General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsVote 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.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
CaliforniaPeggy
(149,560 posts)Enough with the supposed compromise where the wealthy 1% get the bonus, and we get the crumbs, if that.
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)
Generic Other
(28,979 posts)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.
TheProgressive
(1,656 posts).... what else are we suppose to do...
Octafish
(55,745 posts)People who value property over other people already have a party representing their interests. Its' called Republican.
Pisces
(5,599 posts)UnrepentantLiberal
(11,700 posts)
leftstreet
(36,102 posts)I was under the impression the majority expect SS and Medicare to be left alone
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)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.
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)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.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)but that was a hilarious try.
Autumn
(45,018 posts)got to keep an eye on those elected officials, cause I sure don't trust them.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)
The propaganda comes with chutzpah now!
Autumn
(45,018 posts)
The nerve of someone posting their thoughts on a current political situation on a political message board. Dissension, indeed woo me with science
(32,139 posts)
Jakes Progress
(11,122 posts)Just why join a Democratic forum then?
BuelahWitch
(9,083 posts)UnrepentantLiberal
(11,700 posts)
SunSeeker
(51,545 posts)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.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)"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
SunSeeker
(51,545 posts)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?
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021127956
http://news.firedoglake.com/2012/08/27/obama-im-prepared-to-make-a-whole-range-of-compromises/
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Rep-Conyers-Obama-Demand-by-Jeanine-Molloff-110729-352.html
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/07/22/remarks-president (search the page for Social Security)
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/The-Vote/2011/0707/Briefing-room-word-games-What-s-a-slash-versus-a-cut-in-Social-Security
SunSeeker
(51,545 posts)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.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)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.
SunSeeker
(51,545 posts)I can't imagine any Dem calling for SS or Medicare benefit cuts.
upi402
(16,854 posts)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.
TheProgressive
(1,656 posts)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...
upi402
(16,854 posts)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.
TheProgressive
(1,656 posts)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.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)All backed by the "full faith and credit of the United States".
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Last edited Fri Dec 7, 2012, 12:23 AM - Edit history (1)
I'll join that.
RomneyLies
(3,333 posts)Damned straight. Any Dem who votes to cut what I've already paid for gets the boot.
I'm aboard 100%.
MrModerate
(9,753 posts)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.
DRoseDARs
(6,810 posts)...people on our side are unwisely trying to change the meaning of that innocuous word into something dirty as conservatives have already done.
jerseyjack
(1,361 posts)I.m with it, too.
progressoid
(49,961 posts)
Jeff In Milwaukee
(13,992 posts)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.
Jakes Progress
(11,122 posts)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.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)I don't think that counts as ideological purity, nor will it cause inelectibility.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)JEB
(4,748 posts)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.
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)
midnight
(26,624 posts)Jakes Progress
(11,122 posts)grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)femrap
(13,418 posts)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.
mick063
(2,424 posts)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.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)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.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)will be right there with you.
No quarter.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Do you have a prediction?
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)
xchrom
(108,903 posts)Junkdrawer
(27,993 posts)
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"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
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)rdking647
(5,113 posts)thats not a cut.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)rdking647
(5,113 posts)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.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)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.
99Forever
(14,524 posts)Try it and see what happens.
OH...
... and a K&R for Manny.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)DURec!
[font color=firebrick][center]"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 [/font][/center]
[center]
[/font]
[font size=1]photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed[/center][/font]
You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their rhetoric or excuses.
Liberal1975
(87 posts)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.
INdemo
(6,994 posts)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.
bluestate10
(10,942 posts)Taverner
(55,476 posts)Ya Basta
(391 posts)I'm sick and tired of the poor and the working folks getting fucked over, and by those who purport to represent us.
Taverner
(55,476 posts)That is, after all, what the DNC pays him for
Beartracks
(12,806 posts)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.
==================
12AngryBorneoWildmen
(536 posts)
limpyhobbler
(8,244 posts)That's what primaries are for.
pediatricmedic
(397 posts)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.
nenagh
(1,925 posts)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..
