HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Vote to cut entitlements?...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 09:03 PM

Vote to cut entitlements? Then I pledge $100 to primary you in the next election.

That's the message I'm sending to my elected representatives.

If they vote to touch entitlements, then I'll contribute to replace them with another Democratic candidate who actually embraces Democratic principles. They're entitlements because we paid for them in full, and we're entitled to them, the way we're entitled to the money in our bank accounts.

Shared sacrifice, my ass. The wealthiest 5% of Americans got a $1 trillion tax gift break over the last ten years - let them pay it back, with interest, before we go after the old, the poor, and the sick.

77 replies, 9968 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 77 replies Author Time Post
Reply Vote to cut entitlements? Then I pledge $100 to primary you in the next election. (Original post)
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 OP
CaliforniaPeggy Dec 2012 #1
JaneyVee Dec 2012 #2
Generic Other Dec 2012 #3
TheProgressive Dec 2012 #4
decayincl Dec 2012 #22
Octafish Dec 2012 #71
Pisces Dec 2012 #5
UnrepentantLiberal Dec 2012 #8
leftstreet Dec 2012 #9
jtuck004 Dec 2012 #11
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #16
jtuck004 Dec 2012 #26
woo me with science Dec 2012 #19
Autumn Dec 2012 #13
woo me with science Dec 2012 #18
Autumn Dec 2012 #21
woo me with science Dec 2012 #53
Jakes Progress Dec 2012 #34
BuelahWitch Dec 2012 #6
UnrepentantLiberal Dec 2012 #7
jtuck004 Dec 2012 #10
SunSeeker Dec 2012 #12
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #14
SunSeeker Dec 2012 #44
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #57
SunSeeker Dec 2012 #75
JoePhilly Dec 2012 #59
SunSeeker Dec 2012 #74
upi402 Dec 2012 #15
TheProgressive Dec 2012 #17
upi402 Dec 2012 #24
TheProgressive Dec 2012 #27
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #38
woo me with science Dec 2012 #20
RomneyLies Dec 2012 #23
MrModerate Dec 2012 #25
DRoseDARs Dec 2012 #28
jerseyjack Dec 2012 #29
progressoid Dec 2012 #30
Jeff In Milwaukee Dec 2012 #31
Jakes Progress Dec 2012 #36
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #40
woo me with science Dec 2012 #50
JEB Dec 2012 #32
liberal_at_heart Dec 2012 #35
midnight Dec 2012 #33
Jakes Progress Dec 2012 #37
grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #39
femrap Dec 2012 #41
mick063 Dec 2012 #42
sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #43
Zorra Dec 2012 #45
woo me with science Dec 2012 #46
JoePhilly Dec 2012 #47
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #56
JoePhilly Dec 2012 #58
xchrom Dec 2012 #48
Junkdrawer Dec 2012 #49
ProSense Dec 2012 #51
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #54
rdking647 Dec 2012 #52
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #55
rdking647 Dec 2012 #61
MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #77
99Forever Dec 2012 #60
bvar22 Dec 2012 #62
Liberal1975 Dec 2012 #63
INdemo Dec 2012 #64
bluestate10 Dec 2012 #65
Taverner Dec 2012 #68
Ya Basta Dec 2012 #66
Taverner Dec 2012 #67
Beartracks Dec 2012 #69
12AngryBorneoWildmen Dec 2012 #70
limpyhobbler Dec 2012 #72
pediatricmedic Dec 2012 #73
nenagh Dec 2012 #76

Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 09:06 PM

1. I'm inclined to join you.

Enough with the supposed compromise where the wealthy 1% get the bonus, and we get the crumbs, if that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 09:21 PM

2. Exactly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 09:22 PM

3. Do they not know what old age "security" means??

They are basically telling me they can't afford to repay me that money I invested with them to take care of me in my old age.
Where I live, we call that stealing.

Democrats should not let Republicans bully them on this issue. It calls for solidarity now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 09:28 PM

4. If the Party of the People vote against the people...

.... what else are we suppose to do...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheProgressive (Reply #4)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 10:45 PM

22. Yup

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheProgressive (Reply #4)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 08:11 PM

71. That IS the question.

People who value property over other people already have a party representing their interests. Its' called Republican.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 09:30 PM

5. We can always count on you and Brentspeak for the dissension. Trying to stir the pot?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pisces (Reply #5)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 09:41 PM

8. I believe he's entitled to his oppinion.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pisces (Reply #5)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 09:42 PM

9. Don't most members here object to cutting SS?

I was under the impression the majority expect SS and Medicare to be left alone

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftstreet (Reply #9)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 09:55 PM

11. Nothing stays the way you built it without maintenance. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jtuck004 (Reply #11)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 10:13 PM

16. In your opinion, what maintenance is required here?

The problem with Medicare is that we choose to have health care that's twice as expensive as other countries - for outcomes that are no better. Seems like we should reform health care expenses, not cut people off.

As to Social Security, there is zero problem. Projections showing that it might only pay more than 75% of benefits in 20 years are based on the economy never getting better again. Funny how they don't use that projection for any other purpose.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #16)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 10:57 PM

26. Maintenance of the spirit which sees such things as important. Maybe reminding people why


we have it in the first place, and what we get for our investment, how these things prevent us living life like those who used to put their baby's body on a shelf in a cool space until they had enough pennies to bury it.

The opponents are fighting with mere greed as a motivation. That's powerful, but not as powerful as a human with spirit. But the spirit can die if it's not maintained, nourished. Memories and motivations fade if they are not exercised, so I think and we need to be reminded of the costs and value of our freedoms and why we do these things. Not just singing anthems and feeding schoolkids lies about our superiority in the world.

Money isn't the problem, if we have the will, (though I do think reforms that remove excessive profit should be pursued) and I should have made that clear.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftstreet (Reply #9)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 10:32 PM

19. Of course,

but that was a hilarious try.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pisces (Reply #5)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 10:00 PM

13. Someone should, that's a pot worth stirring

got to keep an eye on those elected officials, cause I sure don't trust them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pisces (Reply #5)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 10:31 PM

18. "Dissension"?



The propaganda comes with chutzpah now!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #18)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 10:41 PM

21. And a side of ridiculous.

The nerve of someone posting their thoughts on a current political situation on a political message board. Dissension, indeed

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #21)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 09:25 AM

53. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pisces (Reply #5)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 11:40 PM

34. Then we can assume you support cutting SS?

Just why join a Democratic forum then?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 09:31 PM

6. I didn't vote for "shared sacrifice," I'm with you

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 09:40 PM

7. I'm down with this.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 09:45 PM

10. "Shared sacrifice, my ass." Exactly. Half of the country has been sharing for years...




Here.

I will work against any bully who wants to take more away from people who can't defend themselves, or anyone who collaborates with the traitorous bastards.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 09:56 PM

12. As far as I can tell, it's just Dick Durbin mentioning means-testing for Medicare.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014328550

And it is tempting to make the rich kick in more for their medical care. They pay such a small portion of their income in taxes as it is. But it is the proverbial nose under the tent. It would turn Medicare into a welfare program instead of the single payer insurance that it is now. And once it's a welfare program, it gets starved like all other welfare programs. Same problem with means testing Social Security. The better way to go is to just have the wealthy pay more in taxes to pay for Medicare, take the income cap off, tax capital gains income for Medicare, etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SunSeeker (Reply #12)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 10:09 PM

14. President Obama: "serious entitlement reform"

"maybe they can accept some rate increases as long as it's combined with serious entitlement reform and additional spending cuts... we can probably solve this in about a week. It's not that tough"

- Our President, yesterday

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #14)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 12:50 AM

44. My idea of serious entitlement reform is Medicare for All.

But in lieu of that, serious entitlement reform would involve incorporating the right to negotiate drug prices in Medicare Part D. Now THAT will bring down costs. The Repukes' idea of serious entitlement reform is privatizing or eliminating Medicare. I think our President's idea of what "reform" means is that when it comes to entitlements, it is cutting costs, not benefits. A benefit is a good thing; it does not need reform. A wasteful way of paying for the benefit, on the other hand, does need reform.

I have not heard him endorse raising the eligibility age or other benefit reducing Repuke "reforms." Have you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #57)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 02:21 AM

75. Well...that's 30 minutes of my life I'll never get back.

In none of this links does Obama say he'll cut benefits, and all those predate Nov. 6. by 3 to 16 months. I get it, some people see the Obama statement that he "will not slash benefits for future retirees" as meaning he will cut the benefits, just not "slash" them. If he did mean suggest that "slash" was not the same as "cut," maybe he was trying to appear flexible for potential compromises.

But a lot has changed in the last three months. Obama won decisively. He is using that to strike a much better bargain with the GOP. Better yet, if the bargain is not good enough, he will just walk away and let all the tax rates go up. I can't imagine him cutting SS or Medicare, especially when the fall campaign had each side accusing the other of wanting to cut SS and Medicare. I hope he does let all the Bush tax cuts expire and let sequester happen--that's the only way we'll ever get significant defense cuts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SunSeeker (Reply #44)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 10:05 AM

59. Your description of reforms does not lead to the level of outrage ...

that Manny is looking for.

Durbin was on MSNBC yesterday and he said pretty much exactly what you described ... negotiate for drug prices, but don't cut benefits.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #59)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 01:47 AM

74. Thanks for letting me know about Durbin. I'm glad he clarified that.

I can't imagine any Dem calling for SS or Medicare benefit cuts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 10:13 PM

15. Social Security adds NOTHING to the deficit

The media is silent on this!!!

When you add the $115 billion in 2011 interest it more than offsets the $45 billion deficit talked about.
So I am with you MannyG.

Many better things we can do...

Get rid of the FICA cap at $110,100.
This is insane! We can do better than getting kicked in the brains for no reason again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upi402 (Reply #15)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 10:20 PM

17. I would like to clarify and make a point...

Part of the Budget is 'servicing the debt', which is redeeming US Treasuries that make up our National Debt.

The interest paid to the Social Security is what we, workers, make off of our investment to the Social Security Trust Fund... This interest is *earned* from our special US Treasuries.

Some who analyze the SS Trust Fund report, for some reason, think that our interest should not be included as a
legitimate part of our trust fund...


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheProgressive (Reply #17)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 10:50 PM

24. They should analyze my interest income too, then! :)

But it gets added as income to the regular income.
apples=apples


'83 to '09 the SS Trust fund took in more than it spent, and the excess funded the general fund.

Since then we've suffered the consequences of lunatics running the asylum too long.

Security Treasuries are backed by the full faith & credit of the US Gov't. Except when the Republicans made us default for the 1st time ever - that means something.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upi402 (Reply #24)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 11:01 PM

27. Not sure what you are saying...

The 'excess' is invested in the special US Treasuries. This is the interest 'we' earn on our FICA tax contributions.

Sorry, there is no distinction between our SS Trust Fund Treasuries and the Treasuries that the rich Americans and China, et al own.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheProgressive (Reply #27)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 11:51 PM

38. +1

All backed by the "full faith and credit of the United States".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 10:34 PM

20. Amen.

Last edited Thu Dec 6, 2012, 11:23 PM - Edit history (1)

I'll join that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 10:47 PM

23. I'll agree to.that

 

Damned straight. Any Dem who votes to cut what I've already paid for gets the boot.

I'm aboard 100%.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 10:50 PM

25. Frankly, I'm not taxed enough . . .

Compared to people in similar economic circumstances to myself in other developed countries.

And while I'm willing to do my part I'm a rather a bit south of the 1% I do wish that someone in Washington was seriously looking at not just "income," but the other forms of (largely untaxed) earnings enjoyed by that percentile.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 11:04 PM

28. Thank u for saying WHAT an entitlement is and WHY it is an entitlement. Words have meaning and some

...people on our side are unwisely trying to change the meaning of that innocuous word into something dirty as conservatives have already done.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 11:14 PM

29. This is a positive action. It goes beyond just a gripe in a post.

 

I.m with it, too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 11:20 PM

30. I would if I had $100 to spare.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 11:24 PM

31. You know how fucking stupid the Tea Partiers were?

They primaried any Republican who broke with ideological purity, and wound up with a bunch of unelectable zealots.

That's how fucking stupid the Tea Partiers were.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jeff In Milwaukee (Reply #31)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 11:45 PM

36. Those fucking stupid tea partiers

are so stupid, they have the country moving their way. They have a Democratic president volunteering cuts in entitlements, and they have people on a Democratic forum defending their desires by shushing those who stand up for progressive principles.

There is a difference in blind, stupid ideology and principled support for the rights of people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jeff In Milwaukee (Reply #31)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 12:28 AM

40. More than two-thirds of Americans are with me on this, including most Republicans

I don't think that counts as ideological purity, nor will it cause inelectibility.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jeff In Milwaukee (Reply #31)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 09:18 AM

50. You know how fucking transparent the Third Way is? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 11:26 PM

32. Medicare for all

would bring a lot of healthy people and their money into the system. Talk about your economic stimulus. Business would have a lighter burden and individuals would mostly spend the extra money they didn't have to pay the private blood sucking insurance companies. If they want to cut something, try the lard ass Defense Dept. with all their corrupt contractors (war profiteers). Anybody who votes to shortchange old and sick people can FOAD.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JEB (Reply #32)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 11:41 PM

35. Medicare for all! Yes!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 11:38 PM

33. K&R...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 11:45 PM

37. I'm in. I'll start saving now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 11:59 PM

39. Count me in!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 12:39 AM

41. The

 

rich can afford sacrifice. They simply don't want to. They enjoy watching the Former Middle Class, the working class and poor suffer. Most of them are sadists.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 12:41 AM

42. I'm in

 

I'm in on all this stuff.

Flush Rush.

Boycott Papa Johns

Redifine corporate welfare as entitlements and quadruple their taxes if they send jobs abroad.

Primary Dem's that cut entitlements.




Even if they take it away for now, we are going to get people in there that get it back.


Warning to all politicians: Leave that shit alone. Do not dare piss us off.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 12:44 AM

43. Anyone who does that is not a Democrat period.

And I will be more than happy to work hard to get rid of these infiltrators from the Party.

This will definitely reveal the deceivers and there are not going to be any excuses accepted. We know all the lies, no matter what language they use to dress up the lies in.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 12:55 AM

45. You can bet that all of us who donated to the Elizabeth Warren campaign

will be right there with you.

No quarter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 09:07 AM

47. What date is that vote scheduled for?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #47)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 09:55 AM

56. Same day as the vote to maintain the Bush tax cuts for the 99%.

Do you have a prediction?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #56)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 09:59 AM

58. There is currently no date for that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 09:12 AM

48. Du rec. Nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 09:14 AM

49. I'm in...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 09:20 AM

51. This is inaccurate:

"The wealthiest 5% of Americans got a $1 trillion tax gift break over the last ten years"

At 5 percent, you're at about $100,000 in income.

The reality is that the top one percent got a $1.6 trillion gift over the last ten years.

Priceless
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021936642

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #51)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 09:52 AM

54. You in? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 09:21 AM

52. lets say they get rid of the cola adjustment for social security

thats not a cut.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rdking647 (Reply #52)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 09:53 AM

55. It's a reduction in what's been promised, no? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #55)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 11:09 AM

61. not really

it didnt come about until the 70's...
and thats the problem. declaring ss and medicare off limits is as stupid as the gop's no raising taxes pledge.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rdking647 (Reply #61)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 11:56 AM

77. *What* didn't come about until the 70s?

And why would that matter?

What percentage of Americans don't want *any* taxes raised? What percentage of Americans don't want entitlements touched? Very different situations, I think.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rdking647 (Reply #52)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 10:06 AM

60. You want to play semantics?

Try it and see what happens.

OH...

... and a K&R for Manny.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:05 PM

62. HERE!

DURec!




"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want a party that will STAND UP for Working Americans."
---Paul Wellstone


photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed



You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their rhetoric or excuses.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:47 PM

63. Shared Sacrifice? Ok

We the people have already shared in this "sacrifice" when the 1 percent got a tax hand out straight up, then increased that hand out with two wars that funneled treasury money to well connected defense contractors, with sweetheart legislation to deregulate the energy industry written by the energy industry, with sweetheart legislation for the pharmaceutical industry, written by the pharmaceutical industry, with sweetheart legislation for credit card companies written by the the credit card companies, then just to top it all off WallSt fans the flames of rampant speculation pockets the short term gain then gets bailed out by the tax payer after pile driving the entire global economy. You know what our shared sacrifice should consist of? Losing our jobs because they gave tax INCENTIVES to outsource, and because their greed destroyed our economy. Losing our economic security because people's 401 k's lost 40 percent of their value, losing our pensions because states lost federal funds. Having to be tied to a job because no one is hiring. Now they want to make us have to worry about possibly having to subsidize the elderly members of our families because their Medicare and SS benefits need to be cut because of "balance"? And "sacrifice"? WTF? After record profits? After the wealthiest continue to increase their wealth year after year, recession or no recession? Man I wish I could be a well paid television pundit so I could sit and have a "serious", "adult" discussion about the hard choices "we" need to make to pay for the orgy of greed of the last 12 years "they" enjoyed.

Our message to these corporations getting richer and richer but still somehow on corporate wellfare, these billionaire assholes who increase their personal wealth by a couple billion a year, and these television pundits and bought politicians who wouldn't know the feeling of economic uncertainty if it came and bit them hard on the ass should be Fuck You. We have ALREADY sacrificed, and we have already paid. Now it's your turn.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:48 PM

64. Some say that entitlements have to be on the table in order to get the tax

increase..They call it bargainning..I call it caving again...In 2008 through 2009 all we heard about was affordable healthcare and single payer was even mentioned. As it turned out President Obama and the Democrats caved.We got a health care bill and were told it was a starting point.But it was nothing like what had been promised.The insurance companies bought off Congress and these insurance companies ended up with even stronger subsidies.
Well there is no starting point for entitlement cuts and by God thats what Obama promised us and millions of voters cast their vote for him to insure us that entitlements were protected from these cuts. Now some may argue with me but President Obama campaigned on merely cutting the overhead costs out of Medicare and protecting Social Security from any cuts...And I expect him to keep that/those promises.
I will join millions of others if it means we have to protest at the White House gates to make sure the President gets the message.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:49 PM

65. What is a "Cut" to you Manny? What changes would you accept? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluestate10 (Reply #65)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:54 PM

68. I can't speak for Manny but if they cut one cent, they're getting primaried

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:52 PM

66. I'm with you 1,000,000%

 

I'm sick and tired of the poor and the working folks getting fucked over, and by those who purport to represent us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:54 PM

67. Oh I'm sure MineralMan will be here soon enough to defend cuts

 

That is, after all, what the DNC pays him for

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 07:55 PM

69. Why don't Repubs think tax cuts for the rich are entitlements?

After all, they think the rich are entitled to them, and so do many of the rich, apparently.

So, if the GOP wants to balance the budget or reduce the deficit by cutting entitlements, they must start with those tax cuts for the wealthy.

==================

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 08:00 PM

70. Right Fucking On! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 08:24 PM

72. kick and rec.

That's what primaries are for.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 12:09 AM

73. Cuts are no longer avoidable

The deficit for this year will be around $1.3 trillion in the red.

The proposed tax increases amount to $2 trillion or so over TEN years. That only shaves about $200 billion a year off the deficit, which leaves it growing by more then $1 trillion a year.

Taxes have to increase by more then $10 trillion over the next ten years to break even. That does not even begin to reduce the deficit we already have. You need an additional $600+ billion each year to pay off the existing debt in about 30 years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pediatricmedic (Reply #73)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 05:51 AM

76. Cut defense..

Regulate Rx drug costs for Medicare prescriptions.

If the goal is to maintain Medicare to be available at 65 years...

make it a more basic plan..

Here in Ontario, drug costs are regulated, some Rx meds will only

be covered (paid for) if the patient has a defined clinical condition.

Also, certain medical procedures, the gov't will not pay for.

I don't mean just plastic surgery or seeing psychologist..

(visits to a Psychiatrist are paid for)

Eg, as of 2008, in a certain cancer diagnosis, chemo meds were paid for,

but a bone marrow transplant would be paid for up to the age of 66 yrs.

After that, other meds would be covered...

Each province has different rules..





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread