Stop all benefits for one year.

[Pop23]

Ok...I will forgo 80k in "benefits" to get $7500....sounds like a deal

Why do you need $80k in government benefits? Get off the welfare teat.

If it were welfare you'd have a point, since it's not, your just a nut.


Glad I could set you straight.

 

[Billo_Really]

The federal government is spending roughly $1.5 trillion a year on Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid alone. That doesn't even include foodstamps and other welfare programs, pensions, etc. How much is this doing for our economy, as we sink deeper into debt? I propose we cease all spending on such things for one year. The only exception being for those are disabled. During that same time, payroll taxes be reduced by 50% for everyone.

With the money saved, every tax payer and person who receives benefits gets a check for $7500. Use it as you see fit. Use it for food, use it for health care, use it for rent, use it to start your own business. This approach will offer substantial aid for people in need, will be a lesser total expenditure, and will actually yield a lesser deficit. Meanwhile, individuals will be able to have more disposable income with which to stimulate the economy.

Why shouldn't we do this?

Because I need UI extenstion benefits to survive.

 

[Metzor]

Wow!! The emotional and fear driven responses from the liberals around here are amazing. It's too bad that your entire political worth depends on wealth redistribution. I would take SwimExpert's idea even further, but his idea is a good start. The affected SS recipients will just have to find another way to survive. Move in with children, buy a tent, whatever. Hunger is the best motivator in the world. BTW - SS exists entirely at the whim of congress. The Supreme Court approved SS on the same grounds that it did Obamacare. Congresses ability to tax. There is no fund, but there are a few trillion dollars worth of IOU's in a drawer at the treasury department that will NEVER be paid back, and that does add to the national debt. Also, for the foreseeable future, congress will be subsidizing SS to the tune of 10's of billions of dollars yearly, because receipts are less than outlay. That will add to the deficit and eventually the debt. I know that liberals love this shit because it keeps them elected, but FDR was an ass. His assassination would have been a godsend.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Wow!! The emotional and fear driven responses from the liberals around here are amazing. It's too bad that your entire political worth depends on wealth redistribution. I would take SwimExpert's idea even further, but his idea is a good start. The affected SS recipients will just have to find another way to survive. Move in with children, buy a tent, whatever. Hunger is the best motivator in the world. BTW - SS exists entirely at the whim of congress. The Supreme Court approved SS on the same grounds that it did Obamacare. Congresses ability to tax. There is no fund, but there are a few trillion dollars worth of IOU's in a drawer at the treasury department that will NEVER be paid back, and that does add to the national debt. Also, for the foreseeable future, congress will be subsidizing SS to the tune of 10's of billions of dollars yearly, because receipts are less than outlay. That will add to the deficit and eventually the debt. I know that liberals love this shit because it keeps them elected, but FDR was an ass. His assassination would have been a godsend.

I hate to break it to you, Delusion Boy, but it's not "liberals" who are savaging your dimwit adolescent boyfriend. It's everyone, from BOTH sides of the aisle. While we grown-ups disagree vociferously about what the federal government should be doing and how it should be doing it, only ignorant twats think it's feasible or desirable to simply enact sweeping changes on society in one fell swoop, just because you feel like it.

 

[Pop23]

Wow!! The emotional and fear driven responses from the liberals around here are amazing. It's too bad that your entire political worth depends on wealth redistribution. I would take SwimExpert's idea even further, but his idea is a good start. The affected SS recipients will just have to find another way to survive. Move in with children, buy a tent, whatever. Hunger is the best motivator in the world. BTW - SS exists entirely at the whim of congress. The Supreme Court approved SS on the same grounds that it did Obamacare. Congresses ability to tax. There is no fund, but there are a few trillion dollars worth of IOU's in a drawer at the treasury department that will NEVER be paid back, and that does add to the national debt. Also, for the foreseeable future, congress will be subsidizing SS to the tune of 10's of billions of dollars yearly, because receipts are less than outlay. That will add to the deficit and eventually the debt. I know that liberals love this shit because it keeps them elected, but FDR was an ass. His assassination would have been a godsend.

Theft in any form is bad. Might be wise to teach your children that principle. Life would be so much easier if everyone knew this.

Going back on the promise to return the SS funds as promised is theft

Once again, I'm glad I could set the record straight.

 

[Metzor]

Does USMB have a mat that I can use to wipe the liberal emotional dribble off of my shoes? I'm willing to compromise and only cut a mere 10% a year from entitlement programs. That way it won't be such a shock to the liberal vote buying machine. In 10 years most Americans will be off the government teat and we can get to work on the national debt problem.

 

[SwimExpert]

If you actually believe this steaming pile of horseshit, you either just flew your spaceship in from another solar system, or you're an even bigger nitwit than I was currently assuming.

Personal responsibility is a steaming pile of horse shit? And it makes one a nitwit? Seriously?

What a coincidence. I don't see any alternatives that will get anything done in your childish, kindergarten prattle.

Call me when you grow up and cut your own umbilical chord, Junior. It's painfully obvious to me that we're hearing economic philosophy developed in Mom's comfy basement right now.

I don't think I've been anything but mature and respectful this entire conversation. You've been rather emotional, and have had almost nothing to contribute other than name calling. You should really rethink who is being childish.

 

[SwimExpert]

Or they can just 'die, and thereby decrease the surplus population', of course.

That's a horrible thing to say. Why would you advocate for such a thing? I guess Liberals really do want people to live and die by the government dole.

 

[SwimExpert]

We could raise the retirement age to 70 and ban all tax expenditures, and we would suddenly be flush with cash, without having to cut a single additional cent from spending.

We could use all that cash to lower tax rates and pay down the national debt. And once the debt was paid off, we could cut tax rates some more.

But our politicians are too cowardly. We have a $17 trillion debt to keep 535 people employed.

Okay, now we're getting somewhere. I don't think "all" expenditures can be cut, though. It takes money just to pay the people in the IRS who collect the taxes. Money to open Congress each morning. Not to mention, without some kind of defense spending we're prime pickings for an invasion. So what expenditures exactly would you suggest we cut?

 

[SwimExpert]

Oh, so this is even better. You've worked out a scheme to leave old people completely destitute and unable to pay their bills, KNOWINGLY doing so

Why do you think this is about "old people"? Sure, retirees would be part of those effected. But this is not about them directly. This is about entitlement spending. There will be plenty of other people affected who are not old.

just so that YOU can get yourself a tidy little check to buy a new PS4 with, and developed an entire line of self-serving "I don't need to know anything about the world" babble to justify it.

This doesn't even make any sense. Where did I say anything about wanting a new PS4? Where did I say anything about receiving a check? The only thing that could possibly come close to being a tangent is the part about cutting taxes. EVERYONE'S taxes. It's not about me. It's about our country as a whole, and using the country's funds to invest in and stimulate long term prosperity, so that our children are not left paying our bills. Or worse....our parents and grandparents bills.

Heck, those old farts just have too fancy an apartment and need to downsize so I can have my own gov't check! Let 'em get jobs!

This is ridiculous, and you're flying off the handle based purely on emotion, with no regard to reason or common sense. Why are you being so emotional? This is math, nothing more. The fact of the matter is that reducing entitlement spending is a necessity if we are ever going to turn the tide on the reckless deficit spending that has racked up $17 trillion in public debt. Do you want to do that, or not? If not, then come out and say so.

 

[SFC Ollie]

There are billions being wasted every year in this country on really stupid programs. If people knew about even a tenth of them we'd be able to vote out every incumbent in Washington.

For instance:

$630,000 in stimulus funds meant to install energy efficiency retrofits around Washington D.C. were distributed to – of all recipients – a dance group and a film group. These groups had no energy installation qualifications whatsoever, and predictably failed to successfully perform the job that they took taxpayer money to do.

Down the Drain - Newsroom - Rob Portman

 

[SwimExpert]

There are billions being wasted every year in this country on really stupid programs. If people knew about even a tenth of them we'd be able to vote out every incumbent in Washington.

For instance:

$630,000 in stimulus funds meant to install energy efficiency retrofits around Washington D.C. were distributed to – of all recipients – a dance group and a film group. These groups had no energy installation qualifications whatsoever, and predictably failed to successfully perform the job that they took taxpayer money to do.

Down the Drain - Newsroom - Rob Portman

The stimulus was several years ago, and it's over. Not to mention $630,000 is less than a drop in the bucket. We have a $17 trillion debt. You are complaining about less than .00000004% of the total debt. And about .00000057% of last year's deficit.

 

[boedicca]

People paid into Social Security and medicare, you can not just stop it.

Is it really any worse than raising the eligibility age while reducing benefits? After all, they'd still get their $7500 check for the year.

Yes, it is worse. Phasing in changes allows younger people to plan for their futures. Somebody who is already retired and made his plans for retirement based on SS payments is fucked if the rules are changed on him after the fact.

My personal preference would be to opt out of SS and to keep my money for my own retirement.

 

[SwimExpert]

People paid into Social Security and medicare, you can not just stop it.

Is it really any worse than raising the eligibility age while reducing benefits? After all, they'd still get their $7500 check for the year.

Yes, it is worse. Phasing in changes allows younger people to plan for their futures. Somebody who is already retired and made his plans for retirement based on SS payments is fucked if the rules are changed on him after the fact.

My personal preference would be to opt out of SS and to keep my money for my own retirement.

Why are people planning on government dependency? Shouldn't they be planning on self dependency?

 

[SFC Ollie]

There are billions being wasted every year in this country on really stupid programs. If people knew about even a tenth of them we'd be able to vote out every incumbent in Washington.

For instance:

$630,000 in stimulus funds meant to install energy efficiency retrofits around Washington D.C. were distributed to – of all recipients – a dance group and a film group. These groups had no energy installation qualifications whatsoever, and predictably failed to successfully perform the job that they took taxpayer money to do.

Down the Drain - Newsroom - Rob Portman

The stimulus was several years ago, and it's over. Not to mention $630,000 is less than a drop in the bucket. We have a $17 trillion debt. You are complaining about less than .00000004% of the total debt. And about .00000057% of last year's deficit.

Are you really that fucking stupid? I gave one example out of hundreds. Please, I really do not play well with stupidity.... I tend to neg it, and you are making the right look damned stupid....

 

[SFC Ollie]

Is it really any worse than raising the eligibility age while reducing benefits? After all, they'd still get their $7500 check for the year.

Yes, it is worse. Phasing in changes allows younger people to plan for their futures. Somebody who is already retired and made his plans for retirement based on SS payments is fucked if the rules are changed on him after the fact.

My personal preference would be to opt out of SS and to keep my money for my own retirement.

Why are people planning on government dependency? Shouldn't they be planning on self dependency?

So we were wrong to plan on having social security? Really?

 

[SwimExpert]

I gave one example out of hundreds.

If there are hundreds, then perhaps you can offer.....10? I don't think ten out of hundreds is an unreasonable request.

 

[SwimExpert]

So we were wrong to plan on having social security? Really?

If your plan was to expect to survive off of government handouts, then yes, you were wrong. There is no reason why you could not have set yourself up for success without the government needing to provide for you. After all, it's exactly what you're expecting the younger generation to do. Set themselves up to survive without Social Security being available.

 

[gallantwarrior]

We could raise the retirement age to 70 and ban all tax expenditures, and we would suddenly be flush with cash, without having to cut a single additional cent from spending.

We could use all that cash to lower tax rates and pay down the national debt. And once the debt was paid off, we could cut tax rates some more.

But our politicians are too cowardly. We have a $17 trillion debt to keep 535 people employed.

Okay, now we're getting somewhere. I don't think "all" expenditures can be cut, though. It takes money just to pay the people in the IRS who collect the taxes. Money to open Congress each morning. Not to mention, without some kind of defense spending we're prime pickings for an invasion. So what expenditures exactly would you suggest we cut?

We could eliminate the IRS and tie Congressional pay to their successful performance of the duties they were elected to accomplish.

 

[rdean]

The federal government is spending roughly $1.5 trillion a year on Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid alone. That doesn't even include foodstamps and other welfare programs, pensions, etc. How much is this doing for our economy, as we sink deeper into debt? I propose we cease all spending on such things for one year. The only exception being for those are disabled. During that same time, payroll taxes be reduced by 50% for everyone.

With the money saved, every tax payer and person who receives benefits gets a check for $7500. Use it as you see fit. Use it for food, use it for health care, use it for rent, use it to start your own business. This approach will offer substantial aid for people in need, will be a lesser total expenditure, and will actually yield a lesser deficit. Meanwhile, individuals will be able to have more disposable income with which to stimulate the economy.

Why shouldn't we do this?

I'm curious. To you, what is it exactly that would "help" the economy? Give us some examples.