By:
Advanced search…

Welcome to Detroit Sports Forum!

By joining our community, you'll be able to connect with fellow fans that live and breathe Detroit sports just like you!

Get Started
  • If you are no longer able to access your account since our recent switch from vBulletin to XenForo, you may need to reset your password via email. If you no longer have access to the email attached to your account, please fill out our contact form and we will assist you ASAP. Thanks for your continued support of DSF.

Obama may have trouble with the old folks

Youre going to blame Barrack for something that will be exhausted in 2036 lol. youre ridiculous. Not to mention something thats been an issue for decades prior to Barrack taking office.....weve known these truths for a loooong time now.
 
mhughes0021 said:
Youre going to blame Barrack for something that will be exhausted in 2036 lol. youre ridiculous. Not to mention something thats been an issue for decades prior to Barrack taking office.....weve known these truths for a loooong time now.
Click to expand...


and yet he has proposed what to solve them??? oh ya, not a dam thing
Do you understand"exhaust"...it means nothing left....so we will have to cut payments at some point much before 2036
 
tsmith7559 said:
and yet he has proposed what to solve them??? oh ya, not a dam thing
Do you understand"exhaust"...it means nothing left....so we will have to cut payments at some point much before 2036
Click to expand...


you'll be long dead and buried goof....:tup:
 
It's obama's fault for not going back to 1980 and urging more parents to have children to ensure that there would be enough people paying into SS to support benefits to the baby boomers when they retire.

I think that's a fair position to have. Certainly, Romney (the likely GOP front-runner) was doing his share at the time.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
michchamp said:
It's obama's fault for not going back to 1980 and urging more parents to have children to ensure that there would be enough people paying into SS to support benefits to the baby boomers when they retire.

I think that's a fair position to have. Certainly, Romney (the likely GOP front-runner) was doing his share at the time.
Click to expand...

I guess the American people should have listened to Reagan and started an IRA back in the early 80's...dam, that man was smart.
 
tsmith7559 said:
your schtick is getting old...besides at 260 your ready to have the big one
Click to expand...


nah dude Im healthy as a fucking brahma bull :yay: , you on the other hand are just plain Old Man....lol
 
tsmith7559 said:
I guess the American people should have listened to Reagan and started an IRA back in the early 80's...dam, that man was smart.
Click to expand...


hell ya funneling all those weapons to the contras and then playing the I didnt know about it card...he was a fucking genius...lol
 
Slick said:
hell ya funneling all those weapons to the contras and then playing the I didnt know about it card...he was a fucking genius...lol
Click to expand...


and took full responsibility for it...oh by the way...what does this have to do with SS...stick to the subject
 
We will, in this day and age of no ac-count-ability, continue to borrow money to fund social security. Thats how it's being sustained even now. It's already insolvent.
 
we don't borrow money to fund social security. it's a trust fund. it's withheld from wages; it's entirely separate from income taxes and the federal budget.

SO MUCH misinformation out there being pushed by investment banks, the mutual fund industry & their lobbyists to reap the windfall they would receive if they were able to get their greedy, slimy hands all over social security money.
 
michchamp said:
we don't borrow money to fund social security. it's a trust fund. it's withheld from wages; it's entirely separate from income taxes and the federal budget.

SO MUCH misinformation out there being pushed by investment banks, the mutual fund industry & their lobbyists to reap the windfall they would receive if they were able to get their greedy, slimy hands all over social security money.
Click to expand...

So this is some of the disinformation out there? I'm talking about making up the deficit that exists. Didn't think that needed explanation.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/08/05/news/economy/social_security_trustees_report/index.htm

http://www.ssa.gov/oact/TRSUM/index.html
 
if the deficit exits, the program should be reformed, which has been done before (it was re-financed with treasury bills early in Reagan's tenure), and is not a failure of the program, but entirely realistic, since it's impossible to predict the future, and create an entitlement program that lasts forever without any management

it should not be privatized, which would be a disaster for the vast majority of Americans (but a boon to a select few...)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
michchamp said:
if the deficit exits, the program should be reformed; it should not be privatized, which would be a disaster for the vast majority of Americans (but a boon to a select few...)
Click to expand...

It does exist. For starters, the gub.mint. has borrowed 2.5 trill from the fund.
There was a 45 bill deficit last year it's going to average 66 bill/year over the next several. That annual shortfall is being borrowed.
 
byco42 said:
It does exist. For starters, the gub.mint. has borrowed 2.5 trill from the fund.
There was a 45 bill deficit last year it's going to average 66 bill/year over the next several. That annual shortfall is being borrowed.
Click to expand...

okay. Well, assuming that's accurate - not that I don't trust you, it's just that I'm not familiar with the figures - then they should refinance the program, or adjust the benefits. it doesn't mean the program is bad, obama is bad, or we need to hand our retirement planning to the private sector so they can do the same job - or more likely worse - than the government, but charge a lot more to do it.
 
michchamp said:
okay. Well, assuming that's accurate - not that I don't trust you, it's just that I'm not familiar with the figures - then they should refinance the program, or adjust the benefits. it doesn't mean the program is bad, obama is bad, or we need to hand our retirement planning to the private sector so they can do the same job - or more likely worse - than the government, but charge a lot more to do it.
Click to expand...

The numbers are from the SSA website. With numbers this big, there's a variance. If SS were voluntary, and I had a say in how much I contributed, I would likely participate willingly. But now, I'm not a willing participant, and there's no guarantee that I'll ever see my contribution.

In the private sector, that's a risk, if the losses were market-driven and a crime if they were embezzled, etc.

What do you call it when the government welches on a similar deal, especially when it's pretty clear that it is not going to take any action to adjust the program?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

About Us

Founded in 2011, Detroit Sports Forum is a community of fanatics dedicated to teams like the Lions, Tigers, Pistons, Red Wings, Wolverines, and more. We live and breathe Detroit sports!

Stay Connected

Forum statistics

Threads
32,906
Messages
1,109,152
Members
942
Latest member
Proud Pheasant

Affiliates

    Discussion Hub
Back
Top