We're Doomed, He Hasn't a Clue

[MaTH716]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Believe it or not, some people are not following the Dems budget plan of spending to prevent bankruptcy.

I'm not talking about ridiculous spending, I'm talking about the day to day cost of living. There are many people just struggling to survive now. How are they supposed to save for their retirements?

[jms62]

Originally Posted by MaTH716

I'm not talking about ridiculous spending, I'm talking about the day to day cost of living. There are many people just struggling to survive now. How are they supposed to save for their retirements?

Dell is without Sympathy or Empathy for his fellow Americans although he will tell us otherwise despite the hundreds of posts that confirm the former.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by jms62

Dell is without Sympathy or Empathy for his fellow Americans although he will tell us otherwise despite the hundreds of posts that confirm the former.

...in your opinion.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by joeydb

...in your opinion.

And so are you clueless.

[MaTH716]

Originally Posted by jms62

Dell is without Sympathy or Empathy for his fellow Americans although he will tell us otherwise despite the hundreds of posts that confirm the former.

Really J, what I'm saying has nothing to do with party lines. Cause honestly, the politicians don't give a s.hit about anything else except getting re-elected.
There are a lot of people hurting out there. We have discussed it before, the cost of living keeps going up and wages are not. The housing market continues to slip and you have to believe that there will eventually be a big credit card situation. For the most part, people with jobs can't be worried about raises, they are just happy to be employed. So honestly to Dell (or whoever else thinks they have the answer) how are people who are barely making ends meet now (if they are even doing that), supposed to save for their retirement?

[rpncaine]

Originally Posted by MaTH716

Really J, what I'm saying has nothing to do with party lines. Cause honestly, the politicians don't give a s.hit about anything else except getting re-elected.
There are a lot of people hurting out there. We have discussed it before, the cost of living keeps going up and wages are not. The housing market continues to slip and you have to believe that there will eventually be a big credit card situation. For the most part, people with jobs can't be worried about raises, they are just happy to be employed. So honestly to Dell (or whoever else thinks they have the answer) how are people who are barely making ends meet now (if they are even doing that), supposed to save for their retirement?

Yep, and the companies know it too. They are using it for leverage. Shut up, do your job or we'll get one of the 100's of others who would love to have your job.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by rpncaine

Yep, and the companies know it too. They are using it for leverage. Shut up, do your job or we'll get one of the 100's of others who would love to have your job.

But according to Joey thats ok becuase they are in business to make a profit and OWE Nothing to the country they operate in. They shouldn't be taxed , regulated and they should hire workers where they are the cheapest.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by jms62

But according to Joey thats ok becuase they are in business to make a profit and OWE Nothing to the country they operate in. They shouldn't be taxed , regulated and they should hire workers where they are the cheapest.

They ARE in business to make profit. That's indisputable. That's what separates them from nonprofit corporations.

Any taxes that are levied ARE paid by the consumers of the products and services of that company. It's pointless to keep raising taxes on corporations, ipso facto.

They CAN move and WILL move if they can profit by that, or undo a would-be loss.

Last, but not least - if you are successful in extracting sums of money from companies through taxes, fees, regulations and the like, and you also prevent them somehow from moving or passing the costs on to the consumers, they will go out of business. Unlike the government, they cannot operate at a loss.

I'm not saying I like it that way. I'm saying that's the way it really is, and it is pointless to talk about "the way it should be."

[jms62]

Originally Posted by joeydb

They ARE in business to make profit. That's indisputable. That's what separates them from nonprofit corporations.

Any taxes that are levied ARE paid by the consumers of the products and services of that company. It's pointless to keep raising taxes on corporations, ipso facto.

They CAN move and WILL move if they can profit by that, or undo a would-be loss.

Last, but not least - if you are successful in extracting sums of money from companies through taxes, fees, regulations and the like, and you also prevent them somehow from moving or passing the costs on to the consumers, they will go out of business. Unlike the government, they cannot operate at a loss.

I'm not saying I like it that way. I'm saying that's the way it really is, and it is pointless to talk about "the way it should be."

LOL... Isn't this wholeboard about "How it Should Be" ?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by joeydb

They ARE in business to make profit. That's indisputable. That's what separates them from nonprofit corporations.

Any taxes that are levied ARE paid by the consumers of the products and services of that company. It's pointless to keep raising taxes on corporations, ipso facto.

They CAN move and WILL move if they can profit by that, or undo a would-be loss.

Last, but not least - if you are successful in extracting sums of money from companies through taxes, fees, regulations and the like, and you also prevent them somehow from moving or passing the costs on to the consumers, they will go out of business. Unlike the government, they cannot operate at a loss.

I'm not saying I like it that way. I'm saying that's the way it really is, and it is pointless to talk about "the way it should be."

So how's that been working out for us for the past 50 years, hum?

You have zero, absolutely zero, concrete grasp of how the economic corporate engine of this country is functioning now, and has been for the past 50 years, and what changes have wrought over that time, and how corps have benefited or not, and what has happened to our jobs. Zero.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by MaTH716

I'm not talking about ridiculous spending, I'm talking about the day to day cost of living. There are many people just struggling to survive now. How are they supposed to save for their retirements?

Many can't right now and I realize that. There will be a even larger reliance on SS in the future and that's why I think before we send another check to the mideast or engage in some stupid program like paying for cars to be destroyed the SS fund should be at least partially funded with real assets rather than credits. In other words collected SS taxes should not be used for anything other than SS payments! It's one way we can control the wasteful spending, while reducing the debt, while insuring seniors now and in the future have access to their money that they've put in. It's one of those very rare win-win-win situations.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Many can't right now and I realize that. There will be a even larger reliance on SS in the future and that's why I think before we send another check to the mideast or engage in some stupid program like paying for cars to be destroyed the SS fund should be at least partially funded with real assets rather than credits. In other words collected SS taxes should not be used for anything other than SS payments! It's one way we can control the wasteful spending, while reducing the debt, while insuring seniors now and in the future have access to their money that they've put in. It's one of those very rare win-win-win situations.

Got to admit you nailed this one.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Many can't right now and I realize that. There will be a even larger reliance on SS in the future and that's why I think before we send another check to the mideast or engage in some stupid program like paying for cars to be destroyed the SS fund should be at least partially funded with real assets rather than credits. In other words collected SS taxes should not be used for anything other than SS payments! It's one way we can control the wasteful spending, while reducing the debt, while insuring seniors now and in the future have access to their money that they've put in. It's one of those very rare win-win-win situations.

Who can have a problem with people getting THEIR money. If they put in $100k, they should get $100k. Not $150k. Their money, but no one else's.

And don't tax it. It was a tax to begin with.

[paulo537]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Who can have a problem with people getting THEIR money. If they put in $100k, they should get $100k. Not $150k. Their money, but no one else's.

And don't tax it. It was a tax to begin with.

Pay in ~45 years, get no gain at all? Can I get a little interest?

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by paulo537

Pay in ~45 years, get no gain at all? Can I get a little interest?

Right now you stand to not get back the principal, especially after taxes. This is why Social Security is a loser.

If you wanted interest, you'd invest that money yourself in something stable. Or loan it out for interest like a bank, with collateral having intrinsic value to protect your investment.

This is why Social Security should become a -gasp- "public option". You should be able to opt out. They won't let you since they need you to prop up the Ponzi Scheme. There are too many retirees and too few workers, there never was any trust fund, and they pay many people to administer it. And they tax your "benefit" - which is the payment you get, originally taken through taxes. It's taxed TWICE.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Right now you stand to not get back the principal, especially after taxes. This is why Social Security is a loser.

Completely, 100% false.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Who can have a problem with people getting THEIR money. If they put in $100k, they should get $100k. Not $150k. Their money, but no one else's.

And don't tax it. It was a tax to begin with.

That's not what the program is. Geeshus cripes, it's not a savings account. It's not a retirement account. It's not a ****ing tax.

It's an old-age pension, a safety net, that we the society gives our seniors, because we got tired of seeing them die of poverty in the streets.

And there is no major or immediate - or even intermediate - problem with Social Security meeting all it's obligations. This is all false alarm and nonsensical straw men.

Geehus - worry about something that matters, that is a real problem, like Medicaid or Medicare. Good lord.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Riot

That's not what the program is. Geeshus cripes, it's not a savings account. It's not a retirement account. It's not a ****ing tax.

It's an old-age pension, a safety net, that we the society gives our seniors, because we got tired of seeing them die of poverty in the streets.

And there is no major or immediate - or even intermediate - problem with Social Security meeting all it's obligations. This is all false alarm and nonsensical straw men.

Geehus - worry about something that matters, that is a real problem, like Medicaid or Medicare. Good lord.

medicare is a part of ss, it's part of the ss act that amended the social security program. 1965.
just reminding you of that, so that in future when i mention that ss needs help, it's the entire program, not just the retirement portion.