reason he was having so much trouble with it was the reason you pointed out. He probably took an attitude with whoever down at the labor board he was dealing with and so they decided to attitude right back lol. We ALL know who wins THAT fight……..
getalife
March 4th, 2013
12:30 pm
Libs need to get real and admit the fact that government is too big and wastes too much money.
cons need to get real on SS and Medicare is here to stay and stop trying to end them.
You still have ObamaCare to focus on ending so we can get Canada Care.
Everybody is happy, happy, happy.
They call me MISTER JamVet.
March 4th, 2013
12:31 pm
JamVet – There are fifty tomato plants in this garden.
td – you really should read up more on gardening; there are 27 weeds in this garden. And one of them is huge!
The guy is simply incapable of addressing the original point…
lovelyliz
March 4th, 2013
12:32 pm
They’ll cut active duty pay and veterans benefits to the bone before they cut corporate welfare for politically connected defense contractors.
appleseed
March 4th, 2013
12:33 pm
When a man addresses others as boy, son,he’s talking down to you.Thinks self to be superior.
td
March 4th, 2013
12:33 pm
Brosephus™
March 4th, 2013
12:23 pm
The Preamble is like the Declaration of Independence in that it lays out a philosophy but it is not the actual law. Those little articles after the preamble is the law and nowhere in those articles does it state we should take care of the day to day subsistence of the citizens of this nation.
BTW: How is medicaid, foodstamps, section 8 housing, WIC and other means tested programs “promoting the general welfare” of the citizens of this country?
Doggone/GA
March 4th, 2013
12:33 pm
“Further, he has the power to make the priorities of cuts not to be drastic to leave us vulnerable in many areas”
Commander IN Chief, not “and”…and no, he doesn’t have the power you think he does. The sequester is not an ordinary bill and it spells out what must be cut…basically EVERYTHING not specifically excluded.
stands for decibels
March 4th, 2013
12:36 pm
GOP willingness to swallow
Four hours in, and nobody made the effort to mine this comedy-gold setup into a punchline?
Deeply disappointed. Shame. Shame.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
March 4th, 2013
12:36 pm
How is medicaid, foodstamps, section 8 housing, WIC and other means tested programs “promoting the general welfare” of the citizens of this country?
There’s your sign.
Brosephus™
March 4th, 2013
12:38 pm
How is medicaid, foodstamps, section 8 housing, WIC and other means tested programs “promoting the general welfare” of the citizens of this country?
When you can show WHERE I stated that, I will answer HOW. Until then, don’t put your words in my mouth and think I’m gonna defend them. That’s not how it works here, bro. That crap might work with Rush on the radio, but he’s usually dealing with low information people anyway.
by golly
March 4th, 2013
12:38 pm
td-I would bet you are one of the deacons in your church. Am I right?
Bosch
March 4th, 2013
12:39 pm
Yes Fred, I have found the best way to do business is to piss off the people who can, quite literally, shut and padlock my doors, call them retarded guvmint morons and the like. They are SO much nicer that way!
Cheesy Grits
March 4th, 2013
12:39 pm
Four hours in, and nobody made the effort to mine this comedy-gold setup into a punchline?
Deeply disappointed. Shame. Shame.
I was on my radar. Been a busy day at work.
Joe Hussein Mama
March 4th, 2013
12:40 pm
td — “The Preamble is like the Declaration of Independence in that it lays out a philosophy but it is not the actual law.”
Finally, something I have been repeating for two years gets remembered by one of the GOP Crew here.
Paul
March 4th, 2013
12:40 pm
Kamchak
Well, some people also can’t see how promoting clean air, water, power sources, alternate fuels, etc promotes the general welfare, too -
indigo
March 4th, 2013
12:40 pm
I’m guessing the Reublicans will keep throwing roadblocks in front of Obama untill the 2014 mid-term elections. If all goes well for them(or even if it doesn’t) they will continue stonewalling until the 2016 elections.
Their hope is a Republican President and a majority in both houses after the 2016 elections. THEN they can start to spend huge sums on our Military and proceed to slash Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.
Only in America.
They call me MISTER JamVet.
March 4th, 2013
12:41 pm
Some progress has been made!
Now at least td, is no longer pretending that that clause is not even in the US Constitution.
And Bro, good luck chasing these around!
http://tinyurl.com/bvjbfd3
td
March 4th, 2013
12:41 pm
by golly
March 4th, 2013
12:38 pm
td-I would bet you are one of the deacons in your church. Am I right?
Nope. Made the choice about 20 years ago to get divorced and that choice made it impossible for me to be a deacon. Have to pay for my sins.
Fred ™
March 4th, 2013
12:42 pm
Hey Bosch; Forgot to ask? How are the pups? Of course they aren’t pups anymore lol. We are getting a new one on the 18th. Another Mini Badger hound.
Bosch
March 4th, 2013
12:42 pm
Sorry stands, I haven’t got my blog mojo back (Jack)!
Fred ™
March 4th, 2013
12:44 pm
Well let me go help the girls clean the garage for a while. It will give RB and JM a chance to come out of hiding if I’m gone………
Joe Hussein Mama
March 4th, 2013
12:44 pm
Bosch — “Yes Fred, I have found the best way to do business is to piss off the people who can, quite literally, shut and padlock my doors, call them retarded guvmint morons and the like. They are SO much nicer that way!”
I’m seeing a mental picture of RB barricading himself inside the Golden Gallon he runs and going all Waco because of gubmint paperwork. And all because RB’s crayon broke.
getalife
March 4th, 2013
12:45 pm
China’s housing bubble popped.
Down goes China.
So after aq, who is the enemy?
There are none.
Fred ™
March 4th, 2013
12:45 pm
JHM: Thanks for the parting laugh
stands for decibels
March 4th, 2013
12:45 pm
Commander IN Chief, not “and”
And no “bottle-washer” at the end, either.
Bosch
March 4th, 2013
12:45 pm
Fred,
Starbuck and Apollo are doing well, although I did just yell at Apollo to not eat his vomit, which he did anyway. Sigh. The pups are mostly badger hounds, they are super swell. I love them.
Paul
March 4th, 2013
12:48 pm
Bosch
That link I sent you ends after episode 8. Thought you should know before you began watching. So unless hit hit Netflix or Redbox or we buy it, we’re frakked.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
March 4th, 2013
12:50 pm
Well, some people also can’t see how promoting clean air, water, power sources, alternate fuels, etc promotes the general welfare, too -
“Boggles the mind, it does.”
– Thomas “Yoda” Jefferson
Erwin's cat
March 4th, 2013
12:50 pm
JHM – It’s the same kind of mindset that says ‘well, Mr. Brown was SO successful at running that Arabian show horse organization, SURELY he will be a success if he’s placed in charge of FEMA.’
i read an article a few months back that said basically a car guy should run a car company, a shoe guy a shoe company etc etc…how can you run anything w/o being an expert in the field?
td
March 4th, 2013
12:50 pm
getalife
March 4th, 2013
12:45 pm
China’s housing bubble popped.
Down goes China.
So after aq, who is the enemy?
There are none.
And if it has really popped then who is going to continue to lend us that 40 cents on every dollar we are currently spending?
Bosch
March 4th, 2013
12:52 pm
Paul,
I enjoyed that, thank you. It’s all good though, after they cancelled Caprica, I learned not to get too emotionally attached, plus no spin off can compare….it just can’t, can’t.
getalife
March 4th, 2013
12:53 pm
“Tax-exempt bonds, targeted for elimination in the 1980s, have not only endured, but grown, in what amounts to a large corporate giveaway costing taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars.” NYTimes.
There is plenty of corporate welfare that can be cut that will not harm our economy if you cons jump on board and demand the gop to cut it.
Erwin's cat
March 4th, 2013
12:54 pm
td – And if it has really popped then who is going to continue to lend us that 40 cents on every dollar we are currently spending?
do you have any idea how much of our debt China actually owns?
appleseed
March 4th, 2013
12:55 pm
by golly —truth is couldn’t be trusted to pass the collection plate.
Bosch
March 4th, 2013
12:55 pm
td,
We are our own enemy (or something like that).
Paul
March 4th, 2013
12:56 pm
Bosch
I had hopes with Blood and Chrome they’d learned from their mistakes with Caprica. I was quite disappointed when I found it was a one-off and not a series.
getalife
March 4th, 2013
12:57 pm
“And if it has really popped then who is going to continue to lend us that 40 cents on every dollar we are currently spending?”
China;s government acts quickly because they don’t have a gop so they will be fine.
They raised interests rates, more down payment and stricter mortgages so people have to think twice before buying a house.
Their banks did not go all in like ours.
Bosch
March 4th, 2013
12:57 pm
Ok, had fun, gotta run…catch y’all on the morrow!
wahoo
March 4th, 2013
12:58 pm
Brosephus:
Thank you for your response. Now that you have added that last response, I more clearly understand your position.
For the pre-funding the transfer programs to work, the money can’t be used in other ways, or raided to pay for general expenses, as the SS trust fund was. Under that assumption, I would be much more likely to agree with you.
“Only time will show who’s right and who’s wrong.”
It’s a counterfactual. We’ll never know if my approach would yield a better result than the course the nation selected. What we do know is that a decent chunk of sovereign debt capacity has been consumed and this taxpayer is dismayed at the results that we have for our investment thus far.
TBS
March 4th, 2013
12:58 pm
“And if it has really popped then who is going to continue to lend us that 40 cents on every dollar we are currently spending?”
While Japan was surpassed by China several years ago in terms of which country holds the most US debt, Japan’s holdings are on the increase while China’s has been on the decline over the last year or so.
China is certainly the largest holder, but not even close to the only country or foreign private investors who are willing to purchase and purchasing US debt?
appleseed
March 4th, 2013
12:59 pm
China owns approx. 20% of our debt.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
March 4th, 2013
1:00 pm
“OBAMA LIED ……. JANITORS ‘CRIED’ … ” ??
From time to time (like everyone else on here) in the rush of debate, etc. I will post something from an internet or news source that later turns out to be incorrect or incomplete.
When that is pointed out (and if correct) I always recant/admit the particular article is flawed.
Some of you (who usually like to get personal instead of just debating) will immediately call me a “liar”.
So ……………. is Obama a liar ??? Or did he just pass on (without taking the time to check) incorrect information ???
Headline (Washington Post Fact Checker): “Sequester spin: Obama’s false claim of Capitol janitors receiving ‘a pay cut’ ”
“Indeed, Obama’s remarks at the news conference so alarmed Capitol Hill officials that an e-mail was sent by the Capitol building superintendent that comments that people who clean the building would get a cut in pay were “NOT true.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/sequester-spin-obamas-incorrect-claim-of-capitol-janitors-receiving-a-pay-cut/2013/03/01/3407535c-82a9-11e2-b99e-6baf4ebe42df_blog.html
td
March 4th, 2013
1:00 pm
getalife
March 4th, 2013
12:57 pm
“And if it has really popped then who is going to continue to lend us that 40 cents on every dollar we are currently spending?”
China;s government acts quickly because they don’t have a gop so they will be fine.
They raised interests rates, more down payment and stricter mortgages so people have to think twice before buying a house.
Their banks did not go all in like ours.
You really need to see the story that was on 60 minutes last night about how China really works.
They call me MISTER JamVet.
March 4th, 2013
1:01 pm
Why is it the Governments responsibility to care (code word take care of) its citizens?
When I read stuff like this I want to throw up.
It seems that the most strident of the far right wingers have actually convinced themselves that the legitimate role – certainly the primary one according to td – of the US government is simply national defense.
And it is this lack of humanity and basic concern for their fellow countrymen that is what I find so disturbing about them.
And i believe it will be their ultimate undoing as a political philosophy…
Joe Hussein Mama
March 4th, 2013
1:01 pm
E. Cat — “i read an article a few months back that said basically a car guy should run a car company, a shoe guy a shoe company etc etc…how can you run anything w/o being an expert in the field?”
You know what? That’s EXACTLY what I said when Delta brought Leo Mullin on as CEO in 1997.
http://www.forbes.com/profile/leo-mullin/
Delta’s problems weren’t all due to Mullin’s crappy management, but he managed to alienate DL employees, passengers AND management all at the same time. Hell, I was a multi-year Delta Platinum Medallion member (back when Platinum was as high as you could go) and I still jumped ship for another airline that actually seemed to want my business.
DownInAlbany
March 4th, 2013
1:02 pm
So what’s all the fuss about?
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/cbo-federal-revenue-set-record-2013
getalife
March 4th, 2013
1:03 pm
They focus on China because they need an enemy.
Japan tried some stimulus.
The EU tried austerity and want to end it.
The Swiss voted to cap executive pay.
Erwin's cat
March 4th, 2013
1:04 pm
China owns approx. 20% of our debt
try 8%
http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/moneymatters/ss/How-Much-US-Debt-Does-China-Own.htm
getalife
March 4th, 2013
1:04 pm
downer,
The fuss is about unemployment is still too high.
getalife
March 4th, 2013
1:05 pm
But should add the fed is still easing 85 billion a month.
Moderate Line
March 4th, 2013
1:06 pm
Brosephus™ @11:11 am
Moderate
I don’t think Social Security is in the position it is in because people are only concerned with making money.
I was on my phone so typing was a beeyatch. I was referring to the 401k as opposed to a defined pension. Years ago, people retired and had an idea of what they would have as far as retirement income. Now, the only thing that’s somewhat known is Social Security. Having to base your retirement on your 401k is a gamble that we’re losing, regardless to how much you have in your account.
Over the course of your lifetime, you only get 20% of what YOUR money earns while the financial industry pockets 80% without risking a single penny of their money. That’s what I was referring to about turning your retirement over to people who’s only concern is making money for themselves.
This country has gone from being one that took care of their own to being one that’s “every man, woman, and child for themselves”. How can a country who’s GDP exceeds $15 Trillion claim they can’t afford to take care of their own elderly? What kind of sense does that make, especially considering how many love to trot out the misguided information that this is a Christian society. Christ didn’t dump the poor out in the backyard to fend for themselves.
++++
I am not sure I understand the 20% of my money vs the 80% of their money.
From my perspective this is the result of the individualist tendencies of our society. Our society wants the government to stay out their business in both the social and economic realm. The left focuses on the social realm which garners the younger voters and the right focuses on the economic realm which gets them vote of people who want to pay fewer taxes. In the meantime we are moving to a society which is more liberal (classical use of the term) in both economics and socially. The rich really want this liberalization in both realms because they are the beneficiary of fewer rules both socially and economically.
RB from Gwinnett
March 4th, 2013
1:07 pm
“Just a thought, but if your business isn’t doing well, could it be that you are just an obnoxious jerk that no one wants to do business with? ”
I know all you morons like to laugh and joke about the failure of people in business and I truly appreciate your concern for me and my business, but I’m happy to report we’re setting sales records and increasing our hiring efforts to get a few more of our fellow Americans (the ones who want to work….) out of the unemployemnt line. But if it makes you all feel better to laugh and joke and hope people fail, you go right ahead and do that. I’m sure that sorry attitude will make an employer just giddy over the prospects of giving you a job or a promotion.
Jefferson
March 4th, 2013
1:08 pm
Why would you not want to close a loophole? The term itself means it wasn’t planned to work like that ? Only a water carrier I guess.
getalife
March 4th, 2013
1:08 pm
rb is unemployed and that is why he is angry,
getalife
March 4th, 2013
1:09 pm
Loopholes are corporate welfare .
When cons force their party to cut it, the deficit will drop.
JohnnyReb
March 4th, 2013
1:09 pm
Obama lied…..Janitors cried.
There is an unsubstantiated report that Obama ends a word or phrase with a whistling sound when he is lying.
Film at eleven.
TBS
March 4th, 2013
1:10 pm
td
When I said largest holder, should have been more specific. Largest foreign holder of our debt. Of course as EC pointed out the actual percentage of what they hold, with Japan being right behind them.
Majority of US debt is held here in the US
getalife
March 4th, 2013
1:12 pm
reb,
Can you see what happens in ten years because the cuts are for ten years or until congress ends them.
Joe Hussein Mama
March 4th, 2013
1:12 pm
RB — ” But if it makes you all feel better to laugh and joke and hope people fail”
Nobody here wants you to fail, RB. We just wish you would stop bleating and whining about that awful gubmint paperwork.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
March 4th, 2013
1:12 pm
There is an unsubstantiated report that the smoking gun is the mushroom cloud.
There is an unsubstantiated report that we will be greeted as liberators.
Film at eleven.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
March 4th, 2013
1:13 pm
JohnnyReb:
LOL !
Rightwing Troll
March 4th, 2013
1:14 pm
“There is plenty of corporate welfare that can be cut that will not harm our economy if you cons jump on board and demand the gop to cut it.”
But but but… the “job creators” neeeeeed those tax cuts… so’s they can sit on all that extra capital, force their employees to do more with less, and ride it out til a godly, christian, conservative sits in the whitehouse again and all those cuts can then be directed towards social services…
godless heathen - owner of many things he does not need
March 4th, 2013
1:14 pm
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano says U.S. airports, including Los Angeles International and O’Hare International, are already experiencing delays as a result of automatic federal spending cuts.
IOW, you poor bastards have goaded the beast and now you will suffer.
Erwin's cat
March 4th, 2013
1:14 pm
here is an unsubstantiated report that we will be greeted as
liberatorsMorgan FairchildJKL2
March 4th, 2013
1:16 pm
getalife- cons need to get real on SS and Medicare is here to stay and stop trying to end them.
obamacare is largely funded by cuts in Medicare. (Did you not read that in the wonderful bill?)
The bridge program to obamacare ran out of funding 60% thru it’s lifespan. I’m sure obamacare will be under budget as he is the smartest man on the planet and would never lie to us.
The CBO is never wrong…
Rightwing Troll
March 4th, 2013
1:18 pm
“I’m sure obamacare will be under budget as he is the smartest man on the planet and would never lie to us.”
“Iraqi oil will pay for it all”…
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
March 4th, 2013
1:18 pm
MY LAZY GUN !
“Today I swung my front door wide open and placed my Stevens 320 right in the doorway. I gave it 6 shells, and noticing that it had no legs, even placed it in my wheelchair to help it get around. I then left it alone and went about my business.
While I was gone, the mailman delivered my mail, the neighbor boy across the street mowed the yard, a girl walked her dog down the street, and quite a few cars stopped at the stop sign right in front of our house.
After about an hour, I checked on the gun. It was still sitting there in the wheelchair, right where I had left it. It hadn’t rolled itself outside. It certainly hadn’t killed anyone, even with the numerous opportunities it had been presented to do so. In fact, it hadn’t even loaded itself. Well you can imagine my surprise, with all the media hype about how dangerous guns are and how they kill people. Either the media is wrong, and it’s the misuse of guns by PEOPLE that kills people, or I’m in possession of the laziest gun in the world.
Alright, well I’m off to check on my spoons. I hear they’re making people fat.”
Author Unknown
Joe Hussein Mama
March 4th, 2013
1:19 pm
G. Heathen — “IOW, you poor bastards have goaded the beast and now you will suffer.”
On the bright side, airport concessionaires and airlines anticipate increased revenue as they take advantage of the situation. Airlines expect paid membership in their airport clubs and lounges to skyrocket this year as business travelers’ nerves become more and more frayed.
Brosephus™
March 4th, 2013
1:19 pm
JamVet
Thanks, but I’m not chasing anything he’s dishing out today. If he can’t remain in the real world, then he’ll be chasing by himself today.
————–
wahoo: It’s a counterfactual. We’ll never know if my approach would yield a better result than the course the nation selected.
Not necessarily your approach in the specific, but we’ll know whether the path taken vs the one not taken will be the right one.
————–
Moderate Line
It’s 100% of your money, but you’re only getting 20% in the long run. It’s from something that PBS put out long ago in a special on 401ks. That information comes directly from an interview that PBS did with John Bogle, who founded the mutual fund firm Vanguard.
So what do you say to the great mass of people who feel terrific about putting away 6 percent a year, with a 3 percent employer match — that is, 9 percent a year combined starting at around age 35? What do you say to them?
You’d better step it up if you’re putting 9 percent in at age 35, and you’d better also do some other very significant things. One, you’d better keep [the investment] costs down so you aren’t overwhelmed by the tyranny of compounding costs, whatever market return you might get.
… Investors should realize [they] don’t get the market return. In a 9 percent market, we all share 9 percent before we pay the cost of financial intermediation, and after we pay those costs, which are about 2.5 percent a year, we get 6.5 percent on a 9 percent market.
So if I do your average, what percentage of my net growth is going to fees in a 401(k) plan?
Well, it’s awesome. Let me give you a little longer-term example. The example I use in my book is an individual who is 20 years old today starting to accumulate for retirement. That person has about 45 years to go before retirement — 20 to 65 — and then, if you believe the actuarial tables, another 20 years to go before death mercifully brings his or her life to a close. So that’s 65 years of investing. If you invest $1,000 at the beginning of that time and earn 8 percent, that $1,000 will grow in that 65-year period to around $140,000.
Now, the financial system — the mutual fund system in this case — will take about two and a half percentage points out of that return, so you will have a gross return of 8 percent, a net return of 5.5 percent, and your $1,000 will grow to approximately $30,000. One hundred ten thousand dollars goes to the financial system and $30,000 to you, the investor. Think about that. That means the financial system put up zero percent of the capital and took zero percent of the risk and got almost 80 percent of the return, and you, the investor in this long time period, an investment lifetime, put up 100 percent of the capital, took 100 percent of the risk, and got only a little bit over 20 percent of the return. That is a financial system that is failing investors because of those costs of financial advice and brokerage, some hidden, some out in plain sight, that investors face today. So the system has to be fixed.
I’ve got to unscramble what you just said. You said that in the case of the $1,000 invested for 65 years, the financial system is taking 80 percent of the money. But most of us aren’t doing that. In the first place, at 20 we’re out spending it; we’re not putting it away. But set that aside. We’re really talking about people who are probably saving from 35 or 40 or 45 at best for retirement at 55, 60 or 65. and they are plunking the money away into 401(k)s. I’m just asking you, in that system, roughly what chunk of it are people getting back themselves out of their gains, and what chunk of that is going to go to the financial system for managing their money?
Well, in the long run, it’s 80 percent to the financial system, 20 percent to you. In a given year, it’s about 80 percent to you and 20 percent to the financial system, so if you look at 10 years or 15 years, you’re probably talking about 60 percent to you and 40 percent to the financial system maybe over 20 years, something like that. But the longer the period, the greater the impact of that tyranny of compounding costs is.
The entire series of interviews can be found here.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/retirement/world/401k.html
It goes towards what I was saying about the caste system being put into play here. It’s all going so below the radar that most people don’t see it and won’t see it until it’s too late.
Joe Hussein Mama
March 4th, 2013
1:20 pm
JKL — “obamacare is largely funded by cuts in Medicare. (Did you not read that in the wonderful bill?)”
Nope. I didn’t read that in there because it doesn’t *appear* in there.
They call me MISTER JamVet.
March 4th, 2013
1:21 pm
heathen, going to and through LAX sucks big time as it is!
Though the rates are often (a lot higher), if you can, go though Bob Hope International; it rocks. And it isn’t any farther from where movie stars, like yours truly, hangs out, Hollywood and Beverly Hills. (LOL)
Paul
March 4th, 2013
1:23 pm
DownInAlbany
“So what’s all the fuss about?”
Because expenditures still outpace revenue by about 40%, because entities profiting in the billions pay no tax, because people earning half a billion or a billion pay at a fraction of the rate of someone earning $400K a year.
But why’s it rising? Isn’t a Republican mantra you grow the economy and more revenue comes in? So what, a few months after the election and a month after the inauguration Pres Obama’s worked a miracle!!! (I had noted during the election that even if Romney won, natural cycles would continue, things would get better and Republicans and cons here would say it’s all about Romney, increased confidence, etc. But if Obama won they wouldn’t say that).
godless heathen - owner of many things he does not need
March 4th, 2013
1:24 pm
On the bright side, airport concessionaires and airlines anticipate increased revenue as they take advantage of the situation.
In every cloud, a silver lining.
where movie stars, like yours truly, hangs out,
Jamvet, International man of mystery.
JohnnyReb
March 4th, 2013
1:25 pm
I see JamVet is off in the alternate universe as to the primary job of the Federal Government. If anyone can post evidence where the founders saw the Federal Government as wealth redistributors, please do. It would do loads for making your progressive case.
Brosephus™
March 4th, 2013
1:26 pm
Moderate Line
If you read that entire interview with Bogle, you’ll probably see that the way to change that part of our retirement system has already been suggested, and it involves social security. When you don’t have a great pitchman to explain things, you’ll never get people to understand what you’re really suggesting.
Escaped from Email Purgatory
March 4th, 2013
1:26 pm
“This particular moment in time is an abberation to get spending cuts in place since Obama won’t do any cuts.”
Agree with Johnny Reb.
This is an uncharacteristic maneuver based on extreme circumstances. The GOP perceives Obama as unwilling to negotiate in good faith. There’s good reason for that perception. Obama’s not a guy who has much patience for dissenting opinion.
He’s never shown any real interest in negotiating directly with the GOP on deficit reduction anyway. His style is to hit the campaign trail and attack his opposition in hopes of fomenting anger against them. Then make sure the scab is off the wound when the next election rolls around.
Sooner or later, if all goes according to plan, the Dems will gain control of the House too. Then it will really “be on” and Barack can finish his transformation of America. If you liked Obamacare, you’ll love gun control, higher taxes and expanded entitlements.
So far, this tactic has served him well. No matter the adverse consequences, he’s never blamed for them.
An opinion that he may have pushed things too far with the sequester is being shared by a broader spectrum of the electorate. While both the Dems and GOP had to sign off on the sequester, it was his idea.
In the weeks prior to the sequester, Obama articulated its impending, disastrous consequences in speech after speech. Since its enactment, he’s been tempering that rhetoric. Not to mention creating as much space as he can between the shrill doomsaying and his part in spreading it.
The onerous consequences, thought by both sides to be a guarantee that we’d never get to the point of enacting the sequester, will be held to somebody’s account.
Perhaps he knows his name is sharing the top spot on the Prime Suspects list this time. At least with all but the truest of the true believers.
Whew! I think I’m on cliche overload.
Brosephus™
March 4th, 2013
1:27 pm
JamVet
Did you see the results of the Swiss referendum on CEO pay? I know that if anybody here saw that, it would be you.
JKL2
March 4th, 2013
1:28 pm
jamvet- Why is it the Governments responsibility to care (code word take care of) its citizens? When I read stuff like this I want to throw up.
Because America was never designed to be a nanny state. The Fed is so far off the reservation from what they were hired to do, they couldn’t even give you a job description anymore.
Who needs personal responsibility when the government will pick up the tab for all our screw-ups and dictate our lives to us…
Arms Akimbo
March 4th, 2013
1:29 pm
The five year Obama experiment in progressivism has reached its logical conclusion: flat-line economic growth, ever increasing debt, a central bank that can’t cut off the spigot, negative jobs growth, constantly declining disposible income, and an ever dumbed down electorate. The NYT has published a series of critical articals on Obama’s OFA super-pac over the past two weeks. The OFA is not a grass roots organization that elected Obama. It is instead designed to solicit large donations from corporations and lobbyists. The publically advertised price for access to the President is $500k. Obama is setting up this organization to try to gain control of the House in 2014. He is essentially admitting that his first four years have been a failure and that he does not have the leadership skills to accomplish anything in his second term without the ability to strongarm legislation through Congress. Obama is an excellent politician and a talented campaigner, but nevertheless he is a flawed leader because he does not have the ability to foster bipartisanship. The sequester has made him look foolish- tripping over his fabrications from speech to speech. With the GOP willing to accept Defense cuts, it is too bad that Obama is not strong enough to put together the necessary grand bargain the country desperately needs. Someone needs to remind the White House that the election is over and it is time to actually accomplish something rather than move from one self created crisis to another. Unfortunately, it is beyond Obama’s skillset to do much of anything other than campaign for office.
Welcome to the Occupation
March 4th, 2013
1:32 pm
JKL2: “Because America was never designed to be a nanny state. The Fed is so far off the reservation from what they were hired to do, they couldn’t even give you a job description anymore.
Who needs personal responsibility when the government will pick up the tab for all our screw-ups and dictate our lives to us…”
For WHOSE screw-ups?
THAT is the question.
The only ones in the current scenario who have screwed up are bankers who have been compelled to do so in order to survive/thrive in an utterly broken, unjust system.
What has put our public budgets under strain is the requirement that we bail these institutions out.
It’s got nothing to do with OUR screwups, as in, you and me.
JKL2
March 4th, 2013
1:34 pm
rightwing- “Iraqi oil will pay for it all”…
Who said that? Cite please.
Half Century Dawg
March 4th, 2013
1:34 pm
“There is plenty of corporate welfare that can be cut that will not harm our economy if you cons jump on board and demand the gop to cut it.”
This fiscal conservative (not republican) has no problem with closing loop holes to increase revenue as long as the increase goes 100% to paying down the debt.
Brosephus™
March 4th, 2013
1:35 pm
This is an uncharacteristic maneuver based on extreme circumstances. The GOP perceives Obama as unwilling to negotiate in good faith. There’s good reason for that perception. Obama’s not a guy who has much patience for dissenting opinion.
How do you negotiate with someone who isn’t willing to compromise? Continued repeating of this bogus sh*t will not make it come true. The GOP has been insistent on cuts with no revenue. They got cuts with no revenue in 2011 in exchange for the sequester to force a negotiation that contained cuts and revenue.
The GOP is still saying cuts only with no revenue while Obama is offering cuts AND revenue. Seems like a standoff to me, which is why the sequester kicked in.
JohnnyReb
March 4th, 2013
1:36 pm
Escape from Email Purgatory is correct (and not just for agreeing with me).
What is Obama above all else? A Community Organizer.
What do Community Organizers do?
They stir up as much hate and discontent that they can to achieve their goals.
Obama’s community organizer tactics go back to Saul Alinsky where any trick and lie in the book is OK if it helps achieve the goal.
Throw in 20 years listening to Jeramiah Wright’s black liberation theology and we have one messed up guy as POTUS.
Welcome to the Occupation
March 4th, 2013
1:39 pm
Half Century Dawg: “This fiscal conservative (not republican) has no problem with closing loop holes to increase revenue as long as the increase goes 100% to paying down the debt.”
Why?
Our debt is not really something that needs to be “paid down”, the way a household’s debt needs to be.
Where do you get this idea that you can jump from a household budget scenario to a national budget when the two really have nothing to do with each other?
JohnnyReb
March 4th, 2013
1:40 pm
Brosephus – it may be 6 of one, half dozen of the other, however, sequester was Obama’s idea when he would not compromise with Boehner on spending cuts. Obama still won’t agree to spending cuts.
The man gives the SOTU speech and what does he do? He wants three more entitlement programs. He did not state how he would pay for those, but it’s common knowledge he wants to pay for them through tax increases.
He never quites campaigning and goes around the country blaming Republicans for everything from taking money from the poor to Michelle’s PMS.
Do you really think he can foster compromise acting the way he does?
The anwer is no. He is devisive, not inclusive.
Joe Hussein Mama
March 4th, 2013
1:42 pm
JKL — “Who said that? Cite please.”
Both Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz.
http://watchingthewatchers.org/news/624/iraq-war-cost-little-and-iraq-oil
http://www.factcheck.org/2010/03/rove-vs-brokaw-and-other-sunday-squabbles/
Welcome to the Occupation
March 4th, 2013
1:43 pm
By the way, JohnnyReb I see you’re still here.
Do you realize what an earth-shattering stupidity you uttered earlier this morning? You actually said of Obama, the must ruthless cutter that this country has seen in the last half-century, that he refuses to do any cuts.
If you don’t realize the stupidity of that statement, then I think you instantly disqualify yourself from any grownup conversation and should skulk away in shame.
But will you skulk away?
I doubt is, as to do so would required you to have shame, something those of your ideological stripe by definition do not have.
td
March 4th, 2013
1:44 pm
They call me MISTER JamVet.
March 4th, 2013
1:01 pm
Why is it the Governments responsibility to care (code word take care of) its citizens?
When I read stuff like this I want to throw up.
It seems that the most strident of the far right wingers have actually convinced themselves that the legitimate role – certainly the primary one according to td – of the US government is simply national defense.
And it is this lack of humanity and basic concern for their fellow countrymen that is what I find so disturbing about them.
And i believe it will be their ultimate undoing as a political philosophy…
Before you throw up then you should really walk into the waiting room of your local DFCS office and see what the “great society” has done to the poor souls of generational welfare recipients. If that look of hopelessness does not make you throw up then you have no soul my friend. When a government makes its citizens dependent on it then it deprives them of having a meaning to their lives.
The government is cold, legalized and follows policy to the tee. They do not give people the right message about the meaning of work. The great society has doomed millions of our fellow citizens to meaningless life. How could you support such a system and still say you care?
It is religions responsibility to take care of the poor and if they can not handle the job then the local community and then the state. The Federal government should stay the hell out of it.
curious
March 4th, 2013
1:45 pm
If the Federal Government needs to stop distributing wealth, then end all subsidies, tax breaks, and foreign aid.now.. We’re tried of our money going to moochers.
Half Century Dawg
March 4th, 2013
1:47 pm
Welcome to the Occupation , because we are paying interest on that debt and if we pay it down, we pay less interest. That money could be better applied to other needs or reduced taxes.
Why in your mind does debt not matter? I am open minded and always willing to learn.
JohnnyReb
March 4th, 2013
1:48 pm
Welcome to the Occupation – just what universe do you reside? It’s common knowledge that Obama is the biggest spending president of all time.
It’s also common knowledge that Obama won’t agree to spending cuts instead of tax increases.
But, you keep believing I’m an idiot if it makes you feel better.
What I have found is that Liberals jump to personal attack when the facts don’t support their wishes.
hamiltonAZ
March 4th, 2013
1:49 pm
In a discussion of a different type of entitlement, the NYT offers a story about tax exempt bonds:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/05/business/qualified-private-activity-bonds-come-under-new-scrutiny.html?hp
Brosephus™
March 4th, 2013
1:50 pm
Brosephus – it may be 6 of one, half dozen of the other, however, sequester was Obama’s idea when he would not compromise with Boehner on spending cuts. Obama still won’t agree to spending cuts.
Umm, I think you have that backwards. Obama compromised with Boehner, and that’s how we ended up with the sequestration. Obama caved on revenues in 2011 in exchange for the sequester to force a balanced deal. Nice fail on revisionistic history there.
Do you really think he can foster compromise acting the way he does?
The anwer is no. He is devisive, not inclusive.
I don’t think it matters whether he can foster compromise or not. He’s not the only party that has to compromise. The GOP has to be willing to compromise, but it seems as though they have no idea of what real compromise entails. The GOP is stuck on compromise being them getting 100% of what THEY want and denying Dems 100% of what they want.
Obama’s actually much nicer than me as I would have told the GOP to Go F**k Yourself a long time ago. That’s what a real Angry Black Man raised in Black Liberation Theology would do and not this mamby pamby speech stuff that he’s doing. They don’t compromise or deal with White people very well. I don’t ascribe to BLT at all, but to try to paint Obama as some boogeyman shows that y’all are some real scaredycats when it’s all said and done.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
March 4th, 2013
1:50 pm
What I have found is that Liberals jump to personal attack when the facts don’t support their wishes.
Ann Coulter says, “What?”
JohnnyReb
March 4th, 2013
1:58 pm
Brosephus – it may be years before we truly know if Obama moved the goal posts or if Boehner could not deliver what he and Obama had agreed. Your side blames Boehner, mine Obama.
Currently, it is very clear the reason there are no discussions is that Obama wants revenue increases from eliminating loopholes while Republicans are telling him that he got his revenue increase in the form of the tax rate increase – eliminating loopholes is, in effect, increasing tax rates even though the published rate remains flat.
I don’t think Obama is a boogy man. I think he is very skilled at deception, he lies, and ignores his oath.
curious
March 4th, 2013
1:59 pm
Why not close loopholes?
JKL2
March 4th, 2013
2:03 pm
Welcome- The only ones in the current scenario who have screwed up are bankers who have been compelled to do so in order to survive/thrive in an utterly broken, unjust system.
Not sure about broken and unjust, but to me a bailout is a bailout. Businesses screw up, the government jumps up to bail them out (TARP, etc). People screw up, the government jumps in to bail them out (healthcare, food, housing, retirement, etc)
The federal government needs to get out of the charity business and focus on the things it was designed to do.
getalife
March 4th, 2013
2:04 pm
“Why not close loopholes?”
Because of unlimited corporate donations.
JohnnyReb
March 4th, 2013
2:05 pm
Closing loopholes would be fine IF the rates are adjusted to revenue neutral.
Rates are based on Adjusted Gross Income (AGI). If the rate is unchanged and loophole elimination increases the AGI, a person pays more taxes. It’s the same result as a rate increase.