Obama '08?

Geez, you can't even get right the topics that don't matter. So much for your soothsaying about topics that do.

Social Security, created by FDR, is the biggest Ponzi scheme of all, Advocate. How many trillion of unfunded entitlements are in this plan?

I just came back to this thread after a long while. I am awaiting Advocate's reply to your most risible post about FDR's ponzi scheme. You wouldn't even be here with everything we have for a safety net if it were not for FDR. You really need to reeducate yourself. But, I fear that is impossible for someone so closed minded. It was a situation just like we are in now of terrible greed that made it possible for an FDR to pass legislation to protect people from predators. He indeed was a "A Traitor to His Class" a book I am reading. I highly recommend it.

I understand your opinion. I am not claiming that Social Security has not "helped" alot of people. However, what I am doing is pointing out the truth, that Social Security was not intended to be a sole retirement program, that was not the intent, however it has become one for many people, and it also serves as a program for the disabled, etc., but it has been dishonestly portrayed and dishonestly run by politicians. Also, you ignore the truth, that yes, although it is good now, it is not paid for. An analogy is you or I could go out and buy a nicer house, a nicer car, nicer everything, on a credit card, assuming we are given credit to do it. As you say, that helps us, great, how can one argue against that, well I am simply pointing out the government has done that with Social Security, and just as your credit card or my credit card will need to be paid by future income, so will Social Security. It has not been pay as you go, and eventually all Ponzi schemes fail. And another facet of this is the fact that people now, due to Social Security being out there, neglect their own financial retirement savings, it has been an enabler to more irresponsibility.

I have also been doing some reading, but about World War II, including the prelude to the war, and I have concluded FDR was more of a failure than I thought on some issues. I grew up in an FDR Democrat household, Vietnamnurse, just to put this into perspective, a household that also opposed Eisenhower for president, but I have totally changed my opinion with time and experience.

Okie, you think that Social Security was a mistake? It has been the salvation of this country. Not all socialist ideas are mistakes...and not all conservative ideas are mistakes. There is a mean and we have left that mean so far behind that it is almost impossible for this country to get back on track. There was a program on CNN that ran tonight about the the debt that has run up in the last 8 years. It is very serious....but we can't get out of this mess with merely tax breaks...it will require massive spending on appropriate items in a massive federal budget. It is almost beyond comprehension what the Bush administration has done to our country. The American Indians have a saying...."for the next 7 generations"....the greed that this administration has fostered will go beyond at least 3 generations if we don't act now. I am a moderate....not a socialist...but I don't see a way out of this without some belt tightening by everyone and it is going to be very difficult.

People have bought and put themselves into credit card debt....they had to have the latest gadget...the best this...the latest that. We have consumed ourselves into oblivion. And not just us....Europe too. But our economy is greater than theirs and all of them fall when we do...as does Asia. It is a disgrace to be 37th in the world in health care. My husband is a physician and I am a nurse....I am aghast at the situation. You should be also. You may think it is a Ponzi scheme, but we are heading for more socialism. Bush made sure of that. The teeter totter just teetered too far. And by the way, I liked Eisenhower. Stevenson would not have been a good president. You should listen to Eisenhower about the "Military Industrial Complex". He knew what was going to happen with the corporations. We live on war...we need it to keep our economy going. That has to change, Okie. Rome and all the great powers fell that way. We the people will have to start thinking instead of buying into crap.

Saying SS is a Ponzi scheme is tantamount to saying that life insurance is such a scam. The system has to be periodically adjusted, just as actuaries so adjust insurance plans.

Vietnamnurse, your opinions and mine are not that far apart, you recognize the irresponsibility out there, but you are applying the same observations to come to different conclusions as to the solutions. I am simply saying that although Social Security has helped alot of people, it has not been presented honestly, nor has it been run honestly by the government. I too admire Eisenhower, but when I was a small boy, my parents voted for Adlai Stevenson. I have since learned that Stevenson was a socialist, and translated into today's world, it is Obama that is much more akin to Stevenson. I have an article written in the Saturday Eveing Post by Eisenhower, titled "Why I am a Republican," and yes, although he warned of the military industrial complex, the central part of his political philosophy is much more aligned to be pro capitalist, small government, pro individual freedom and responsibility. His opinions were very close to what mine are now. I think he would say, as I have, that the Republicans have veered away from the conservatism that works, Bush had elements of it, but he failed in some areas, but the Democrats are total absolute failures in regard to their philosophy, they are in left field.

I am simply pointing out that Social Security has been founded upon a false premise, it will work for a while, but nothing comes free, charge cards have to be paid for eventually, I will remind you of that, nothing comes without a cost, and although it helps alot of people, it has now become a gigantic drain upon the economy, and it represents a mountain of unfunded entitlements and debt to the country.

What would I do about it, I would not abolish it, we cannot at this point because too many people depend upon it now, but I would attempt to reform it in such a way to make it more honest, more transparent in terms of the money, and attempt to separate it from the general fund in how it operates. I would try to do a number of things in regard to the tax system, and part of that is the sales tax, the so-called fair tax, I would rather tax spending or consumption than I would production, I think that is a healthier way to tax and it would accomplish a number of things that we cannot do now, to help the economy. That would leave Social Security as the only tax, or national insurance policy as a payroll deduction, possibly merging it with some kind of medical insurance plan as well, but I would leave personal freedom for our own insurance as something that must be preserved, absolutely . All of these ideas are preliminary, but we need some drastic reform, and we need once again to have the federal government to deal with its citizens honestly and openly, and currently that is not happening in the area of social security.

There is alot of disagreement, but count me one as not believing the New Deal cured the depression. Unemployment was still sky high years after the New Deal had been in operation, and not until the war spurred our economy before we even entered the war, that it began to come out of it. And now I just finished reading about FDR rounding up over 100,000 Japanese Americans, for no other reason than they had Japanese heritage, that was criminal, and then they even drafted some of their sons, to add insult to injury. Not only that, they incarcerated German Americans and held them for months or a year, with absolutely no evidence whatsoever. Now, we have Bush holding people for very very good reasons, most of which are not citizens and were not captured here, and because they are serious threats or were actively involved in plots or trying to kill us, and Bush has been demonized over it, yet to this day FDR is worshipped. I think you need to look at politics through a different prism, vietnamnurse, I think you see alot of the same things but your misinterpreting who are the good guys and the bad guys. You need some perspective 0f history.

If I have it right, life insurance companies have assets, Advocate, that is the difference. The only asset the federal government has in regard to Social Security is you and I. They are banking on us working and producing in the future, so thats the only asset they have in the program, the problem being is that they do not own us, and there is no assurance that we will produce anything, or nearly as much as needed. As the ratio of workers to recipents go down, the day of reckoning will become more real, and the drain on the economy will become greater, no getting around it.

You are 100% incorrect with this statement. Social Security has done more to expand our economy than almost any other program ever invented. It has helped out almost every single family in America, by removing the crushing pressure of caring for one's parents later on in life. It has encouraged our high rate of home ownership and basically done away with the multi-generational model of living; this has added countless jobs and productivity into our economy while lowering the cost of housing at the same time.

It's like you can't see anything beyond the next week or month or so, Okie. Don't you ever consider the long-term benefits of programs?

Cycloptichorn

Under your reasoning, cyclops, if taking 15% of the payroll expanded our economy, then why not take 100% to really expand it?

Do you forget who it is you speak to? I would support many, many more socialist policies in America, Okie.

You are incorrect about Social Security. Pretty soon, if not already, you'll be drawing it yourself, and will bitch about it; but of course you'll take the money just like everyone else does.

Cycloptichorn

O boy is dead set on ruining this countries economy as fast as he possibly can.

If O boy does manage to rebate taxpayer money to the masses in the form of another stimulus
check do yourself and your fellow Americans a huge favor and buy guns & ammo with the money.

Haha, I'm sure you'll be happy when you are drawing your SS check as well, Tico.

The problem with your and Okie's analysis, is that those who are helped by SS would have been a drag on society without SS; you just choose to ignore this simple but salient fact.

Cycloptichorn

Wrong! As assets, SS has treasury bills and notes, backed by the full faith and credit of the USA.

Guess what insurance companies have as assets. They have treasury bills and notes, corporate bonds, and similar.

Thanks for the honesty, cyclops, you are a socialist, but interesting, if you convert 100% of the economy to a socialist economy, do you have any real world examples of an economy that surpasses that of the United States? I think your assertion that Social Security has bolstered our economy is based on your imagination. It is forced insurance program, that in fact siphons off a huge amount of productivity to the government to spend and re-distribute, and we all know that the return on that money is less than optimum. We do not in fact know what our economy would be doing if the working class did not have the 12 or 15% of their earnings removed from the free market economy for them to spend or save. If saved, it would provide money in the markets for expansion of business, etc., thus providing more jobs, or higher paying jobs, and if spent, it would also expand the markets.

What it boils down to is whether the government can most efficiently spend money, as opposed to the people doing it, and I think most people would have to agree that the government or central planners do a much poorer job of efficiently spending the resources, so I think there is no proof whatsoever that Social Security has expanded the economy. It has distributed it differently than it would have been applied otherwise, but no proof it is more efficient at all. As I said, if there is, why not go to a communist economy whereby all of the income goes to the government to re-distribute through central planning.

By the way, yes, I will draw Social Security, almost the maximum allowed, because I have paid an enormous amount of money into the system over my lifetime, and still am. I do not have a choice, if I had, I would have invested the money into something that would have at least made 5% on the money.

The only part of your post worth responding to. The truth is that the vast majority will not save their money, Okie. They will spend it on frivolous things, and while that may expand the economy in the short-term, it will hurt them severely at the end of their life.

Are you taking care of your parents? Housing and feeding them? Do you deal with that stress? Have you dealt with it for the last 30 years? Do you want your kids to have to deal with the stress of housing and feeding you? I don't want to hear 'they wouldn't have to, I have plenty of money;' the vast majority of Americans do not, and many more DID but lost it due to market crashes or financial mis-management.

You can't see the forest for the trees, Okie; just whatever puts the most money in your pocket, right now, is all that matters. This is known as 'short-sighted' thinking. Not something to be proud of at all.

Cycloptichorn

Intellectually shallow post, cyclops.

O boy is happily spending all of your future SS checks.