Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 165
  1. #61  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG
    Give me some time I will compile it for you.
    Compile it? Your statement sounded like you knew we wouldnt have control. This must be based on some information that you havbe access to. Just post it. Compiling suggests that it needs to handled in some way. Why?
    “There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.”
    — Ed Howdershelt
    "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have."- Thomas Jefferson
  2. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #62  
    Quote Originally Posted by clairegrrl
    And you are welcome for allowing me to correct you on your incorrect statement about the 3%
    You are right. I am confused about it. Not that this is an easy subject to completely understand or anything. See what you can make of it. Here

    Here is some snips
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If a worker sets aside $1,000 a year for 40 years, and earns 4 percent annually on investments, the account would grow to $99,800 in today's dollars, but the government would keep $78,700 -- or about 80 percent of the account. The remainder, $21,100, would be the worker's.

    With a 4.6 percent average gain over inflation, the government keeps more than 70 percent. With the CBO's 3.3 percent rate, the worker is left with nothing but the guaranteed benefit.

    If instead, workers decide to stay in the traditional system, they would receive the benefit that Social Security could pay out of payroll taxes still flowing into the system, the official said. Which option would be best is still unclear because the White House has yet to propose how severely guaranteed benefits would be cut for those with individual accounts.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
  3. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #63  
    Quote Originally Posted by Woof
    Compile it? Your statement sounded like you knew we wouldnt have control. This must be based on some information that you havbe access to. Just post it. Compiling suggests that it needs to handled in some way. Why?
    These were some of the statements I had heard peppered through out the news. So now it is a matter of getting all the real info from non-partisan sources. A very tough thing to do in these ages
  4. #64  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG
    You are right. I am confused about it. Not that this is an easy subject to completely understand or anything. See what you can make of it. Here
    Oh an unbiased source. Of course the Washington post is going to report only the most fair and balance pov on this subject.
    “There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.”
    — Ed Howdershelt
    "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have."- Thomas Jefferson
  5. #65  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG
    These were some of the statements I had heard peppered through out the news. So now it is a matter of getting all the real info from non-partisan sources. A very tough thing to do in these ages
    Looking for nonpartisan and you post a link the Wa Post? Might as well be the DNC website.
    “There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.”
    — Ed Howdershelt
    "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have."- Thomas Jefferson
  6. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #66  
    Quote Originally Posted by KRamsauer
    Okay, securities industry and big business being bigger than education? That's a bet I'll take any day of the week.

    Anyway, the point was just because someone is at the top of the list doesn't mean they are buying favors. When you look at the other side of the aisle, this becomes obvious.
    No it doesn't mean one thing, but it could be viewed that these institutions have some influence by the very nature of the donations. This is why some do it.
  7. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #67  
    Quote Originally Posted by Woof
    Looking for nonpartisan and you post a link the Wa Post? Might as well be the DNC website.
    What would you prefer?
  8. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #68  
    Quote Originally Posted by Woof
    Looking for nonpartisan and you post a link the Wa Post? Might as well be the DNC website.
    Hey I said it was tough these days to find non-partisan sources. This all non-sense anyways. I still say we review repealing some of those tax cuts and see what we come up with. I will try and be open minded about "private" accounts, but from everything I have seen so far it is a raw deal.
  9. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #69  
    Alright I'm done here for now. I am going to check out some of the stuff on TREOs the reason I come to this website.
  10. #70  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG
    What would you prefer?
    Well since I asked you to prove your 1/3 tax cut statement, I figured you could. I certainly didnt think you were going to run around to a bunch of different news sources to offer proof. That makes your statement suspect in and of itself because the news media today is notorious for inaccuracies.

    Seems like you dont know that removing 1/3 of the tax cut will fix SS, you just hope you can piece together enough stuff from various sources and make it look like it backs up your claim. Weak.
    “There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.”
    — Ed Howdershelt
    "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have."- Thomas Jefferson
  11.    #71  
    Quote Originally Posted by treobk214
    nudist, its very simple. be a part of a solution, or simply become part of the problem. you, dear nudist, are nothing but part of the problem. negativity, negativity, negativity, that's your new name. have we read any solutions offered by you here? no. so where does that leave you?

    as nothing more than... PART OF THE PROBLEM. that's it. now go have a drink with your buddy ted.
    In a previous thread about SS, I did offer a solution, such as others have offered below... tax cut money to alleviate the SS "crisis". several people indicated that they would be willing to give up their tax cut to solve the SS problem.

    Did carefully overlook this, dear treobk214?

    I certainly did not see any dispute from you about the facts that were cited contradicting the administrations claim.

    It seems many of the "GOP persuasion" consistently resort to tarring the messenger when they cannot dispute the message. I am not referring to me, specifically, but many officials that criticize this administration get slammed personally.

    when you said my posts generally attacked republicans, you are partially right. their way of conducting elections, and many other ethical matters leaves much to be desired (insert your Clinton bash here, as if that justifies it). HOWEVER, you don't claim that I attack you or CG for your views or citations, do you? If so, I could bashed CG personally for her list of Kerry contributors.

    I would hope you will lay off characterizing me personally. But if you really need to, go ahead. Now, go have a drink with your soulmate, Tom Delay.
  12. #72  
    partially right, nudist? you believe the repubs leave a lot to be desired in elections? you just can't get over the fact that you lost.. I think you dribble on and on about this point which you want so bad to be true but unfortunately is merely a figment of your attempts to rationalize your loss.
    you know denial is part of the acceptance period, right?
    how about the stuffed ballots dems are famous for? how about your party's attempts to block the overseas military votes? I mean, you try to paint your party as if they are the victims here. that's so far from the truth is simply laughable. for the record, you do more bushslamming than most here, if not all, so why are you so surprised that YOU are being singled out?
    did I carefully overlook something dear nudist? what ONE idea re: tax cuts? that's all you've got? that's your party's big ingenious plan? sad. again, breathe in and exhale. at some point you get past the denial part and simply accept your party's situation. this is why ted drinks so heavily, he's still hanging on that ledge of denial.

    he's waiting at the bar, by the way.
  13. #73  
    Maybe, he drinks like a fish to forget how cowardly he was about the girl he killed ?
  14. #74  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG
    These were some of the statements I had heard peppered through out the news. So now it is a matter of getting all the real info from non-partisan sources. A very tough thing to do in these ages
    Try factcheck.org. They will also let you know that it is 3tenths of one percent...not 3%
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  15. #75  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG
    I will try and be open minded about "private" accounts, but from everything I have seen so far it is a raw deal.
    That's the beauty of the whole thing...you wouldnt have to put any money in the "private" account....it's optional.
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  16. #76  
    Quote Originally Posted by nudist
    ...when you said my posts generally attacked republicans, you are partially right. their way of conducting elections, and many other ethical matters leaves much to be desired ....
    I think Tom Daschle was only the first of many dems that will be shown the door. Ohhh...wasnt his wife a lobbyest??
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  17. #77  
    Quote Originally Posted by clairegrrl
    Try factcheck.org. They will also let you know that it is 3tenths of one percent...not 3%
    Here is the most recent summary from Factcheck.org:

    Quote Originally Posted by factcheck.org
    In his State of the Union Address, President Bush said again that the Social Security system is headed for "bankruptcy," a term that could give the wrong idea. Actually, even if it goes "bankrupt" a few decades from now, the system would still be able to pay*about three-quarters of the benefits now promised.

    Bush*also made his*proposed private Social Security accounts sound like a sure thing, which they are not. He said they "will" grow fast enough to provide a better return than the present system. History suggests that will be so, but nobody can predict what*stock and bond markets will do in the future.


    Bush left out any mention of what workers would have to give up to get those private acounts -- a proportional reduction or offset in guaranteed Social Security retirement benefits. He*also*glossed over the*fact that money in private*accounts would be "owned" by*workers only in a very limited sense -- under strict conditions which the President referred to as "guidelines." Many retirees, and possibly the vast majority, wouldn't be able to touch their Social Security nest egg directly, even after retirement, because the government would take some or all of it back and convert it to a stream of payments guaranteed for life.
    SS, if it does go under, then it would pay 75% of current benefits instead of 100%. The Bush plan would still have the government controlling your money. Bush does not seem to be telling the whole story here, and that makes me suspicious. If, according to unbiased analysis the average benefits to workers would be 75% or less with the president's plan that it would be with SS currently, then I do not see why we should change.
  18. #78  
    "maybe, he drinks like a fish to forget how cowardly he was about the girl he killed " - dbrummels

    there's another reason
  19. #79  
    Quote Originally Posted by cellmatrix
    If, according to unbiased analysis the average benefits to workers would be 75% or less with the president's plan that it would be with SS currently, then I do not see why we should change.
    Then if that is what you believe, you dont have to participate.. Why would you want to prevent others from having that same freedom to choose??
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  20. #80  
    Quote Originally Posted by nudist
    Why is it that a modest deficit in Social Security that won't begin for almost a decade and a half requires immediate radical action, while a vastly greater overall federal deficit occurring right now doesn't? "
    Doesn't seem as though this question was addressed...

    When ever you are getting out of debt, you must set priorities. One of the most effective methods is to find a "manageable" debt to resolve first. Once that debt is addressed, there is a little relief that hastens the resolution of the next, then the next, then the next...

    Further, in reality, the national deficit is not on any one's radar. In fact, it may be the lynch pin to the world economy, namely, our integrity to pay on it (i.e. people can trade our notes, because of our commitment to make good on our debts).

    What makes Social Security a priority is that there are more and more very specific payables coming due on a daily basis. With the national deficit, we're talking interest payments. With Social Security it's principle -- the contributors' principle, at that.

Posting Permissions