Do the Dems hate Wall Street?

Quote:

It doesn't matter how hard you worked or what you sacrificed, if you have it, they want it for social programs. It's like the dems are really the party of the lazy. They want the government to do everything for them and feel they are entitled to it. Social Security is nothing more than another entitlement for them.

I guarantee that, no matter how hard you work, you never have worked harder than some of the poorest people in the country have just to survive. Why do you deserve more than them? Because of the system that is set up to favor you, regardless of how much actual hard work you did.

We just want to balance that out a little.

The thing that gets me, is that you conservatives apparently don't give a damn about anything but your money.

Cycloptichorn

Job creation becomes an expanding factor when people are more competitive. They get fired less they quit less frequently. They get along better with fellow employees. The markets become more competitive. people have more to spend more businesses find more creative strategies to expand. Expansion means more jobs across the board which includes R&D in manufacturing and other sectors of the markets to fill rapidly changing technologies and services.

All of this happens because one thing alone... competition. Of a desire to keep the PSS fund filling and to remain working for that future retirement day in the sun. A fund that you can frequently check up on it's progress and growth. This provides a person with a greater reason to stay in the work force, a greater sense of personal value and confidence.

Job creation becomes an expanding factor when people are more competitive.

They get fired less they quit less frequently.

They get along better with fellow employees.

The markets become more competitive.

people have more to spend more businesses find more creative strategies to expand.

Expansion means more jobs across the board which includes R&D in manufacturing and other sectors of the markets to fill rapidly changing technologies and services.

All of this happens because one thing alone... competition. Of a desire to keep the PSS fund filling and to remain working for that future retirement day in the sun.

A fund that you can frequently check up on it's progress and growth. This provides a person with a greater reason to stay in the work force, a greater sense of personal value and confidence.

And the Right hates people who insist on fairness and equality in this country. They hate people who have NO money (or very little); they whine and complain that ANYONE can get a good paying job if they wanted to (which is so not true, as there will always be less fortunate); they hate people who insist on having their votes counted; they hate dissent against this sitting pResident, and they especially hate those who may be different than themselves.

Dookiestix wrote:

And the Right hates people who insist on fairness and equality in this country. They hate people who have NO money (or very little); they whine and complain that ANYONE can get a good paying job if they wanted to (which is so not true, as there will always be less fortunate); they hate people who insist on having their votes counted; they hate dissent against this sitting pResident, and they especially hate those who may be different than themselves.

You are probably right...

That does not address the problems with SSI though. The changes that are needed in SSI could address some of the disparity in society that you speak of. This is a chance to even the score, so to speak and provide some lasting social services that actually work.

You have no idea what I have or haven't done cyclo. You have no idea where I came from or what hurdles I had to overcome.

Just because that account does not do as well does not mean that it is not still yours and worth adding more to it.

Also, is it better for your account to do poorly rather go totally broke where social security is surely heading now?

Quote:

Cycloptichorn

Job creation becomes an expanding factor when people are more competitive. They get fired less they quit less frequently. They get along better with fellow employees. The markets become more competitive. people have more to spend more businesses find more creative strategies to expand. Expansion means more jobs across the board which includes R&D in manufacturing and other sectors of the markets to fill rapidly changing technologies and services.

All of this happens because one thing alone... competition. Of a desire to keep the PSS fund filling and to remain working for that future retirement day in the sun. A fund that you can frequently check up on it's progress and growth. This provides a person with a greater reason to stay in the work force, a greater sense of personal value and confidence.

Once again, you write things without understanding them. I'll go line by line.

Quote:

Job creation becomes an expanding factor when people are more competitive.

Explain this, please; it doesn't make any sense. It seems as if you are trying to say that the more competitive people get, it leads to more jobs being created.

How do personal accounts lead to people becoming more competetive? In what ways will they be more competitive? Be specific, please, or admit you don't know what you are talking about.

Comment:
Go back to grade one... ownership is competition... ask the Jones'!

Quote:

They get fired less they quit less frequently.

What?!?! On what do you base this assumption? How exactly are more competitive people going to quit less frequently from their jobs? Wouldn't someone who is highly competitive be looking for a better job all the time? Wouldn't an organization which is highly competitive re: their employees fire those employees which didn't meet standards?

Be specific, please, on how people will quit less if we have private accounts in SS. Or admit that you don't know what you're talking about.

Comment:
Going to a better job or being promoted to better paying position is not the same as quitting or being fired and being unemployed for X amount of time.

Quote:

They get along better with fellow employees.

Once again, on what do you base this? Why do people suddenly get along better with fellow employees? Be specific, or please admit that you don't know what you are talking about.

Comment:
They get along better because they are happier because they feel more "secure"... that is simple enough to have figured out on your own now.

Quote:

The markets become more competitive.

How, exactly, are the markets more competeitve? Which markets? How is this linked to SS private accounts? You are putting a bunch of unrelated stuff up here, as if this SS proposal is going to revolutionize the way we do business. I'd like specifics as to how you see this happening, in which markets, or just go ahead and admit that you don't know what you are talking about.

Comment:
Better workers, better markets... again simple logic. which seems to escape you.

Quote:

people have more to spend more businesses find more creative strategies to expand.

This isn't even a correctly worded sentence, as well as being completely off-topic. How exactly will SS private accounts give people 'more to spend more' and how will this lead to 'creative strategies to expand' for businesses? Be specific please, or admit that you don't know what you are talking about.

Ok here we go again...

Comment:
Because the are happier and more secure and they don't get fired or quit and thus, they have more money... Bingo!

Quote:

Expansion means more jobs across the board which includes R&D in manufacturing and other sectors of the markets to fill rapidly changing technologies and services.

Um, well, I guess this part is okay. Though in our global society w/outsourcing, I would say that there is no guarantee that either A) this is true, or B) that the money/jobs will end up going to American workers, given that so many companies save money by hiring overseas. How exactly is it going to help Americans? Be specific, or admit that you don't know what you are talking about.

Comment:
More Americans will own businesses and there will be more service jobs to accommodate them... more tourism and more beautification of the country's landscapes and parks.

Quote:

All of this happens because one thing alone... competition. Of a desire to keep the PSS fund filling and to remain working for that future retirement day in the sun.

Here's where you break from logic completely.

You have shown, in no way, how Privatizing SS will lead to more people keeping their jobs, how it will lead to better competition, how competitive workplaces lead to more expansion, or any of that. It's like you've latched on to the word 'competition' and believe it is a cure-all for our economic problems. It isn't. You really need to realize this.

Quote:

A fund that you can frequently check up on it's progress and growth. This provides a person with a greater reason to stay in the work force, a greater sense of personal value and confidence.

Complete conjecture. When my personal fund isn't doing as well as they promised, am I going to have a greater sense of personal value?

Comment: Better than it going broke along with the government trying to fruitlessly bail it out...

Why do you assume that people's confidence and personal value are tied up to how much money they have made? Do you really believe that this is true? Is this how you judge your sense of self-worth, by how much you have in the bank? Do you expect other people to judge their sense of self-worth by what they have in the bank?

Making an argument in favor of something is harder than just stringing pretty words together next to each other, Rex. I'm not trying to give you a hard time, but I seriously can't believe you are writing this as if any of it had logical basis or made sense.

Comment:
Maybe if you read my "pretty words" a bit more intently you would have gotten my drift... The fault is not my (vague to you) pretty words but your blinding partisan agenda.

You might as well just wave your hands and say 'I support the President, and that's the end of it!' It would get your beliefs across without making you try one of those annoying argument things.

Comment:
I did that too!!
Also my "words" are annoying because they do not agree with your leftist move on dot org mumbo jumbo...

Cycloptichorn

Uninformed neocons like RexRed rely on ambiguous and convoluted discussion in order to muddy the waters of consistency in the debate, thereby allowing the bait and switch to happen wherever they choose. They also will tap into any remote element of a long, extensive thread, and use it to their advantage, even though it may be completely off-topic.

But hey, I guess there's no sense at all in reaching him now with your "leftist move on dot org mumbo jumbo..."

Go back to grade one... ownership is competition... ask the Jones!

They get along better because they are happier because they feel more "secure"... that is simple enough to have figured out on your own now.

Because the are happier and more secure and they don't get fired or quit and thus, they have more money... Bingo!

Maybe if you read my "pretty words" a bit more intently you would have gotten my drift... The fault is not my (vague to you) pretty words but your blinding partisan agenda.

Dookiestix wrote:

Uninformed neocons like RexRed rely on ambiguous and convoluted discussion in order to muddy the waters of consistency in the debate, thereby allowing the bait and switch to happen wherever they choose. They also will tap into any remote element of a long, extensive thread, and use it to their advantage, even though it may be completely off-topic.

But hey, I guess there's no sense at all in reaching him now with your "leftist move on dot org mumbo jumbo..."

...and your point is?

RexRed wrote:

Dookiestix wrote:

Uninformed neocons like RexRed rely on ambiguous and convoluted discussion in order to muddy the waters of consistency in the debate, thereby allowing the bait and switch to happen wherever they choose. They also will tap into any remote element of a long, extensive thread, and use it to their advantage, even though it may be completely off-topic.

But hey, I guess there's no sense at all in reaching him now with your "leftist move on dot org mumbo jumbo..."

...and your point is?

I guess my point is that you come off as a GOP shill who is mearly parroting the GOP talking points regarding SS. I've heard those lines in "red" so many times as to make me puke...

Rex,

Though I'm sure you are a nice guy, we can say with confidence that you don't know what you are talking about on this issue. Your comments, such as

Quote:

Go back to grade one... ownership is competition... ask the Jones!

Don't make any sense at all, and certainly aren't indicative of an understanding of economics.

You say things like

Quote:

They get along better because they are happier because they feel more "secure"... that is simple enough to have figured out on your own now.

and

Quote:

Because the are happier and more secure and they don't get fired or quit and thus, they have more money... Bingo!

Which make zero sense at all.

Let me see if I understand your logic.

You are saying that if we Privatize SS,
People will be happier because they have more money!;
People will work better with each other because they are happier;
People will get fired less because they work harder;
All this hard work leads to competition, which will lead to more jobs and a stronger economy;
Which will create manufacturing, jobs, trade, and tourism as well as beautify our surroundings.

Quote:

Maybe if you read my "pretty words" a bit more intently you would have gotten my drift... The fault is not my (vague to you) pretty words but your blinding partisan agenda.

You see, I 'get' your drift just fine. It's just that your drift is so idiotic I don't even know where to begin. You call basic economic theory and a request for explanation besides simplistic, childish answers 'move on dot org mumbo jumbo.'

To everyone else:

This is what is scary about privatization. Every fool who thinks they know a little bit about the economy suddenly starts to think there are simple answers to our problems as a nation. This belief is generally referred to as the 'drunk guy in a bar' syndrome(if you've been there, you know what I mean, it starts with 'you know what they oughta do...') and is extremely problematic, as they will never look into the ACTUAL numbers to see that the plan is completely ridiculous from a fiscal standpoint.

We need to find better ways to get the message across to people who don't understand complicated concepts...

Cycloptichorn