Me too, but since we are at it, I'll paste the link for the umpteenth time.
Maybe someone will read it this time.
Very entertaining. Especially the parts about new savings coming from ACA.
Nothing like Tim and Kathleen telling us how sound the system is. They have
no stake in making things
I love this line:
This deficit is expected to shrink substantially for 2011 and to
return to small surpluses for years 2012-2014 due to the improving
economy.
Righ!
SS is now paying out more than it's taking in. The reason it will stay
solvent until 2039 is the $2.5 trillion and the
Sam wrote:
I love this line:
This deficit is expected to shrink substantially for 2011 and to
return to small surpluses for years 2012-2014 due to the improving
economy.
Well, here's what the CBO says in this doc
http://cbo.gov/ftpdocs/120xx/doc12039/SummaryforWeb.pdf :
(1.) The Outlook
Translation: we have to either cut social security and public health plan
funding or raise taxes or
While true, I just can't see many politicians committing political hari kari
by making this part of their platform.
J
-
Ninety percent of politicians give the other ten percent a bad
So we're counting the interest on money we spent and will need to borrow
with interest.
Some government accounting practices would make Kenneth Lay blush:
Here is a nice one:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/12/nyregion/12pension.html
ALBANY Gov. David A. Paterson and legislative leaders have
]
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 00:28
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: Social Security is now permanently in the red
Bush was told by Greenspan and Paul O'Neil early in his term that this would
happen if Social Security wasn't fixed. He elected instead to give massive
tax rebates to increase his
it could happen to any of us,especially these days. always be prepared for
the unexpected.
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 12:08 AM, Eric Roberts
ow...@threeravensconsulting.com wrote:
I like to see how that would go over...imagine if Robert went into work and
at the end of the pay period, he
Yeah but Robert, you kinda dodged the question you know.
If the trillions had not been spent on the war in Iraq and now in
Afghanistan wouldn't you have the money to pay your elderly?
How is it that so many other countries around the world have proper
social services and the United States can't
Bush did try to fix SS and was told loudly it doesn't need fixing.
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 1:28 AM, Maureen mamamaur...@gmail.com wrote:
Bush was told by Greenspan and Paul O'Neil early in his term that this
would happen if Social Security wasn't fixed. He elected instead to
give massive
Sam wrote:
Bush did try to fix SS and was told loudly it doesn't need fixing.
Wait a minute ... so you're saying that if we'd just told him the
right stuff to do, then he'd do as he was told???
DANG IT!
Always so close to World power.
Yes.
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 10:32 AM, Gruss Gott grussg...@gmail.com wrote:
Sam wrote:
Bush did try to fix SS and was told loudly it doesn't need fixing.
Wait a minute ... so you're saying that if we'd just told him the
right stuff to do, then he'd do as he was told???
DANG IT!
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 5:18 AM, Vivec gel21...@gmail.com wrote:
Yeah but Robert, you kinda dodged the question you know.
If the trillions had not been spent on the war in Iraq and now in
Afghanistan wouldn't you have the money to pay your elderly?
How is it that so many other countries
Without social services there would be.
And of course it's an extreme, but 50 million was the number of people
that were not covered by medicare.
The wars have to do with the immediacy of the problem which has
occurred before a time when you DO have the ability to pay.
Probably two or three
You don't seem to understand the basic problem. In two or three decades,
we'll be on the hook for $50 trillion plus in benefits that we don't have
the money for. It only gets worse from here unless we change how we do
things.
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Vivec gel21...@gmail.com wrote:
You don't seem to understand the basic problem. In two or three
decades, we'll be on the hook for $50 trillion plus in benefits that we
don't have the money for. It only gets worse from here unless we change how
we do things.
You're just banging your head against the wall.
J
-
Government's
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 12:47 PM, Jerry Barnes critic...@gmail.com wrote:
You don't seem to understand the basic problem. In two or three
decades, we'll be on the hook for $50 trillion plus in benefits that we
don't have the money for. It only gets worse from here unless we change how
we do
that jive with
what you are told to believe?
-Original Message-
From: Robert Munn [mailto:cfmuns...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2011 03:39
To: cf-community
Subject: Social Security is now permanently in the red
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20110127/D9L0BDUG0.html
Bush was told by Greenspan and Paul O'Neil early in his term that this
would happen if Social Security wasn't fixed. He elected instead to
give massive tax rebates to increase his popularly, then after 9/11 to
start wars we couldn't afford. End the wars, reduce the tax cuts and
repay the Social
It isn't about what I want, it's about what is going to happen. We're
running out of time to do something. Sooner or later the bond markets will
decide our fate for us. We don't even have to default. If interest rates on
our debt rise so high we can't borrow, China will be telling us what to do
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20110127/D9L0BDUG0.html
The economy isn't going to improve in the near term, so revenues are going
to continue to lag. I think we could see 9% unemployment for a long time. It
could even get worse again. Healthy Boomers may not start draining their
Medicare
Did you read the whole article or just cherrypick the stuff that jive with
what you are told to believe?
-Original Message-
From: Robert Munn [mailto:cfmuns...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2011 03:39
To: cf-community
Subject: Social Security is now permanently in the red
http
with
what you are told to believe?
-Original Message-
From: Robert Munn [mailto:cfmuns...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2011 03:39
To: cf-community
Subject: Social Security is now permanently in the red
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20110127/D9L0BDUG0.html
The economy isn't going
Did you read the whole article or just cherrypick the stuff that jive with
what you are told to believe?
I find it very disappointing and sad that as soon as someone brings up
a concern about anything in government (it seems like no matter what
is it), someone has to almost immediately resort
Haha, welcome to CF-Comm. The reason that gmail's mute button was created.
:)
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 9:15 AM, Justin Scott leviat...@darktech.orgwrote:
Did you read the whole article or just cherrypick the stuff that jive
with
what you are told to believe?
I find it very
Did you read the article?
-Original Message-
From: Scott Stroz [mailto:boyz...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2011 08:50
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: Social Security is now permanently in the red
I find it funny that whenever someone has a different viewpoint from your
own
Did you read it?
-Original Message-
From: Justin Scott [mailto:leviat...@darktech.org]
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2011 09:15
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: Social Security is now permanently in the red
Did you read the whole article or just cherrypick the stuff that jive
with what
26 matches
Mail list logo
