that the SS program can be stabilized without significant and prompt
action to address the underlying imbalances. Failure to deal with the
problem in a timely way will result in a systemic problem for the US
economy in less than ten years.
While there are a number of proposals to address the imbalances, there
really are only two possible out comes. Either the 60-70% of the baby
boomer population who are highly dependent of SS are going to have the
benefits cuts, or younger workers are going to have to dig into their
pocket to pay for the Boomers for the next 30 years.
Bottom line; either a significant portion of seniors are going to be eating cat food, or the next few generations are going to be paying (unfairly) through the nose.
I have not written one of these critical pieces without getting a bunch
of complaints from the big guns who support SS (as it is) and maintain
that what I am saying is just bunk. They are wrong, I’ve been right all along.
Charles Blahous, the Public Trustee for the SS Trust Fund gave testimony (Link) to the House Ways and Means Committee on Friday. I think he laid it on the line rather nicely.
The 2011 Trustees’ report is the first in which Public Trustees have ever participated to have concluded that an era of permanent annual deficits has been reached.
This is important. It’s all you need to know. SS has turned a corner. It
is headed south. It will continue to head south as far as the broader
economy is concerned for the next 75 years (actually SS is in perpetual deficit).
Social
Security expenditures exceeded the program’s non-interest income in 2010
for the first time since 1983. This deficit stood at $49 billion last
year and is projected to be $46 billion in 2011.
These are not small numbers. The $100b shortfall in 2010-11 is a fairly
big burden given that the rest of the government’s finances are in such a
hole. Blahous said something that may have been a “tell” as to what we are looking at in the future with these deficits:
This deficit is expected to shrink to about $20 billion for years 2012-2014 as the economy strengthens. After 2014, cash deficits are expected to grow rapidly as the number of beneficiaries continues to grow at a substantially faster rate than the number of covered workers.
Blahous is not following the SS “script” with this comment. These are the projected deficits based on the SSTF annual report:
Note that the “projected” annual deficits remain fairly small all the
way out to 2018. So what is Blahous referring to regarding big deficits
post 2014? SS provides an alternate forecast that they call the
“High-Cost” analysis. This chart looks at the two forecasts together.
For Blahous to suggest to Congress that the deficits will be “growing rapidly”
post 2014 represents (to me) that the real thinking inside of SS is
that the actual results will be closer to the worst case scenario.
Should that be the result, the cumulative deficit at SS from 2011
through 2020 will be a very lumpy $900 billion.
My own review of the numbers says that we have little chance of achieving even the results of the high cost analysis. It is likely to be much worse than that.
The problem is that the economy is simply not producing enough jobs.
There are fewer workers contributing to the system. The SSTF is
anticipating “a strengthening economy”, I see no evidence of this today
and have no expectation for a turnaround in the jobs picture any time
over (at least) the next five years. The following graph says it all on
payrolls in America. The recession killed us. As of today the number of
workers contributing to SS is less than it was in 2000. Look at this at
you will understand the problem.
I think that Blahous made some important comments. One’s that will shut up the defenders of SS. The argument that those defenders repeatedly use is that SS does not impact the current deficit. That is flat out wrong:
Social
Security operations are currently adding to the unified federal deficit
and will add substantially more in the years to come.
The facts folks. SS is adding to the annual budget deficit ($116b in
2011). It is adding to our funding deficit (the amount we need to borrow
from the Public). That number was a manageable $49b in 2010 but it will
grow every year from now on. In less than a decade it will become
unmanageable.
Blahous spoke about the “Assets” of the SSTF. The believers in SS constantly point to the huge $2.6T surplus at SS and say: “There is plenty of money in the piggy bank. There is no need to mess with SS today”. That is not the case at all.
If we look at the bonds from the perspective of the Trust Funds, they are assets. If we look at them from the perspective of the unified federal budget, they are a net wash, as are the interest payments that they receive.
Folks, there are no Assets in the Trust Fund. There are pieces of paper
to be sure. But they are just pieces of paper. The merely represent
claims on future taxpayers.
The following words are, I think, critical to the debate on SS:
The costs that will be borne by younger generations will grow significantly each year that a new cohort of baby boomers joins the benefit rolls.
I am screaming at the top of my lungs, “How can we let this happen?”
To me, it is absolutely insane to think that the Baby Boomers (I’m one) can put the burden of SS on younger workers. This simply will not work.
The result of a policy approach that sticks everyone under 50 with the
cost of the Boomers is going to result in deep social divides. We have
enough problems in our society today. We don’t need/want Age Warfare to be added to the list. But if the plan to “fix” SS is one that sticks the bill onto young people we WILL have age warfare, it’s inevitable. The social consequences would be greater than the economic costs. Why does no one see this?
Addressing the imbalances at SS will be painful, and no one likes pain.
So the result has been that our political leaders just kick this can
down the road. I don’t think that there will be any fixes at SS until
after 2012. While an extra two years will not result in a crisis, it
will result in a higher cost of the necessary fixes. I hope all the
defenders of SS read what Blahous has said on this:
Elected officials will best serve the interests of the public if financial corrections are enacted at the earliest practicable time.
Earlier action will also afford elected officials with a greater
opportunity to minimize adverse impacts on vulnerable populations, including lower- income workers and those who are already substantially dependent on program benefits.
The big defenders of SS call themselves Liberals. Paul Krugman and Dean Baker are on top of the list. But there is nothing liberal about their position. Who is going to be most hurt by what is coming (absent changes)? The answer is clear. Older people who are 100% dependent on SS and younger workers who are on the bottom of the income scale.
The Liberals have to come to understand their dilemma. The more they put
their foot down and demand no changes to SS, the worse off will be
those that they are actually trying to help. The liberals are shooting their own constituency.
Note: On these matters I consider myself a liberal. But I
come to a completely different conclusions than those who actually call
themselves Liberals.
My position on this complicated issue:
-We can’t cut benefits across the board. Too many people would be eating cat food. That’s not American.
-We can’t put the burden of the Boomers on younger workers. It’s simply not fair. That’s not the American way either.
-The solution(s) have to be born (largely) by the Baby Boomers
themselves. Post the Boomers, SS can be a PayGo concept. But the
transition is not PayGo. It is a huge inter-generational transfer of wealth. This means that well off Boomers (there are many, including myself)
are going to have to dig into their pockets to support those in their
age group who did not fair so well. That, in my opinion, is the only
viable solution. That would be more representative of the American way. Fairness.
Thank you, nick!
45 Married both work and make more than the
threshold..In the current system, the people who
fall under the cap have their entire salary
taxed to pay for SS. Over the cap you don't.
Let's not BS people about what's fair..
What's fair about pointing a gun at Peter to pay for Paul's retirement? If all these govt entitlement programs are so great, WHY aren't they voluntary? Down with Big Brother!
Awaiting the Thought Police...
So I hope you understand you have to build savings yourself for both your retirement. The SS you pay, you can write off.
And then you think it would be more fair if the cap was lifted? You would pay more today and still could reasonably expect close to nada when you reach retirement age.
I got news for you: I'm forty goddamn years old, and to think for two seconds that any fucking cent I pay into SS will EVER make it back to me? Kiss my ass. It's a tax. Plain and simple. One that targets the upper middle class WAGE earners.
I know it's coming, but let's call it what it is. One more redistribution of MY money to cover a shortfall caused by incompetent Socialist assholes.
Dead on Colonel.
I'm screwed on the whole deal and have known it my entire working life, but I'll take it like a man as long as the theft doesn't continue for yet another generation.
We have to kill it off, for them.
"We have to kill it off, for them."
Perfect.
Exactly, spot on. Thank you Colonel.
Socialists assholes .... yep! Social welfare for the Oligarchy!!
You got that part right!!
Come to think of it, rather than eat catfood, perhaps it would make more sense to eat the real useless eaters, the cats themselves. I know the Chinese enjoy dog and cat meat and you can even find roasted rat for sale along the roadside in Zimbabwe--a real delicacy as I understand. Has anyone here killed a neighbor's cat or dog and eaten it? It might be a good idea to consider in order to become acclimated to the taste before Bruce's austerity program for 90 year olds kicks in.
Don't forget, boomers, that there is a plentious supply of nutritious seafood from the westcoast of Japan or the Gulf of Mexico, thanks to some of the corporations mentioned above that pay no tax. I'm sure this can be had at very low prices.
What's currently "fair" is that you get a benefit, upon retirement, which is determined by your lifetime contributions to the program, limited on the upside by maximum social security wage base. You can be sure that if the wage base cap is removed, the "rich" so affected will not receive a commensurate increase in their SS benefit when they do retire. Their additional FICA taxes will simply go to those lower down the income spectrum.
Thus will expire the myth that SS is not just another plain-and-simple welfare program. What will remain will be a federal program whose express purpose is wealth and income re-distribution. This will have a major impact on its popularity.
Correction:
... whose express purpose it to provide a social safety net for the nation.
as for the re-distribution bulshit:
re-distribution is already happening, you moron!
It's called: write the laws so that the people at the very very top get most of it! That is re-distribution.
People cannot claim at the same time that
1) the market is rigged
2) the market decides current wages and incomes
that is like saying that current levels of wages and income are rigged (BINGO!!!)
People at the "very, very top" already pay the vast majority of income taxes in this country. The statistics are out there for anybody to see. You could confiscate ALL the income and ALL the assets of the top 10% of the population in this country, and still not make an appreciable dent in the incomprehensibly large benefits which have been promised the Boomers in the form of SS and Medicare. The numbers are simply too large. The math no longer works.
That there has been a giant fraud visited upon this country by the banks and the financial elite is indisputable. Please, somebody start a federal investigation to claw back every cent of their ill-gotten gains; I am all for it. And, put their sorry corrupt butts in jail for 20 years each. But, do not confuse the issue, which is that there is no way the promises made via these programs can possibly be honored, whether or not the wage base cap is eliminated or not, and the program will become a political football like any other.
Actually, the Medicaid, Medicare portion of the Social Security System is the easies fix of them all.
Medi-Medi will now only pay the lowest non-zero cost that a company or individual has billed ANY individual for a product or procedure sold or performed anywhere on the planet. (Non-Zero cost so that charity work is not affected)
So Glaxo-Smith-Kline sells drug X in Cuba at $0.05 per dose, it can no longer charge Medi-Medi $50.00 per dose for it.
Blue Cross has a deal with hospital X to get treatment Y done for $250.00, Medi-Medi also pays $250.00 for it, and not $5,000.00.
But, Cedar Sinai treats a kids cancer for free - No change in the amount they can bill Medi-Medi.
Doctors, Hospitals, and Corps can either accept it, or lose access to ALL government grants, funding, and contracts. (Which would include research performed in public or private setting, paid for with grants or other government funding being able to be marketed or sold by said doctors, hospitals, or corps.)
Social Security is a little harder, but not much, remove the cap, have it also apply to Cap Gains and Dividends earned outside of a qualified IRS plan (401k, 457, IRA, Edu IRA, etc) and have absolutely EVERYONE pay into it (With elected or appointed government officials paying double). Congress, Cops, Firefighters, Teachers, Librarians, EVERYONE. (Yes, this includes me, who is a County Government worker). Finally, so that the Upper Middle Class arent totally fucked by this change (Just mostly fucked), for each quarter that a person is paying in more than the previous cap they get a 1% increase in their final benefits. (Oh and make half the cost of it a Tax Credit for Self Employed individuals who are paying both the employer and employee portion for the same individual).
re-post later
Dent ... you say.... of course! let's make a dent... so here it is again:
..........................................
Did I hurt your feelings? .... junk away and kiss my a$$!
A truth nobody wants to talk about:
The budget plan proposed by the Progressive Caucus is the ONLY plan that balances the budget and it does it by 2021.
That is according to the non-partisan CBO.
http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/04/debt_proposals
..........................................
Did I hurt your feelings? .... junk away and kiss my a$$!
Yeah...you bolsheviks are famous for "balancing budgets"...at gunpoint. The "non-partisan" CBO? Selfsame that told us Obamacare was going to lower costs, deficit, etc. They lied. This whole discussion is academic, in any case. 12 short months from now, Medicare, Medicaid, SS, foodcards, Sec 8, etc. will be chaff in the wind. Good riddance.
Somehow I think that after a few years, all this talk of 'trust funds' and 'benefit schedules' will be relics of the past.
Countries will still have social welfare systems, some much better than others, but any payments in the present will be paid out of current tax revenues, without borrowing ... no 'guarantees' for the future, for anyone, beyond a generic promise of 'help for those in need that is fairly distributed, based on what is available to share'.
So we won't worry about systems being 'sustainable' because nothing concrete will be promised beyond the next fiscal year ... this after several years of revolution and rioting when most everyone finally accepts that when the money is gone, the money is gone indeed.
We can’t put the burden of the Boomers on younger workers. It’s simply not fair. That’s not the American way either"
This has been going on for twenty years. They paid their way BK
Not correct. More than half of the 2.6 trillion trust fund is interest. That "money" came from all taxpayers (and deficits).
The amount that "you" contributed is about 1/4. The other quarter came from your employer. But guess what? Your employer deducted that expense from their income taxes. So really most of that contribution is just air.
The following links spell it out, even for the Ignorati:
http://reason.com/blog/2008/10/24/saving-social-security-episode
http://reason.com/blog/2009/10/15/social-security-chief-says-ins
http://reason.com/archives/2005/05/02/social-securitys-progressive-p
Sadly, Social "Security" is one of those dreams, coming due...
"Dreams Come Due, Government and Economics as if Freedom Mattered", ISBN: 0-671-61159-3, by John Galt
The book is dated, but many of the things it talks about are still valid today.
http://goo.gl/FnxBZ Treasury Direct $14 Trillion Debt
http://goo.gl/TMl74 $15 Trillion in Loans
http://goo.gl/EXzal / ='s $29T
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/BASE 3 Years 300% More Dollars Printed Out of Thin Air!
in 3 years.. NOT! including TARP / TALF / FED SWAP Windows.. and / or any other.. than what is sourced and sited above..
$18 Trillion in 3 years! $18 TRILLION!
Bruce,
I was self employed and paid the WHOLE 15%. No deduction.
Here's a link everybody should check.
http://www.missingmoney.com/Main/StateSites.cfm
Thanks,
Found some money I forgot about. Insurance policy refund.
Social Security - Robbing The Middle Class http://goo.gl/m8QMq $2.5 Trillion Dollar Surplus! Money! You have I.O.U.'s NOT! a Surplus!
The Gang of 6 Raising the Retirement Age & Reducing Social Security Benefits http://goo.gl/Aix0y All for the Surplus $
http://www.dickipedia.org/dick.php?title=The_Gang_of_Six Reducing Social Security Benefits http://goo.gl/m8QMq All for YOUR! Surplus Money!
Sen. Ben Nelson [D(ick)-Neb.]
Gang of 6 Member Nelson, Ben (D-NE) $14 Million Dollar Lobby Whore http://goo.gl/i29tJ And! who owns him http://goo.gl/DvBWP
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cycle=Career&type=I&cid=N00005329&newMem=N
Sen. Mary Landrieu [D(ick)-La.]
Gang of 6 Member Landrieu, Mary L (D-LA) $24 Million Dollar Lobby Whore http://goo.gl/dwFxO And! who owns her http://goo.gl/tM3bG
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cycle=Career&type=I&cid=N00005395&newMem=N
Sen. Ron Wyden [D(ick)-Ore.]
Gang of 6 Member Wyden, Ron (D-OR) $23 Million Dollar Lobby Whore http://goo.gl/GnQKf And! who owns him http://goo.gl/zNRvN
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cycle=Career&type=I&cid=N00007724&newMem=N
Independent Dick Sen. Joe Lieberman, from Connectidick
Gang of 6 Member Lieberman, Joe (I-Conn) $49 Million Dollar Lobby Whore http://goo.gl/C7tSk And! who owns him http://goo.gl/XospA
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cycle=Career&type=I&cid=N00000616&newMem=N
Sen. Olympia Snowe [R(eally big dick)-Me.]
Gang of 6 Member Snowe, Olympia J (R-ME) $10 Million Dollar Lobby Whore http://goo.gl/5ArgP And! who owns her http://goo.gl/zj2JJ
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cycle=Career&type=I&cid=N00000480&newMem=N
Sen. Susan Collins [R(eally big dick)-Me.]
Gang of 6 Member Collins, Susan, M (R-ME) $14 Million Dollar Lobby Whore http://goo.gl/X8I73 And! who owns her http://goo.gl/1dcLY
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cycle=Career&type=I&cid=N00000491&newMem=N
Now you may say that these six have been disbanded.. but there will be another 6...
and the $2.5 Trillion in I.O.U.'s.. Bruce will use for Tax Breaks for the Corporations so that they can start hiring sheepeople again! Right Bruce?! LOL!!
Tax Breaks!!! LOL!!!
Senate Republicans blocked a Democratic Bill to End tax Breaks for Moving U.S. Jobs Offshore! http://goo.gl/6qhnK
we need MORE! tax cuts for corporations..
I mean, we need more carry forward Tax Breaks as Corporations are already paying $0.00's in Taxes.. so that the Corporations may carry forward those benefits that Corporations are unable to monetize when over the threshold for the Tax Benefits already used. No Need for any Tax Credits to go to waste!
Think of all the Jobs that the Corporations will create when they don’t have to pay Taxes and when their war chests are bursting with new minted Dollar bills!
Hurry! More Tax Cuts! NOW! Before the top 1% has to pay any Taxes what so ever!
And Please! Don’t forget “The Subsides!” Free! Money!! is GREAT!!! when it’s at the tax payer expense! It is not like the sheepeople will even notice it! They are to fucking stupid!
Top 10 corporations which paid no taxesHere is Sen. Sanders’ list of the 10 worst corporate income tax avoiders:
1) Exxon Mobil made $19 billion in profits in 2009. Exxon not only paid no federal income taxes, it actually received a $156 million rebate from the IRS, according to its SEC filings. (Source: Exxon Mobil’s 2009 shareholder report filed with the SEC here.)
2) Bank of America received a $1.9 billion tax refund from the IRS last year, although it made $4.4 billion in profits and received a bailout from the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department of nearly $1 trillion. (Source: Forbes.com here, ProPublica here and Treasury here.)
3) General Electric made $26 billion in profits in the United States over the past five years and, thanks to clever use of loopholes, paid no taxes.(Source: Citizens for Tax Justice here and The New York Times here. Note: despite rumors to the contrary, the Times has stood by its story.)
4) Chevron received a $19 million refund from the IRS last year after it made $10 billion in profits in 2009. (Source: See 2009 Chevron annual report here. Note 15 on page FS-46 of this report shows a U.S. federal income tax liability of $128 million, but that it was able to defer $147 million for a U.S. federal income tax liability of negative $19 million.)
5) Boeing, which received a $30 billion contract from the Pentagon to build 179 airborne tankers, got a $124 million refund from the IRS last year. (Source: Paul Buchheit, professor, DePaul University, here and Citizens for Tax Justice here.)
6) Valero Energy, the 25th largest company in America with $68 billion in sales last year, received a $157 million tax refund check from the IRS and, over the past three years, received a $134 million tax break from the oil and gas manufacturing tax deduction. (Source: the company’s 2009 annual report, pg. 112, here.)
7) Goldman Sachs in 2008 only paid 1.1 percent of its income in taxes even though it earned a profit of $2.3 billion and received an almost $800 billion from the Federal Reserve and U.S. Treasury Department. (Source: Bloomberg News here, ProPublica here, Treasury Department here.)
8) Citigroup last year made more than $4 billion in profits but paid no federal income taxes. It received a $2.5 trillion bailout from the Federal Reserve and U.S. Treasury. (Source: Paul Buchheit, professor, DePaul University, here, ProPublica here, Treasury Department here.)
9) ConocoPhillips, the fifth largest oil company in the United States, made $16 billion in profits from 2006 through 2009, but received $451 million in tax breaks through the oil and gas manufacturing deduction. (Sources: Profits can be found here. The deduction can be found on the company’s 2010 SEC 10-K report to shareholders on 2009 finances, pg. 127, here.)
10) Carnival Cruise Lines made more than $11 billion in profits over the past five years, but its federal income tax rate during those years was just 1.1 percent. (Source: The New York Times here.)
http://www.greenpartywatch.org/2011/04/30/top-10-corporations-who-paid-no-taxes/
http://goo.gl/cgg4O General Electric $14.2 Billion in Profits, Pays $0 in U.S. Taxes
$39M Dollar Lobby in 2010 $14B in Profits =’s NO TAXES PAID! http://goo.gl/rZLDY
$10 billion sale of F.D.I.C.-backed debt http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2009/01/06/ge-capital-begins-10-billion-debt-sale/
Austerity! for the Poor! becuase the $18 Trillion Printed went to Wall Street!
That will fix the Problem Bruce!!!
Laughing My Fucking Ass OFF!!!
Austerity!! for the Poor!!!! Hurry! welfare is making the country broke! LOLLOLOOLOLOLOLOLOOLOLOLOL!!!!
Social Security is the Problem!!! LOLOLLOLLOLOLOL!!!
Bruce you are a Government Plant!
http://goo.gl/FnxBZ Treasury Direct $14 Trillion Debt
http://goo.gl/TMl74 $15 Trillion in Loans
http://goo.gl/EXzal ='s $29T
$18 Trillion Dollars goes to AAA rated corps in 3 fucking years and you want to blame the liberals! for wanting to feed the poor!
You, Bruce are a fucking Joke!
I wrote the other day about corporate taxes and what a rip off they are. So I am on the same page as you on that. Out companies do not pay their fair share.
SS is not a tax. At least is not supposed to be. SS (FICA) payments are not supposed to be used to pay for wars and the like. They are supposed to be seperate.
PS. My argument in the piece is that I DO NOT want to see that seniors in our society have to eat cat food. If we do not address the problems ASAP they will be eating cat food.
What kind of sick ending is that?
Not to worry -- they won't be able to afford cat food. Have you checked how much those little cans cost? Maybe some dry dog food if they're lucky. And heat? Doesn't look good.
JW, you can rant as long as you want, but you offer no solution approaches except maybe expropriating the "rich" and the corporations.
Or, much more likely, indirect expropiation of everyone (including retirees) by debasing the dollar - in a way that doesn't show up in CPI, so no COLA.
Good luck with that!
a flat tax..
everyone pays the same thing.. no deductions.. fair, flat and no dedections..
****************************************************************
that is me quoting my in my 1st post.. shut the fuck up you dumb fuck.
I'm 100% for a flat tax. Funny how you just endorsed a conservative ideal. See? Start with the common ground.
And that fixes SS?
I want some of the stuff you are smoking.
Give me/us a coherent picture how to approach the situation, in a concise form, not in 100 line copy/paste dumps or in tiny bits spread around over dozens of posts.
We have enough politicians spewing their half truths and outright lies, you don't need to add your voice to that group.
are you fucking serious?
the whole idea of everyone payin their fair share instead of the top 1% of 1% paying none just flys the fuck over your head..
"O" now I get it.. you want me to lay out a 5 year phased plan of implementation that would cross party lines and rouse support from both sides of the isle?
just becuase I engage you fucking insects on your level does not mean for one fucking milli-second that my kindness should be taken for weakness.
Can you do simple math?
Even if you tax the top 1% at 100% on all their income (including capital gains, dividends, etc.) this will hardly make a dent trying to fill the vast funding gap in SS. You can throw f'ing fairness and other nice or less nice words around as much as you want, it doesn't overcome the facts.
the top 1%.. if they paid taxes.. would more than cover SS.
the problem is, that they dont pay any taxes or very little.
you want tax cuts, that sounds great.. but since they already pay $0! what can we offer next.. "O" thats right.. carry forward tax credits as I have mentioned a MILLION times already.
you are a republican who has no comprehension of anything in the real world.. you are a faith based nut job..
just becuase you like the sound of something.. just becuase you feel good about something.. just becuase it feels right.. does not mean that in the real world that it exists, the numerical facts are just that.. math and facts.. something someone else can duplicate with use of mathamatics. it is science, not faith based I hope its right cause it feels right.
you must be a woman, with all of your feelings spilling over.
Where did I indicate want of tax cuts?
Otherwise: keep believing!
People like you will contribute exactly nothing in solving anything...
Excellent post. this is exactly what's needed; facts. Facts which cause indignation, research, outreach, organization, protest; etc. Although I'm vaguely aware of the corporations not paying taxes, actually reading the list is enough to make you throw up; the Carnival Cruise Lines item made me want to bang my head against the wall. Keep up the good work.
Good points JW, but Bruce a plant? Cmon...
Bruce or whatever his name is... wants the system left in total? and his generation is going to pay.. with the system left as is..
seriously?
really Hulky?
he is a product of shuck and jive for the last 40 years.. be polite at all costs and screw the people when they are not looking.. that is who he is.
He is an OUTRIGHT Coward! who wants to fuck people over.. so even if he isnt a plant he asks plant questions or runs plant ideas up the flag pole and everyone here provides quality feed back.
he would not pay shit, he would fine the loop hole! and squirm by like he has his whole life!
Take a breath. A deep one. You know nothing about me. But if your interested go to my blog (or continue to tune in on Zero Hedge)
Read my stuff for a week or two. Your pespective is off base.
But if you like to write trash, be my guest. I understand you need to rant. It's okay.
I'll suggest the visceral reactions to your post have much to do with the headline and little to do with the body. Hell hath no fury like a liberal scorned.
He's just the messenger JW. Tell me it ain't so Bruce!
I respect Bruce and what I think he's trying to say.
We have to find a way to end the SS Ponzi without killing everyone off who had their paychecks extorted for their entire life. In ending it, its unfair to tax kids for it (who are just starting out in life) who will get nothing out of it for their taxation.
No matter what we do grandma is not going to starve or eat cat food when we have young able bodied people running around with EBT cards.
Its a sticky issue...one idea I've seen is to sell off some National Parks which are ours anyways to bridge the gap...the greens, will of course scream like stuck pigs but they could always step forward and purchase them ;-)
I don't know...another is scaled withdrawl from the system. A thirty year old would pay less into it than a forty year old with over fifty staying the same etc...I'm over 50 and I've said my entire life since I was in my 20's it was a ponzi and tried my best to prepare even with all the other myriad of taxes to contend with.
The main thing is to end it and the taxation for it because everyone now knows it was always a ponzi...the surplus of the past was spent long ago and IOU's left in the till.
At some point we will learn you can't trust a pol with a pot of money sitting in front of them no matter what stripe they wear.
It's because it's so expensive to protect the rest of the world from evil that we can't afford to pay a decent old age pension to our countrymen who go broke in old age. Of course, in a meritocracy, these people deserve to suffer. We well-off types are the righteous judges of our sinful brethren, it goes without saying.
Still, one wonders if we could somewhat reduce the stock of heros that we honor each year by engaging in less evil suppression around the world. Even as those poor souls whom we protect will probably succumb to untold suffering without our ministrations, perhaps pulling back could alleviate our problems with wouldbe catfood useless eaters. Then there are the trillions we could clawback--oh, forget it--this is America.
On the other hand, has anyone done a study of various brands of catfood to see which ones are less dangerous in terms of possible parasites, contamination by toxic metals, etc? I would be very curious to start researching this right away.
First off, let me say that I agree with your sentiment. What I don't understand, is at what juncture in the Western world, did we decide we were ENTITLED to retirement? During our entire lives, we live better than the rest of the world, and then we arbitrarily decide that there is an age where we should just be able to kick back and provide nothing? That's the bullshit part.
Maybe I'm from a different neck of the woods than a lot of you guys, but I just did some work on the property of a farmer who is 102 fucking years old. Lives by himself, and still runs the farm. I had to meet him at his house, and he told me to come in the afternoon, because he had to get FIVE teeth pulled in the morning. Trying to be nice, I said, "That'll ruin a day." His response? "Why do you think I'm having it done in the morning, think I want it to fuck up a whole day?" This is no shit.
Assuming this whole fucking world doesn't blow itself up in the next fucking couple of years, I will be able to semi-retire at 52, and pull the plug at 55. Know what that means? Death by stagnation at 57. I have every intention of tipping over with a shovel in my hand; if I'm lucky, I will have set it down long enough to bounce a grandkid on my knee for a few minutes.
This idea that we are going to spend DECADES producing nothing, and living off the sweat of others is pure BULLSHIT. If you have saved enough, then by all means do what you desire. If you haven't, you work til you can't. Ever wonder in awe at some of those tough old broken down fuckers who don't have an ounce of quit in them? Why do you think they live so long? They've got shit to do, and they're too fucking busy to die.
At what point in this world did we decide work was something to be avoided?
"On the other hand, has anyone done a study of various brands of catfood to see which ones are less dangerous in terms of possible parasites, contamination by toxic metals, etc? I would be very curious to start researching this right away."
LOL.
As an FYI...Social Security alone is roughly the same size as the defense budget.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/02/01/us/budget.html
We can all quibble over what a federal government should do or be...or what cat food is the safest and tastiest...but we have to be honest about the numbers...because they are what they are.
Edit: And it should go without saying...I didn't junk you.
That's not what I got from the article at all.
I think it is safe to say that the "strengthening economy" is pretty much wishful thinking at this point.
"There are fewer workers contributing to the system."
"-We can’t cut benefits across the board. Too many people would be eating cat food. That’s not American."
"-The solution(s) have to be born (largely) by the Baby Boomers themselves."
"This means that well off Boomers (there are many, including myself) are going to have to dig into their pockets to support those in their age group who did not fair so well."
What I got out of the whole thing was Bruce suggesting that the well off Boomers are going to have to take it in the ass because he doesn't want the poor SOB boomers eating cat food, and he doesn't want my kids paying for the fiscal incompetence of his generation.
Thank you for saying:
What I got out of the whole thing was Bruce suggesting that the well off Boomers are going to have to take it in the ass because he doesn't want the poor SOB boomers eating cat food, and he doesn't want my kids paying for the fiscal incompetence of his generation.
This is precisely what I was trying to say.
bk
I think you have the correct interpretation.
I say let them eat cat food. Or dog. Everyone knew this was coming for my whole adult life.
They had an opportunity to become debt free. Instead, my peers live in McMansions that the bank really owns, they have three mortgages and are drowning in debt.
Suicide is what I recommend. Do not ask me to pay.