Obama may have trouble with the old folks

[tsmith7559]

Hey Barack, do you ever pay attention to the entitlement funds???

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/04/23/trustees-warn-about-social-security-fiscal-picture/

 

[mhughes0021]

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.

 

[tsmith7559]

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.

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

 

[Slick]

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

you'll be long dead and buried goof....:tup:

 

[tsmith7559]

you'll be long dead and buried goof....:tup:

your schtick is getting old...besides at 260 your ready to have the big one

 

[Michchamp]

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.

 

[tsmith7559]

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.

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.

 

[Slick]

your schtick is getting old...besides at 260 your ready to have the big one

nah dude Im healthy as a fucking brahma bull :yay: , you on the other hand are just plain Old Man....lol

 

[Slick]

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.

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

 

[tsmith7559]

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

and took full responsibility for it...oh by the way...what does this have to do with SS...stick to the subject

 

[Slick]

and took full responsibility for it...oh by the way...what does this have to do with SS...stick to the subject

suck my cock >

 

[tsmith7559]

suck my cock >

its pretty hard to defend Barry, isnt it...lololol

 

[Slick]

its pretty hard to defend Barry, isnt it...lololol

he doesn't need defending...he's up against an empty suit in 2012.:lmao:

 

[byco42]

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.

 

[Michchamp]

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.

 

[byco42]

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.

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

 

[Michchamp]

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...)

 

[byco42]

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...)

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.

 

[Michchamp]

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.

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.

 

[byco42]

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.

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?