Is the GOP intentionally preventing a recovery?

Were you aware that reality doesn't give a shit about your claims?

800px-U.S._Federal_Spending_-_FY_2007.png

Like I said, defense is the biggest single item. SS is an off budget insurance program, Medicare and Medicaid are TWO items, despite being stuck together arbitrarily on that chart.
:lol:

It really pisses you off that America has the most powerful military in the world, doesn't it?

Tough shit.

No it just saddens me that there are people in this country stupid enough to believe that a nation's greatness can be measured by the size of its armies.
 
Synthaholic, I'll address this to you directly, since only the hysterical chick took a swing and a miss at it.

So, in essence, liberals believe that the government, in actuality, owns everything in this country, and that the government shall determine how much each citizen in this country is allowed to keep.

Does that sum it up?


You can't disagree with that statement if you feel the government is entitled to keep what it sees fit.
 
Like I said, defense is the biggest single item. SS is an off budget insurance program, Medicare and Medicaid are TWO items, despite being stuck together arbitrarily on that chart.
:lol:

It really pisses you off that America has the most powerful military in the world, doesn't it?

Tough shit.

No it just saddens me that there are people in this country stupid enough to believe that a nation's greatness can be measured by the size of its armies.
We sleep soundly in our beds because rough men -- and women -- stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm.

America is a great nation, leftist hand-wringing and historical revision to the contrary. It's given you freedoms that you would enjoy in few other nations.
 
What's the difference between a tax law, and a law against murder, speeding, shoplifting, possessing cocaine, etc., etc., etc.

Is it ALL just tyranny enforced at the point of a gun?

In the later case, there is a victim. Laws against rape, murder and robbery prevent an aggressor from using force against an innocent victim. In the case of taxation, government is the aggressor. Government initiates force against the victim.
 
Synthaholic, I'll address this to you directly, since only the hysterical chick took a swing and a miss at it.

So, in essence, liberals believe that the government, in actuality, owns everything in this country, and that the government shall determine how much each citizen in this country is allowed to keep.

Does that sum it up?


You can't disagree with that statement if you feel the government is entitled to keep what it sees fit.

The People decide what the government can and can't do.
 
Name a Liberal boondoggle.

Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security.

Oh Bull, SS has been working for over 75 years. And it's been working very well. I guess you are one of those Americans that haven't taken the time to find out about the program. But don't blame SS for your laziness.

Bernie Madoff's Ponzi scheme worked very well for decades. It was still a Ponzi scheme, and Bernie is a crook.
 
Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security.

Oh Bull, SS has been working for over 75 years. And it's been working very well. I guess you are one of those Americans that haven't taken the time to find out about the program. But don't blame SS for your laziness.
Social Security Will Begin Going Broke This Year, Congress Warned

Actuaries Report 2010: Social Security Insolvency May Occur Sooner Than Predicted | Pax Americana Institute

Yeah. Sounds like it's working great.

Naturally you found the most conservative websites you could find. But it doesn't sound like SS isn't working...it sounds like they are trying to scare you at some point in the future. SS does need to be tweeked. I never said anything different. But there are people that think that by raising the cap it will bring in enough money to cover those heavy years until the next boom generation gets to working age.

Social Security

Social Security expenditures exceeded the program’s non-interest income in 2010 for the first time since 1983. The $49 billion deficit last year (excluding interest income) and $46 billion projected deficit in 2011 are in large part due to the weakened economy and to downward income adjustments that correct for excess payroll tax revenue credited to the trust funds in earlier years. This deficit is expected to shrink to about $20 billion for years 2012-2014 as the economy strengthens. After 2014, cash deficits are expected to grow rapidly as the number of beneficiaries continues to grow at a substantially faster rate than the number of covered workers. Through 2022, the annual cash deficits will be made up by redeeming trust fund assets from the General Fund of the Treasury. Because these redemptions will be less than interest earnings, trust fund balances will continue to grow. After 2022, trust fund assets will be redeemed in amounts that exceed interest earnings until trust fund reserves are exhausted in 2036, one year earlier than was projected last year. Thereafter, tax income would be sufficient to pay only about three-quarters of scheduled benefits through 2085.

Under current projections, the annual cost of Social Security benefits expressed as a share of workers’ taxable wages will grow rapidly from 11-1/2 percent in 2007, the last pre-recession year, to roughly 17 percent in 2035, and will then dip slightly before commencing a slow upward march after 2050. Costs display a slightly different pattern when expressed as a share of GDP. Program costs equaled roughly 4.2 percent of GDP in 2007, and are projected to increase gradually to 6.2 percent of GDP in 2035 and then decline to about 6.0 percent of GDP by 2050 and remain at about that level.

The projected 75-year actuarial deficit for the combined Old-Age and Survivors Insurance and Disability Insurance (OASDI) Trust Funds is 2.22 percent of taxable payroll, up from 1.92 percent projected in last year’s report. This deficit amounts to 17 percent of tax receipts, and 14 percent of program outlays.

The 0.30 percentage point increase in the OASDI actuarial deficit and the one-year advance in the exhaustion date for the combined trust funds primarily reflects lower estimates for death rates at advanced ages, a slower economic recovery than was assumed last year, and the one-year advance of the valuation period from 2010-2084 to 2011-2085.

While the combined OASDI program continues to fail the long-range test of close actuarial balance, it does satisfy the conditions for short-range financial adequacy. Combined trust fund assets are projected to exceed one year’s projected benefit payments for more than ten years, through to 2035. However, the Disability Insurance (DI) program satisfies neither the long-range nor short-range tests for financial adequacy. DI costs have exceeded non-interest income since 2005 and trust fund exhaustion is projected for 2018; thus changes to improve the financial status of the DI program are needed soon.
Trustees Report Summary

I did not copy anything to do with the medical parts of the programs as I don't know enough about it to comment. I know as much about that as you do about SS.
 
Where did you earn the money? Here.


How does that entitle the government to take it?

:confused: So you don't expect to have to pay the military? or FEMA? You don't want to use the roads? Or maybe you think they should all be toll roads even though postal roads are part of the constitution. Just how do you think those programs should be paid for? Honestly, this particular discussion is one of the stupidest on this board.

Whether toll roads are practical or not isn't the issue. We are discussing a question of morality. How does that mere fact that I live in the USA entitle the government to take anything from me?
 
Synthaholic, I'll address this to you directly, since only the hysterical chick took a swing and a miss at it.

So, in essence, liberals believe that the government, in actuality, owns everything in this country, and that the government shall determine how much each citizen in this country is allowed to keep.

Does that sum it up?


You can't disagree with that statement if you feel the government is entitled to keep what it sees fit.

The People decide what the government can and can't do.

Like Obamacare?
 
Yes - an entitlement.

wrong. Military benefits are payment for services rendered. Entitlements are payment for breathing.

Medicare and SS are funded by payroll taxes. You have to have paid in to get Medicare, and SS retirement benefits.

Not true at all. People started collecting Social Security the day the law went into effect. They never paid a dime into the program. There are numerous other ways you can collect without ever having paid into it.
 
Synthaholic, I'll address this to you directly, since only the hysterical chick took a swing and a miss at it.

So, in essence, liberals believe that the government, in actuality, owns everything in this country, and that the government shall determine how much each citizen in this country is allowed to keep.

Does that sum it up?


You can't disagree with that statement if you feel the government is entitled to keep what it sees fit.

The People decide what the government can and can't do.

In other words, "the people" own everything you make and allow you to keep a portion of it?
 
Like I said, defense is the biggest single item. SS is an off budget insurance program, Medicare and Medicaid are TWO items, despite being stuck together arbitrarily on that chart.
:lol:

It really pisses you off that America has the most powerful military in the world, doesn't it?

Tough shit.

No it just saddens me that there are people in this country stupid enough to believe that a nation's greatness can be measured by the size of its armies.

You appear to be ignoring the fact that social security/medicare/medicade make up 43% of the entire budget.

I am not saying that cuts don't need to be made to defense--cuts are going to have to be made EVERYWHERE.

There is absolutely NO WAY that taxes alone can pay for 14.3 trillion red ink now with another 64 TRILLION in unfunded liabilites due to babyboomers now entering these programs.
 
:lol:

It really pisses you off that America has the most powerful military in the world, doesn't it?

Tough shit.

No it just saddens me that there are people in this country stupid enough to believe that a nation's greatness can be measured by the size of its armies.
We sleep soundly in our beds because rough men -- and women -- stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm.

America is a great nation, leftist hand-wringing and historical revision to the contrary. It's given you freedoms that you would enjoy in few other nations.

As opposed to right wing pearl clutching? and you have a hell of a lot of nerve talking about revisionist history... you assholes are the masters.
 
Synthaholic, I'll address this to you directly, since only the hysterical chick took a swing and a miss at it.

So, in essence, liberals believe that the government, in actuality, owns everything in this country, and that the government shall determine how much each citizen in this country is allowed to keep.

Does that sum it up?


You can't disagree with that statement if you feel the government is entitled to keep what it sees fit.

The People decide what the government can and can't do.

Obviously these are people that don't believe they are part of the government. They just don't believe in "we the people." So rather then work to make the country a better place and the government truly "we the people" they sit around on their butts and insult people.

It is sad.
 
How does that entitle the government to take it?

:confused: So you don't expect to have to pay the military? or FEMA? You don't want to use the roads? Or maybe you think they should all be toll roads even though postal roads are part of the constitution. Just how do you think those programs should be paid for? Honestly, this particular discussion is one of the stupidest on this board.

Whether toll roads are practical or not isn't the issue. We are discussing a question of morality. How does that mere fact that I live in the USA entitle the government to take anything from me?

You are question morality? Really? What morality is it that you think you should go through life without paying your fair share? And if you think it isn't a fair share why the hell aren't you working to change things?

What a colossal crock of bull. You sense of morality might mean that you don't give a sh*t about your neighbors but your sense of morality means you shouldn't even pay for yourself. sheesh!
 
wrong. Military benefits are payment for services rendered. Entitlements are payment for breathing.

Medicare and SS are funded by payroll taxes. You have to have paid in to get Medicare, and SS retirement benefits.

Not true at all. People started collecting Social Security the day the law went into effect. They never paid a dime into the program. There are numerous other ways you can collect without ever having paid into it.

Who get SS retirement benefits without ever having paid in?
 
Synthaholic, I'll address this to you directly, since only the hysterical chick took a swing and a miss at it.

So, in essence, liberals believe that the government, in actuality, owns everything in this country, and that the government shall determine how much each citizen in this country is allowed to keep.

Does that sum it up?


You can't disagree with that statement if you feel the government is entitled to keep what it sees fit.

The People decide what the government can and can't do.
We are a Republic, not a democracy. At least, that was the original goal. The founders were keenly aware that the treasury would be coveted.


When people talk about "taxing the rich", all they are saying is that they want the government to give them an even less percentage of what they feel the rich deserve. You can twist it any way you want, but the bottom line is that the government has the power to decide what you are allowed to keep. Perhaps that is how you want it. You would not be the first.


Just think about it. Contemplate what I am saying without a knee-jerk reaction. The government has become this entity that determines what ratio of money they will let you keep. They allow us whatever they determine once they have taken their share. They determine what that share is. If you believe that people are somehow making that determination, you are not being honest with the reality of the matter.

The government grows, it takes more, it gives you what it wants to give you.

What is the limit? At what point of the government keeping your money would you be outraged?


And the government just gets bigger and bigger, and layers itself in duplication and a web so intricate that not a person alive could figure out how to begin to address what went wrong.


The government owns everything. It gives you what it deems your fair share.
 

Forum List

Back
Top