New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

If fixing Social Security were easy, it would already be done

I would not trust the mattress or the stock market with my retirement and am surprised you suggest those as viable alternatives to insurance backed by the full faith and credit of the USA.
 
Try reading some books on the subject Trap. You will see quite quickly who is to blame. As for the "greed control" line, you must be joking. Up until a short time ago, we had usury laws on the books. Greed control is everywhere in our legal and social system. In my neck of the woods, it manifests itself as a local ordinance keeping property owner A from building a ten story apartment building on his 1/4 acre track home lot. In other areas, it shows up in pollution laws, labor protection laws, consumer protection laws, OSHA, EPA and so on and so on. I wonder how a modern educated man like yourself can utter such a foolish statement. You want to live in a Hobbesian world? Go to Hong Kong, you will love it.
 

BlanketyBlankBlank

Council Member
The risk exposure happened way before Fannie and Freddie got involved in the sub-prime markets and only got worse after 2005. This was about greed, pure and simple. The greed on the part of Wall Street though was the true culprit. This greed continues today. Since they are incapable of controlling their own greed, the government must step in to force them to behave rationally and honestly. Failure of risk managers at all the firms will force us to regulate them or break them up.
I don't know if I'd agree with the term Greed. but I'll grant you that for the sake of argument.

the products that the banks created had to have customers. investors - pension funds, 401k's/403b's, institutions, individuals. Additionally the creation of the derivatives fueled by Wall St. profits trickled down to lenders who became more aggressive regarding their lending criteria.

This was enabled by the government/regulators and the rating agencies, and borrowers. Just because people borrow money that they can't afford because the lender will give it to them doesn't let them off the hook.

all the while Fan/Fred were booking sub prime assets and under-reporting it.

So the 'greed' was on the part of 'all of the above'
 

BlanketyBlankBlank

Council Member
The elders of today are alive today and need it today. The elders of tomorrow will cross that bridge when they get to it. Your arguments are based upon a notion of pending doom when in fact there is no crisis except in your mind. Dollars can be created to meet the need of the people, its as easy as pie.
the magic D.C. money tree?


All it takes is for some future leader to prioritize SS over other areas of the government. What if we decide as a nation to become the new Canada of the world and stop spending 700 billion a year on war?
which is working well so far. our current 'leaders' can't agree on the location of the sky.

and 'prioritize SS over other areas of the government' means what?


I'm always amused by leftist's singular focus on 'defense' as the source of our financial woes/solution to busted budgets.

in fact it's #3 on the hit parade.

I'd like to see a less aggressive policy worldwide and scale back our influence/nation building efforts (see: Libya), but there are serious threats that need to be dealt with.
 

Joe Economist

Council Member
It was not insolvent in 1983 no more than the defense department was in 1983. The actuarial tables assume things in the future, that is a forecast. Whether they do it based on historical numbers or estimates of future numbers, it is still a forecast nonetheless and subject to the same errors as any forecast.
You do not understand how Social Security works. It gets financed funds from payroll taxes. It is not like defense where politicians decide how much money it gets every year. It has fixed sources of revenue and a defined expense.

The elders of today are alive today and need it today. The elders of tomorrow will cross that bridge when they get to it.
You think that elders of today are more deserving than elders of the future. I think that is self-serving bunk.
 

Joe Economist

Council Member
I would not trust the mattress or the stock market with my retirement and am surprised you suggest those as viable alternatives to insurance backed by the full faith and credit of the USA.
Again, you are demonstrating how litte you know about Social Security. Social Security is not backed by the full, faith, and credit of the USA. According to the Supreme Court, Congress can change benefit levels at will, and workers have no earned right to benefits.

The government owes Social Security 2.7 trillion which is a small sum against the liabilities for which there is no money. Tomorrow DC could cancel the debt, and end the system.
 
More baloney. SS taxes go into the general fund, any shortfalls get covered by the general fund. Surpluses get borrowed by Peter who pays Paul. Yes, I do think elders today are more deserving than elders of the future. You want to count the future elders for us? Could be several billion of them depending upon how far out you want to stretch your bogus argument...
 

OldGaffer

Governor
You Wingers have one major problem to overcome, you have to get total control of the US vGovernment before you can institute your Ayn Rand cultist philosophy, and that may present you with some problems. The AARP still holds a hell of a lot of political clout, seniors vote in large numbers and threatening their social security and medicare will get you booted out of office in a heartbeat.
 
Top