Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

USA Politics - Hamster Wheel

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

USA Politics - Hamster Wheel

Old 7th Sep 2012, 04:18
  #7601 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: East of LGB
Age: 66
Posts: 622
A not so Alternate Universe

I wonder if I should call Debbie Wet-her-pants and let her know. Didn't she tell CNN's Anderson Cooper that the omission was a technical oversight?

Democrats are pretending that flaws in their party's platform, which excluded much pro-Israel language and any reference to God, are the result of "technical oversight." The truth is that the Democrats' draft platform was the result of a meticulous process handled by Newark mayor Cory Booker, and passed unanimously on August 11th.
So, an oversight? Seems it was locked in last month. er...

Democrats' Controversial Draft Platform Passed Unanimously in Detroit in August
11Fan is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2012, 04:26
  #7602 (permalink)  

Aviator Extraordinaire
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma USA
Age: 74
Posts: 2,394
The rise you mentioned started in 2007-2008 and has not change much since then.
Well, I guess you read the graph differently than I did. As it shows a clear increase starting in 2006, when coincidently the Democrats took control of Congress, both house, from just over 10 percent to over 14 percent, never the less raising every year since Obama took office and the Democrats have controlled the Senate.

So I'll stick with what I wrote, thank you anyway for your concern.
con-pilot is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2012, 04:45
  #7603 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: East of LGB
Age: 66
Posts: 622
Guess it didn't go down too well Barry. Seems you left your cheerleaders on the sidelines holding their pom-poms wondering how their Prize Quarterback fumbled the football so badly.

After Michelle Obama and Bill Clinton spoke the other nights, the folks at MSNBC were exuberant. Tonight they are doing the best they can to put a brave face on their disappointment over Obama's wan speech but you can see the heartache in their eyes.
Day 3: Watchdogging the Corrupt Media's Convention Coverage

I would think that the mention Obamacare in the speech would have sent a thrill up their legs......

What?

He didn't say anything about it? But it's his signature piece, and he didn't bring it up?

Oh that's right, it swiped $716 Billion from Medicare and is now a tax. Better to not bring it up.
11Fan is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2012, 05:09
  #7604 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 81
Posts: 1,163
Lyman,

"Quote:
The economic debacle was made possible by Gramm, Dodd, Frank, And Clinton."

Yes, it was. Refer to the extinguishment of Glass Steagal, allowing banks to action in equities, and wrapped equities at that.
It was known as the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act or the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999. The sponsors were all Republicans. The Act passed the House of Representatives by a bi-partisan vote of 343-86. The Senate had a different bill that passed along party lines, 54 (R) - 44 (D). After resolving the differences between the two bills, the Act again passed the House, 362-57 and the Senate, 90-8. Not much Clinton could do, a veto would be overridden, so he signed it into law.
Some time back, the FED ceased collecting FICA, and Obama called it a tax cut in favor of the middle class. It was no such thing, what he did was unfund all SSA payments, and shifted the obligation to the General Fund. There are several ways to see this, but the upshot is that SSA is now unfunded, and a HUGE burden on the Debt.
Not exactly.
Starting Jan. 7, 2011, the Social Security (FICA) tax withholding rate was reduced from 6.2 percent to 4.2 percent on the disability/retirement portion of FICA. This reduction is capped at the first $106,800 of wages. The Medicare portion of FICA remains at 1.45 percent.

This one-year reduction was the result of the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010, which was signed by President Obama in December. It has been renewed again for 2012. FICA collections go into the US Treasury general funds as they alway have. Excess FICA funds offset total Government debt so there is really no "surplus funds" in FICA at any given time. This was the result of a Government unified budget change made during the Lyndon Johnson era.
Turbine D is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2012, 05:33
  #7605 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: E.Wash State
Posts: 0
Turbine:
You seem well informed re Social Security and its funding.

And you'll agree, there is no such thing as the "Social Security Trust Fund".
That money taken from you and I during our working years has been spent.

What you (presumably) and I are getting now is cash taken from the checks of currently working Americans. In other words, a classic Ponzi Scheme.

So why are Dems and their ilk demonizing Ryan, and the few in Congress willing to step up and say "wait a minute, we'll have to have a better plan by the time the rest of the baby boomers join in the check-parade." It's just not sustainable.
obgraham is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2012, 05:45
  #7606 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: East of LGB
Age: 66
Posts: 622
And being one of those "rest of the baby boomers [to] join in the check-parade", up until recently, I haven't had a lot of faith in there being anything left by the time I got there.

At least I have the pleasure of knowing that what I am paying in to Social Security (figuratively speaking of course) is going to my immediate family; specifically, my Father and my Mother-in-Law.
11Fan is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2012, 05:47
  #7607 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: East of LGB
Age: 66
Posts: 622
obgraham,

So why are Dems and their ilk demonizing Ryan
Think Saul Alinsky. No plan of your own, bash the other guys.
11Fan is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2012, 06:19
  #7608 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The Land of Beer and Chocolate
Age: 53
Posts: 794
You need to go back and review real history. The economic decline (debacle) began when Bush reduced income taxes to avoid the word "recession".
Absolute manure. Next you'll be telling us that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were actually financially sound and the Dems should never have had to block legislation from the Republicans to regulate them properly.....
hellsbrink is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2012, 07:19
  #7609 (permalink)  

Freight God
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: LS-R54A
Posts: 307
Just for my understanding, as I have no vote in the race...

There are some of you who want to have an investment banker to run the country?
Hunter58 is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2012, 07:50
  #7610 (permalink)  
bnt
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland. (No, I just live here.)
Posts: 723
Originally Posted by Hunter58 View Post
Just for my understanding, as I have no vote in the race...

There are some of you who want to have an investment banker to run the country?
I have no vote in the race either - though I do know Romney isn't an investment banker, he's in "private equity". Bain Capital would find businesses that were in trouble, arrange financing for them (thus putting them in more debt), and try and turn them around. Sometimes it worked (e.g. the Staples chain), sometimes it didn't.

He had access to private equity (funds supplied by private investors), and would use the money to support expanding or failing companies that needed it. This was not a gift; it was debt to the businesses in question, debt which has to be serviced (interest paid), and on top of that, Bain Capital got paid a lot for providing that service. That is how Romney made his personal fortune. This photo was taken in 1984, when Bain Capital had only 7 staff total, but the money was already coming in:



It is well understood that businesses often have to spend money to make money, and that if you don't already have money, you have to borrow it - so Bain Capital and other equity firms provide that liquidity. If you apply that logic to whole countries, it starts sounding rather Keynesian, and the direct opposite of Ryan's "austerity" ideas, doesn't it? In short, Romney has no business using the US debt to attack Obama, since "stimulus" is exactly what he supplied to Bain Capital's clients - putting them in more debt but (hopefully) for good reason. It doesn't hurt that he got rich(er) in the process, too.

Last edited by bnt; 7th Sep 2012 at 07:52.
bnt is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2012, 12:13
  #7611 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Grassy Valley
Posts: 2,123
In the eighties and nineties I used private money to develop a housing project. The differences between private equity and Banks is profound. I had become utterly contemptuous of the numpties at BoA and Wells; they were ignorant, lazy, and risk averse.

Private investors are smart, resourceful, and personal, something I grew to appreciate in my business. They charge more than banks, but the service, efficiency, and respect they show is worth the small one to one and one half point difference in fees.

That said, i am repulsed by that picture of the Bains. That could be Mitt's Willie Horton...

sayin

And those suits... They're off the rack. DeClasse.

Last edited by Lyman; 7th Sep 2012 at 12:16.
Lyman is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2012, 13:41
  #7612 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Patterson, NY
Age: 64
Posts: 436
Lyman wrote:

And those suits... They're off the rack. DeClasse.
Look more like DeWalmart to me!!!!
rgbrock1 is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2012, 13:46
  #7613 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 278
The good news: College football season is underway.
The bad news: This chart.

Matari is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2012, 14:48
  #7614 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 81
Posts: 1,163
obgraham,
And you'll agree, there is no such thing as the "Social Security Trust Fund".
That money taken from you and I during our working years has been spent.

What you (presumably) and I are getting now is cash taken from the checks of currently working Americans. In other words, a classic Ponzi Scheme.
I don't think you can claim Social Security is a classical Ponzi scheme. In a Ponzi scheme there is no return generating mechanism beyond just contributions from new entrants whereas Social Security payouts have always been underwritten by incoming tax revenue and the interest on the Treasury bonds held by Social Security. Private sector Ponzi schemes cannot be sustained indefinitely without reducing payouts, whereas Social Security's benefits can theoretically always be sustained by raising taxes on new participants or reducing promised payouts. There is the difference between the two.
Originally, Social Security was envisioned as an "insurance Program". It insured you would have income from the insurance plan if you contributed to the plan when you retired. If you didn't contribute, you didn't have this insurance. Over the 77 years from it's initiation, the program has morphed into a program far beyond the original intent. Non-participants (those that didn't pay into the plan) are now eligible to receive benefits from the plan. That has lead to the question today, is Social Security an insurance plan or a tax for redistribution of income? If a "means test" were applied to examine who should receive SS benefits, it would surely result in the program being a tax intended to redistribute income. The program does need to be addressed to survive on its own financially. There are choices, move towards a privatized program, reduce benefits to new recipients, increase the present cap limit of payments into the program or increase the percentage of contributions to the program from both employee and employer. No matter what, recipients will continue to receive benefits as it is treated as a monthly bill, due and payable by the US Government out of the cash register, the US treasury. That is, unless Congress decides otherwise and I doubt they will.
Turbine D is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2012, 15:58
  #7615 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 81
Posts: 1,163
11Fan,
My quote: This meeting was extremely well documented.
Your quoteOn HBO, wasn't it?
Actually, I didn't see Too Big To Fail on HBO as I don't subscribe. But, there were two really good books on the financial crisis:
The Big Short by Michael Lewis - how the crisis all came about.
Too Big To Fail by Andrew Ross Sorkin - The basis for the HBO program, I assume.
There was also a series on PBS, Money, Power & Wall Street. Between Sorkin's book and the PBS documentary is where I think the Paulson meeting was well documented.

Prior to the NYC meeting and upon McCain's urging, President Bush arranged a meeting in the White House of all the Government players and invited both McCain and Obama. Upon arrival of all the players, he introduced Henry Paulson and said Paulson would lead the discussions and the Bush left the meeting. Paulson outlined the depth and threat to the potential financial collapse in America and worldwide and what he proposed to do. It was this meeting that probably put Obama in White House. Obama was wired into the situation and was kept informed by both government officials and Wall St. leaders whereas McCain apparently came to the meeting stone cold and without the benefit of information Obama had. Consequently, McCain remained silent throughout the total meeting he urged to take place while Obama participated, questioned and subsequently endorsed Paulson's proposals. At the meeting conclusion, some of the Republican attendees remarked that the election was lost to the Democrats. They were right, as it turned out.

BTW, I graduated college with two majors, Engineering & Economics. I chose Engineering as my working career but the economics I learned was extremely useful in acquisitions and divestitures I was involved with during my business career. The economics I majored in was Adam Smith's conservative economics, that being basically defined in his book "Wealth of Nations". However, John Keynes "Free Market Economy" had taken over the western free world's economics as the "gold standard" and so I had to know the differences. When Nixon took the US off the real gold standard, he said "We are all Keynesians now." So the debates I am having on PPRuNe regarding today's politics and positions taken are not necessarily what I believe, but are just opposing positions to stimulate broader discussions and economics is an important aspect of any political discussion.
Turbine D is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2012, 16:04
  #7616 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 278
Ah, so the bona-fides are now established, credentials check out, and we have an 'Educated Man' who can see both sides of the coin.....

Sorry, I dozed off for a minute. Now what about those August numbers?
Matari is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2012, 16:08
  #7617 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 81
Posts: 1,163
Matari,

The good news: College football season is underway.
The bad news: This chart.
Actually, good data and chart, but the news still isn't good as you say...
Turbine D is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2012, 16:11
  #7618 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: "Deplorable but happy as a drunken Monkey!
Age: 73
Posts: 17,053
There are some of you who want to have an investment banker to run the country?
We have seen what happens when you we have a Community Organizer who had Marxist Mentors, Marxist Advisors, and Terrorist friends in the White House.

We have seen the direct results of that kind of thinking...over 5, 000,000,000,000 US Dollars increase in the National Debt in less than four years....Deficit spending of over 1,000,000,000,000 US Dollars per year, no Budget passed by the Democrat Party controlled Senate, Presidential Budgets presented twice that garnered not one single vote from either Party, and you think having a Business Man can be worse?


Food Stamp roles are now up to about 47, 000,000 people.....and Obama says that is a good thing. At the same time, the US Park Service posts signs saying "Do Not Feed the Animals as that will cause them to become dependent upon that source of food and they will not look for natural sources of food."

Now what does the Park Service know that the the rest of the Federal Government does not?

Are we making "being Poor" too convenient and comfortable?

Last edited by SASless; 7th Sep 2012 at 16:15.
SASless is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2012, 16:16
  #7619 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: East of LGB
Age: 66
Posts: 622
“President Obama is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people,”
Clint speaks......

The Carmel Pine Cone's first story of the week
11Fan is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2012, 16:41
  #7620 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 81
Posts: 1,163
Lyman,
In the eighties and nineties I used private money to develop a housing project. The differences between private equity and Banks is profound. I had become utterly contemptuous of the numpties at BoA and Wells; they were ignorant, lazy, and risk averse.
My wife had the same experience when she went to buy a business in the mid-eighties. It was before banks thought women could actually run a business and a woman attempting to borrow money to buy a business, well it rarely happened, the answer was more often "You have a nice business plan but we can't take the risk, sorry." So I funded the business as a "venture capitalist" and paid myself back out of my income, not the business income. The business turned out to be profitable every year for the 10 years she had it and then she sold it at a profit. It was life in those days.
Turbine D is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.