obamas job proposal

[horseofcourse]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Cliff Note Version

Give me $450 billion now to spend now and I won't spend as much over the next ten years. It will equal out ten years from now, trust me, now gmme that money. I was just kidding about not being able to send out social security checks a couple months ago.

Obviously social security is the most efficient government system in effect right now. Nothing else is funded at all right now. Social security is fully solvent for 25 years and if nothing at all is done 75 percent solvent after that even with the trillions pilfered from it. So yeah, that was comedy his statement on that. Exactly how much should be cut from the military budget?? I know we agree on that. We can just pick a percent and go from that. The money spent on that is what needs drastic reducing without question. I agree.

It is pure common knowledge by everyone in this country that social security has added exactly zero to the deficit...nothing...it is it's own FULLY funded system and not an entitlement program in any way shape or form.

[jms62]

450 Billion just seems like a lot of money for buying the votes of the construction workers he put back to work. It is a bandaid on amputated limb. Until American workers are willing to work for wages equal to India and China we are screwed. DEFLATION anyone? He even said it last night "The Race to the Bottom".

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by horseofcourse

Obviously social security is the most efficient government system in effect right now. Nothing else is funded at all right now. Social security is fully solvent for 25 years and if nothing at all is done 75 percent solvent after that even with the trillions pilfered from it. So yeah, that was comedy his statement on that. Exactly how much should be cut from the military budget?? I know we agree on that. We can just pick a percent and go from that. The money spent on that is what needs drastic reducing without question. I agree.

It is pure common knowledge by everyone in this country that social security has added exactly zero to the deficit...nothing...it is it's own FULLY funded system and not an entitlement program in any way shape or form.

really?

from factcheck:

Social Security and the Deficit

Democratic Rep. Xavier Becerra of California said that he would "fight to take [Social Security] off the table" in budget negotiations, because it "hasn't contributed 1 cent to the deficit that we face today, nor 1 cent to any of the national debt, the $14.3 trillion." We take no position on whether Social Security should be cut, but it's wrong to say it's not contributing to the deficit.
Social Security benefits paid were more than payroll taxes in 2010, leading to a cash deficit of $49 billion. For 2011, the Social Security and Medicare Boards of Trustees project a $46 billion deficit. And those figures don't include the billions more the government will have to borrow to cover that reduction in payroll taxes that was in last year's deal to extend the Bush tax cuts.

http://factcheck.org/2011/07/debt-li...bate-round-up/

[horseofcourse]

Originally Posted by Danzig

really?

from factcheck:

Social Security and the Deficit

Democratic Rep. Xavier Becerra of California said that he would "fight to take [Social Security] off the table" in budget negotiations, because it "hasn't contributed 1 cent to the deficit that we face today, nor 1 cent to any of the national debt, the $14.3 trillion." We take no position on whether Social Security should be cut, but it's wrong to say it's not contributing to the deficit.
Social Security benefits paid were more than payroll taxes in 2010, leading to a cash deficit of $49 billion. For 2011, the Social Security and Medicare Boards of Trustees project a $46 billion deficit. And those figures don't include the billions more the government will have to borrow to cover that reduction in payroll taxes that was in last year's deal to extend the Bush tax cuts.

http://factcheck.org/2011/07/debt-li...bate-round-up/

well there you have it, I stand corrected. Let's gut it...get that moolah in the wall street casino pronto!!

[horseofcourse]

GIRALDI: And, of course, none of this has been investigated. What do you think the chances are that the Obama administration will try to end this criminal activity?

EDMONDS: Well, even during Obama’s presidential campaign, I did not buy into his slogan of “change” being promoted by the media and, unfortunately, by the naïve blogosphere. First of all, Obama’s record as a senator, short as it was, spoke clearly. For all those changes that he was promising, he had done nothing. In fact, he had taken the opposite position, whether it was regarding the NSA’s wiretapping or the issue of national-security whistleblowers. We whistleblowers had written to his Senate office. He never responded, even though he was on the relevant committees.

As soon as Obama became president, he showed us that the State Secrets Privilege was going to continue to be a tool of choice. It’s an arcane executive privilege to cover up wrongdoing—in many cases, criminal activities. And the Obama administration has not only defended using the State Secrets Privilege, it has been trying to take it even further than the previous terrible administration by maintaining that the U.S. government has sovereign immunity. This is Obama’s change: his administration seems to think it doesn’t even have to invoke state secrets as our leaders are emperors who possess this sovereign immunity. This is not the kind of language that anybody in a democracy would use.

The other thing I noticed is how Chicago, with its culture of political corruption, is central to the new administration. When I saw that Obama’s choice of chief of staff was Rahm Emanuel, knowing his relationship with Mayor Richard Daley and with the Hastert crowd, I knew we were not going to see positive changes. Changes possibly, but changes for the worse. It was no coincidence that the Turkish criminal entity’s operation centered on Chicago.


...nothing to see here. Move along little doggies.

It was unfathomable we could have a worse president than Clinton...the next one was infinitely worse. It was unfathomable we could have a worse president than Bush...the next one was infinitely worse. good, God, what's coming in 2012?? The trend is very bad.

[horseofcourse]

so Obama made a nice campaign speed last night signifying absolutely nothing?? How quaint.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by horseofcourse

well there you have it, I stand corrected. Let's gut it...get that moolah in the wall street casino pronto!!

lol
no, you don't get rid of it. but we certainly can't pretend it's just peachy either.

[horseofcourse]

Originally Posted by Danzig

lol
no, you don't get rid of it. but we certainly can't pretend it's just peachy either.

It's over. Obama's number one priority was to gut the remnants of the New Deal from day one. He absolutely loves the payroll tax cut which was the first step to begin it's gutting. He's perfect for the masters...a democrat, he can go further than anyone else as the tribalism warrants support for abysmal policy positions. He's the one that had the alan simpson led commission to start "entititlement" gashing. I really think the masters want a second term for him, but he's been so horrific it's gonna be tough to pull off. Wall street wants that money, bad. they'll get it.

[Danzig]

social security isn't going anywhere if that's what you're suggesting.