HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Just for the record: Soci...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:14 PM

Just for the record: Social Security is self funded and does NOT add to the debt. rec for the truth.

touching any of it is heresy, a sellout, and an obvious cave in to Wall Street. Obama touches ANY of it in any way other than actually paying back whats been illegally taken from it shows clearly that he is a corporatist in sheeps clothing!

74 replies, 5745 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 74 replies Author Time Post
Reply Just for the record: Social Security is self funded and does NOT add to the debt. rec for the truth. (Original post)
In Truth We Trust Dec 2012 OP
MotherPetrie Dec 2012 #1
patrice Dec 2012 #3
MotherPetrie Dec 2012 #6
patrice Dec 2012 #8
MotherPetrie Dec 2012 #10
patrice Dec 2012 #19
MotherPetrie Dec 2012 #22
patrice Dec 2012 #28
MotherPetrie Dec 2012 #50
patrice Dec 2012 #51
forestpath Dec 2012 #16
patrice Dec 2012 #24
forestpath Dec 2012 #27
patrice Dec 2012 #29
forestpath Dec 2012 #30
patrice Dec 2012 #36
JDPriestly Dec 2012 #9
robinlynne Dec 2012 #11
forestpath Dec 2012 #18
patrice Dec 2012 #26
JDPriestly Dec 2012 #55
plethoro Dec 2012 #45
fasttense Dec 2012 #64
patrice Dec 2012 #2
patrice Dec 2012 #12
abelenkpe Dec 2012 #41
patrice Dec 2012 #48
leftstreet Dec 2012 #4
Puzzledtraveller Dec 2012 #5
Hydra Dec 2012 #7
robinlynne Dec 2012 #13
woo me with science Dec 2012 #15
bobclark86 Dec 2012 #14
mostlyconfused Dec 2012 #52
spooky3 Dec 2012 #60
mostlyconfused Dec 2012 #62
Hydra Dec 2012 #71
spooky3 Dec 2012 #72
mostlyconfused Dec 2012 #73
spooky3 Dec 2012 #74
avaistheone1 Dec 2012 #17
Egalitarian Thug Dec 2012 #20
SHRED Dec 2012 #21
patrice Dec 2012 #33
mbperrin Dec 2012 #38
grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #57
SHRED Dec 2012 #23
Go Vols Dec 2012 #25
kworkman Dec 2012 #31
patrice Dec 2012 #34
mbperrin Dec 2012 #40
Dustlawyer Dec 2012 #32
NorthCarolina Dec 2012 #35
AnnieK401 Dec 2012 #37
99th_Monkey Dec 2012 #39
progressoid Dec 2012 #42
In Truth We Trust Dec 2012 #49
AnotherMcIntosh Dec 2012 #56
grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #66
humbled_opinion Dec 2012 #43
rustydog Dec 2012 #44
Coyotl Dec 2012 #46
Stonepounder Dec 2012 #47
Autumn Dec 2012 #53
TheProgressive Dec 2012 #54
decayincl Dec 2012 #58
Faryn Balyncd Dec 2012 #59
reformist2 Dec 2012 #65
LineReply .
blkmusclmachine Dec 2012 #61
avaistheone1 Dec 2012 #63
dotymed Dec 2012 #67
bonniebgood Dec 2012 #68
blackspade Dec 2012 #69
Elmergantry Dec 2012 #70

Response to In Truth We Trust (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:16 PM

1. He's already shown that very clearly...

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #1)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:25 PM

3. Wondering, do you find people who dictate for everyon else what vast sets of different things "show"

even slightly fascist?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #3)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:33 PM

6. Are you accusing me of being fascist?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #6)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:41 PM

8. How accurately does my description characterize your post? & I really was just wondering about your

reaction to the kind of behavior I described. You could have demonstrated how I am in error in my characterization, but you decided instead to "try the shoe on"; is it my fault if you adopt an in-accurate characterization of your message.

Instead of doing what appears to be diversion from the issues about which you made the statement to which I was responding . . .

Why don't you just show us all how wrong I am?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #8)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:48 PM

10. Are you accusing me of being fascist?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #10)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:57 PM

19. I asked you a question which you are refusing to answer. Why is that? You could have SHOWN that

you are not a fascist, but, for some reason you refused to.

I'm curious; reverse our roles here and tell me how you would regard someone who refused to answer a direct question, which is your right of course, but the answer could have obviated any inference of fascism.

Also, instead of discussing fascism itself and what its traits might or might not be, you are trying to make this about me; can you tell me why that is?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #19)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:58 PM

22. Are you calling me a fascist? It's a simple question. Yes or no?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #22)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 04:13 PM

28. I asked you if you are one. Are you? Yes or no?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #28)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 06:27 PM

50. You didn't ask me that, LOL. Your first response seemed to imply you were ACCUSING me of being a

 

fascist without coming right out and SAYING so. That's why I just flat out asked if that's what you were doing. You still haven't answered; now you are trying to turn it back on me.

No, I'm not a fascist. If I were, I'd be SUPPORTING Obama's plans to cut SS in order to prevent tax cut expiration pain for the wealthy. I'd be thrilled that he put the lie Joe Biden's promise that he wouldn't touch SS. I'd be ecstatic that he's seeking Goldman Sachs blessing for his approach to the fiscal cliff - instead of utterly disgusted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #50)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:20 PM

51. You assume that we know why Obama would put chained CPI on the table, which isn't a cut, btw, it's

a slowing in it's growth.

ALL of the BUDGET AREAS sequestered as a result of the last budget battle that followed the raise the deficit cap death match and all anyone can see Obama angling for is "to prevent tax cut expiration pain for the wealthy"???

What do you think about the fact that we have one year left in the deadline for the health care insurance exchanges, which the feds are going to play a BIG role in because so many states have refused to set up their own state exchanges and will, thus, be given access to those designed and negotiated by the feds?

That's just ONE part of what's going on.

"Defense" Department is on the table BIG time.

Education??? INFRASTRUCTURE???

Kerry may become SoS and he has a DEEP background in ALTERNATIVE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT.

Personally, I'm willing to put some skin into this game and the CPI is something I would consider for the RIGHT deal on real health care, which for me includes an expansion of services covered hopefully all of the way to Mental Health parity. Did you know that the PPACA, a.k.a. Obamacare, has provisions that COULD very well result in the kinds of tools and processes by means of which PATIENTS and their DIRECT CARE GIVERS could seek an expansion of the types of services covered? It's called the Patient Centered Outcomes and Research Institute.

I'm not as trusting as people may think, but I don't think BO is our problem in all of this. Congress is and I have not trusted Pelosi since she pulled that meaningless little bit of political theater right before the deficit cap death match in which, in order to make herself look like she matters, she had the House vote and pass that "keep the Middle Class Bush Tax Cuts" resolution, which took PO off at the knees right when he and the Senate were addressing: extension in Unemployment Benefits, including long-term unemployed benefits, Don't Ask Don't Tell, The Dream Act, and whether to extend or sunset the Bush Tax Cuts. You may recall how that turned out and PO got blamed for ALL of it. Not sure whether you noticed, but I'm pretty sure PO was pissed off, when he had to let the Bush Tax Cuts continue and he said at that time that we will revisit ALL of this and that will include LOOPHOLES. That's what he said.

I, btw, am for letting all of the Bush Tax Cuts go, going after those loopholes, considering maybe a nice little deal for the lower end of the upper brackets (nothing higher than $1 million) and tie it to entrepreneurship and American jobs, raising or eliminating the Payroll (SS) Tax cap and, oh yeah, BIG cuts to Defense.

...................................

All descriptions of fascism strongly suggest a single motive in all of its many disguises and behaviors: power - the acquisition of power for power's sake alone. That's why fascism will wear ANY hat, take ANY stance, say ANYthing, do whatever, no political, religious, ethical limits - it will reach across ANY line, assume any identity for one reason and one reason only, the acquisition of power. Look at corporate media, including the internet and I think it shows some of what I'm talking about.

This is why I am pretty sensitive to how information is used. Information, what it is, how it is processed and used, all of that is power. & Not that I am perfect and have no opinions, not that I know everything I need to know in order to figure things out. I try to admit it and I think it will help if everyone else does the same. We need talk about all of this and self-evaluate, so we can hold ourselves and accountable and, then, that will give us the right to ask others to be accountable too. We need to think together about how pervasive fascism is and how it most particularly DOES focus on and USES the lack of information to extend itself. We need to think about this and call ourselves and, therefore, others to account for what's going on together. I try not to apply to anyone else any criteria that I'm not applying to myself, so if I'm not sure, I will say that. If it's my opinion, I will call it that. If I am speculating, I will admit it. I'm hoping to share that effort with others who will do the same, because that will free each of us from whatever it is that limits us all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #8)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:55 PM

16. Wow. You really love to throw that word "fascist" around when YOU are the one ordering MotherPetrie

 

to prove themself to YOUR satisfaction.

Unbefuckinglievable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forestpath (Reply #16)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 04:02 PM

24. Perhaps your standards for rationalism are different from mine, more willing to assume big stuff

about people who make claims that can affect millions of dis-empowered people.

That's your right & that's MP's right, but let's call it what it is, okay? at least until it demonstrates otherwise and at this point, it appears to be uninformed opinion posing as absolute truth, mistakenly, or otherwise, mis-characterizing the efforts of other people to solve this problem

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #24)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 04:13 PM

27. MotherPetrie said no such thing. But you keep putting words in MP's mouth.

 

Especially since the OP said basically the same thing - yet MP is the one you attack.

You've put words in MP's mouth in this thread, and in other threads, too.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forestpath (Reply #27)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 04:14 PM

29. Pardon me if I observe that OPINION is opinion, even if the opinionated refuses to do so. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #29)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 04:16 PM

30. That's NOT what you're doing. You keep claiming they said things they didn't say.

 

And then attacking them for it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forestpath (Reply #30)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 04:30 PM

36. Please quote what you're referring to and I will evaluate myself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #3)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:46 PM

9. Exposing lies, telling the truth is not fascist.

The OP is telling the truth and dispelling lies and misinformation. The OP is not fascist, not at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #9)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:49 PM

11. well said.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #9)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:56 PM

18. +1

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #9)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 04:11 PM

26. What kind of truth? We are talking about millions of people here, so facts are most useful. &

In that regard, even Paul Krugman himself has said he's not sure what the facts are at this point.

Do you think it good to cut the ground out from under those doing the negotiations at various levels of this issue, before they get to it, by guaranteeing weak political support, so all the opposition has to do is wait for you and MP et al to draw enough people away that the whole field belongs to them anyway and you all lose on your issues too, btw, so the rest of us hear choruses of self-aggrandizing "I told you sos" when what is really going on is self-fulfilling prophecies?

Tell me that none of that is possible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #26)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:15 PM

55. Interesting answer.

First, until the trial is completed, no one can be sure what the facts are. And even when it is finished, there will probably be disagreements about the facts.

This part of your post is particularly interesting:

Do you think it good to cut the ground out from under those doing the negotiations at various levels of this issue, before they get to it, by guaranteeing weak political support, so all the opposition has to do is wait for you and MP et al to draw enough people away that the whole field belongs to them anyway and you all lose on your issues too, btw, so the rest of us hear choruses of self-aggrandizing "I told you sos" when what is really going on is self-fulfilling prophecies?

Whoever released the documents to Wikileaks was disclosing information that had been kept secret from Americans. But the important things, especially the video of the brutal murder of a journalist in Iraq, were well known to people in Iraq and probably in general in the Middle East.

The people our diplomats might negotiate with probably know far more about our bad deeds than even the most careful student of Wikileaks.

I for one do not want politicians, whether Bush or Obama to lie to me in order to avoid guaranteeing weak political support.

Leaders should be honest with the electorate. That is the most fundamental right we have as citizens -- to vote and as a corollary to be fully informed of the truth when we vote.

In my opinion, had more Americans known how much lying went on in order to get us involved in the Iraq War, Bush would not have had a second term. And, in my opinion, that would have been good for the entire country. Maybe we could have avoided the economic meltdown had a Democrat been president.

Bush deserved to have weak political support. He was a liar and a cheat. And he lied and cheated for political advantage. That is unacceptable in a democracy whether a representative democracy or a direct democracy. Wanting political support is no excuse for lying.

The party that is honest and open should win elections. I don't want "leaders" who lie to me. That is one of the reasons that Romney lost -- because the American people caught him in so many lies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #1)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 05:49 PM

45. He showed it long ago. This will not turn all the Democrats against him, but

 

when the chained CPI increases happens a couple of times, it will turn enough against him that we will NOT take back the House in 2014, and may well lose both the Senate and the Presidency in 2016. There are Republicans all over internet laughing out loud. This was the blackest day since he was elected. Democrats losing Social Security benefits devised by a Democrat. Never in my life did I think this would happen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #1)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 06:36 AM

64. The president has now created a new Democratic program. This is now the Obama Austerity program.

The OBAMA AUSTERITY program will go down in the history books along side Herbert Hoover's Hoovervilles.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to In Truth We Trust (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:21 PM

2. Un-rec: If I can reduce the number of middle-wo/men in between what SS deposites in my bank acount @

month and what I use that money for, I am VERY interested in that concept.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #2)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:50 PM

12. And I'll take it that anyone who disagrees with my budget priority wants SUBSIDIES for FOR-PROFIT

"health" "care" which support death-panels comprised of people who limit DIRECT CARE for fat salaries.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #2)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 05:12 PM

41. You are unbelievable nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to abelenkpe (Reply #41)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 06:02 PM

48. And you take people who characterize vast sets of information & persons, about which they know

not very much (let alone knowing necessarily what they might NEED to know in order to evaluate all of those facts validly . . . ) they characterize ALL of that in a single absolute sort of way, e.g. #1 (when experts such as Paul Krugman himself has actually stated that he refuses to deliver that kind of single absolute judgement) and you find persons who do "believable." Really?

Isn't "believing" various kinds of stuff (about war, about other races, about the poor, about Wall Street & banks) exactly what got all of us into this mess?

What value is there in knowing when all anyone has to do is, just like the media propaganda machine, believe, and then just saying it makes it so, so you don't ever need to question someone who engages in such characterizations and refuses to state the factual bases for what they want you to believe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to In Truth We Trust (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:27 PM

4. DURec

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to In Truth We Trust (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:28 PM

5. except that it is raided for it's cash

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to In Truth We Trust (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:37 PM

7. It's a big pot of cash

and all the wolves are drooling over it.

Who put the predators in charge of the henhouses?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hydra (Reply #7)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:50 PM

13. and who is letting them stay there right this minute by permitting ANY discussion of SS?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to robinlynne (Reply #13)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:54 PM

15. Thank you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hydra (Reply #7)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:53 PM

14. The American people...

...when they elected Reagan and the jackasses who controlled Congress.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hydra (Reply #7)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:28 PM

52. how big is the pot of cash?

Where is it held?
How much in federal outlays are there for SS each year?
From where do the dollars come that support those outlays?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mostlyconfused (Reply #52)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 12:14 AM

60. answers to all of your qs, and others, are at the ssa.gov website

As is often said here, google is your friend!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spooky3 (Reply #60)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 12:48 AM

62. Taxes collected do not cover the outlays

They have not for a while. Where does the money come from to cover the shortage?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mostlyconfused (Reply #62)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 02:32 PM

71. SSI has been running a surplus up until very recently

Something like 2.7 trillion. That money has been invested in gov't bonds(loaned to the general fund) and needs to be paid back with the promised low interest.

The problem is that the politicians don't want to do it. The tax cuts and massive defense spending have been financed with it, and those will have to go away to do so.

That's the elephant in the room- the 1% want their continued welfare at the cost of everyone else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mostlyconfused (Reply #62)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 04:22 PM

72. Why didn't you take my advice? The answer is at the site. That suggests to me that you are not

serious about wanting a fact-based answer.

DO. THE. WORK. Get informed. Be a good citizen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spooky3 (Reply #72)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 04:42 PM

73. Couldn't find the the info in the page, so

I Googled instead and found a CBO report that showed a chart of SS tax receipts against outlays, and that the receipts are no longer large enough to cover the payments. Yes, I'd like a fact based answer, which is why I asked.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mostlyconfused (Reply #73)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 05:34 PM

74. Go to the SSA site and look for the FAQ page on the social security trust fund, for a start.

The SSA site comprises more than one page. Search the entire site for the information you want. It is on there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to In Truth We Trust (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:55 PM

17. k&r

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to In Truth We Trust (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:58 PM

20. K&R, again. This fact has been shown and shown and shown again, yet even here there are so many

 

that are willing to blindly follow any looter that wears a 'D' and go along with another theft.

We need the so-called cliff. In one step it will unravel more shenanigans than Congress could hope do in next session.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to In Truth We Trust (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:58 PM

21. just lift the cap

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SHRED (Reply #21)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 04:23 PM

33. Too many opinionated people around TRYING to limit the options here to EVER get consideration of

that possibility.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SHRED (Reply #21)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 05:05 PM

38. Yes, without doing anything, the fund is good to 2037. Forever after lifting the cap.

That's it. One of the most successful government programs in the history of any country.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mbperrin (Reply #38)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:17 PM

57. It's a no brainer, and for Obama to go after SS now that we've given him

a second term, shows us what we are really up against.

No, all his free passes are used up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to In Truth We Trust (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 04:01 PM

23. it also helps stimulate the economy

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to In Truth We Trust (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 04:05 PM

25. I voted against this asshole in '80 and '84

but...


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to In Truth We Trust (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 04:21 PM

31. SS Cuts

I just read on Alternet that the President has agreed to cuts in Social Security and a new way of adjusting COLA to pay less. We need our people in Congress to stand up and say no cuts to Social Security. I think the headline read "Obama throws Seniors under the bus".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kworkman (Reply #31)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 04:28 PM

34. NO ONE in Congress is going to stand up for any position that cuts ITS OWN support out from under

itself by not sticking together. And accusing the lead negotiator of lying and thievery is a sure recipe to see that that happens and I see that behavior so often here at DU that I tend to think that failure on any/all fronts is possibly it's authentic purpose.

Does my tentative conclusion seem so improbable when there are, after-all, some very fat salaries on the table right this minute.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #34)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 05:06 PM

40. What fat salaries are on the table?

Specifics, please.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to In Truth We Trust (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 04:21 PM

32. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to In Truth We Trust (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 04:30 PM

35. Rec, but it won't matter. SS and Medicare have ALWAYS been the true target.

The rest is to make it appear "equitable"...which, of course, it won't be.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to In Truth We Trust (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 04:54 PM

37. I just tried to call the WH comments line to comment on the proposed cuts

to SS COL adjustments. I could not get through.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to In Truth We Trust (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 05:05 PM

39. I called my Senator (Wyden/D-OR), who MoveOn says is "waivering".

he's the same "liberal" Senator who was infamously "collaborating" with Ryan's
Medicare voucher foolishness.

I told them that even Reagan had enough sense to oppose cuts to SS because
it has NOTHING to do with deficits or balancing the budget.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to In Truth We Trust (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 05:28 PM

42. The government has borrowed nearly $2.7 trillion as of 2011 from the SS trust fund.

The government has borrowed nearly $2.7 trillion as of 2011 from the trust fund and used the money for other purposes. That is a bit of a problem. If they had left it alone (e.g. Gore's "lock box") we wouldn't have as big of a crisis.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progressoid (Reply #42)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 06:26 PM

49. Your post is very welcome. Thank you! Purely criminal behavior to borrow this HUGE sum and then have

the unadulterated gall to so they need to slash benefits for the neediest who PAID for it themselves in order to sustain the wealthiest. Criminal!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progressoid (Reply #42)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:39 PM

56. Such "borrowing" with no intention to ever pay it back was begun by LBJ, expanded by Nixon, and

 

then greatly expanded by Reagan.

Now, we're running on auto-pilot where the military-industrial complex never gets less and more funds have to be "borrowed" from the SS trust fund.

Does anyone sincerely believe that cuts via a chained-CPI will be the last effort by Republicans and "Centrists" to cut SS benefits? They'll be back for more and more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progressoid (Reply #42)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 07:48 AM

66. Obviously, if we are not going to pay back one

of our creditors, the banksters, china and the Saudis should be first on line before elderly Americans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to In Truth We Trust (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 05:36 PM

43. Although you are techinically correct

The payroll tax deduction that Obama put in place, is taking money out of the Social Security funds, I am not complaining because it gives my family $800 per year extra money which I spend and thus stimulate the economy. What should happen is that the ceiling should be lifted on the percentage that the rich pay in to S.S. that simple step would make the program solvent, but on top of that it should be means tested and ended for anyone that is pulling in 100K annual income in retirement. Those things would ensure that it remains available for everyone and in fact would allow for slight lowering of the retirement age back to 62.

One other point that could prove to be problematic for S.S. is the crazy money scam that is actually happening now. Many people that are unemployed and who have used up their 99 weeks of unemployment benefits are going to the doctors and claiming they are mentally impaired, i.e. suffering a breakdown, and other such trauma and getting placed on SSDI.

I wanted to find out the real numbers on this and I looked at usdebtclock.org the site lists the SS retirees and SSI including disability numbers from SSA. This site also has a clock that you can roll back over the last 12 years in 4 year increments. What I found was that from 2000 - 2004 the # of Retirees/SSI increase by 2.5 million, from 2004 to 2008 the # increased by 2.8 million but from 2004 thru present the number increased by 17.5 million that is nearly 700 percent increase in the last 4 years.

So the money that Social Security is outlaying is huge and is causing an effect to future benefits.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to In Truth We Trust (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 05:40 PM

44. K & R

Quit trying to rob and steal MY future retirement

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to In Truth We Trust (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 05:50 PM

46. knr

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to In Truth We Trust (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 05:53 PM

47. The bastards are literally taking food out of my mouth!

My wife and I live on our SS income. I worked for 50 years, paying into SS from the time I was 15 to the time I retired at 65. It wasn't a tax, it was a contribution to a defined benefit plan. SS is NOT an entitlement, it is NOT part of the debt crisis, cutting SS won't pay down the debt by a single penny.

Instead, it cuts MY freaking COLA, which this year is a lousy 1.7%. We've already cut things pretty much to the bone - to the point where we actually consider whether we can afford the gas to go to the grocery or whether we need to wait another day or two and consolidate a few errands into one trip.

The lying bastards promised - Obama, Pelosi, and others absolutely promised that 'SS was not on the table'. You all see how long those promises lasted. They are all lying scum who don't give a rat's ass about anyone except themselves and their rich donors.

Screw them all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to In Truth We Trust (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:36 PM

53. Someone should tell Obama

For the life of me I can't understand why this stupid, cruel idiot idea would even be mentioned by fucking so called Democrats. It shows me what these people we elect really think of us. They hold us in contempt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to In Truth We Trust (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:50 PM

54. Any cuts, at all, to Social Security and if Dems have a hand in it...means

...the Democratic party is no longer...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheProgressive (Reply #54)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:19 PM

58. I agree

And, if and when the cuts are signed into law, I will no longer (after 44 years) be a Democrat. I imagine that all elections until I check out will be between the same two parties. The Democrats will probably still be the lesser of two evils and get my vote. But, if they sell me out, I can no longer support them with money and time and my name will no longer be on their list of members.

98% of us bailed out the rich and the banks. And this is our Thank You.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to In Truth We Trust (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:43 PM

59. The problem is that neither party wants to pay back the $2.7 trillion surplus which has been loaned


...to the Treasury. The SS Trust Fund is the single largest holder of Treasury bonds. This has made possible the cutting of income tax rates to unsustainable, historically low levels during wartime. In other words, surplus PAYROLL taxes (and self-employment taxes) have been used to subsidize general fund expenditures which should have been funded by general fund (income tax) revenues. As the SS Trust Fund now needs to tap that $2.7 trillion surplus to pay for the funded benefits, that would necessitate raises income tax rates to sufficient levels to fund general fund expenditures, and repay the borrowed SS Trust Fund.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Faryn Balyncd (Reply #59)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 06:38 AM

65. +1,000,000. This is the crux of the problem - the ultrarich unwilling to pay back what they owe SS!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to In Truth We Trust (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 02:20 AM

63. k&r

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to In Truth We Trust (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 11:05 AM

67. All of this on-line bickering and discussing

will not help.
Occupy had the right solution. We all, en masse, must occupy everywhere and demand equality. There is no other solution.
United we stand....divided we fail.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to In Truth We Trust (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 01:14 PM

68. I am with you on the occupy everything. I am ready nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to In Truth We Trust (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 01:28 PM

69. DURec

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to In Truth We Trust (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 02:02 PM

70. Here is what I understand..

And correct me if I am wrong (Im sure that wont be a problem)

The SS admin is paying current payees with SS tax money coming in, and since that is now not enough, it is "cashing-in" the IOUS known as T-Bills that were placed there when the govt raided the money years back when their was a surplus of revenu coming in. So now the govt has to pay off those IOU's that the SS Admin is now redemming, and to do that they are borrwing more money and adding to the debt by selling more T-Bills...

Is this correct? If so then I could see how one could claim that SS is "adding to the debt"...but the money should never have been lent to the Govt in the first place..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread