Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery

Magic-Mushrooms-Shop.com
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Myyco.com Shop: Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 |  [ show all ]
Re: Privatization of Social Security Pros and Cons [Re: AhronZombi]
    #4020310 -

FFS make a new thread, or explain how love is going to solve SS.

I've no problem debating with you, but all this fluff certainly isn't about SS now is it?


--------------------
"Their is one overriding question that concerns us all: How can we get out of the fatal groove we are in, the one that is leading towards the brink?" Albert Szent-Gyorgyi
"We may not be capable of eradicating the corruption of reason, but we must nevertheless counter it at every instance and with every means." Dan Agin
"Politics is the best religion and politicians are the worst followers."
-It's ok to trip as long as you don't fall.
-Substance over Style.
-Common sense is uncommon.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Privatization of Social Security Pros and Cons [Re: Psychoactive1984]
    #4020311 -

the only issue you need to focus on is your mind, because as long as you control it you control everything

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Privatization of Social Security Pros and Cons [Re: AhronZombi]
    #4020327 -

The only issue I need to focus on is one that I feel deserves, or to what I assign value giving my time.

I like the little idealistic notions of love solving the world's issues... Unfortuanetly, you might as well suggest that if everyone ate a doughnut all at one time, the world would be happy for eternity... I fear that a simplistic notion that isn't being explained beyond it's namesake won't do much.

good night, time for me to have a smoke (that I love).


--------------------
"Their is one overriding question that concerns us all: How can we get out of the fatal groove we are in, the one that is leading towards the brink?" Albert Szent-Gyorgyi
"We may not be capable of eradicating the corruption of reason, but we must nevertheless counter it at every instance and with every means." Dan Agin
"Politics is the best religion and politicians are the worst followers."
-It's ok to trip as long as you don't fall.
-Substance over Style.
-Common sense is uncommon.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Privatization of Social Security Pros and Cons [Re: Psychoactive1984]
    #4020336 -

Psychoactive1984 said:
FFS make a new thread, or explain how love is going to solve SS.

I've no problem debating with you, but all this fluff certainly isn't about SS now is it?


Thanks. While this is interesting, it doesn't really fit the guidelines of our speech.

I appreciate your help so far. Looks like I'm off to a good start. I just need some help with the key points that I can argue with so that I'm not completely lost when I get in front of the class. I'll be back tomorrow night. I'm on the east coast almost done at work and ready for (a different) class again in a few hours.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Privatization of Social Security Pros and Cons [Re: Psychoactive1984]
    #4020357 -

sad how the media has tainted you

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Privatization of Social Security Pros and Cons [Re: AhronZombi]
    #4020364 -

When faced with a dangerous situation, I'll take a weapon over love any day.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Privatization of Social Security Pros and Cons [Re: RandalFlagg]
    #4020365 -

i fully suppor tthe right to defend your self, and think we should all be able to have any weapons we want. i just dont know if i would use on my self. but id rather us have weapons than the government

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Privatization of Social Security Pros and Cons [Re: Frappy]
    #4020801 -

Frappy said:
Psychoactive1984 said:
FFS make a new thread, or explain how love is going to solve SS.

I've no problem debating with you, but all this fluff certainly isn't about SS now is it?


Thanks. While this is interesting, it doesn't really fit the guidelines of our speech.

I appreciate your help so far. Looks like I'm off to a good start. I just need some help with the key points that I can argue with so that I'm not completely lost when I get in front of the class. I'll be back tomorrow night. I'm on the east coast almost done at work and ready for (a different) class again in a few hours.


That was in response to AhronZombi.


--------------------
"Their is one overriding question that concerns us all: How can we get out of the fatal groove we are in, the one that is leading towards the brink?" Albert Szent-Gyorgyi
"We may not be capable of eradicating the corruption of reason, but we must nevertheless counter it at every instance and with every means." Dan Agin
"Politics is the best religion and politicians are the worst followers."
-It's ok to trip as long as you don't fall.
-Substance over Style.
-Common sense is uncommon.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Privatization of Social Security Pros and Cons [Re: AhronZombi]
    #4020815 -

Sad how the heights of idealism have tainted you. Argkue you the issue and explain the benefits of this new love craze, talk about the implementation of a real plan and it's feasability.

Or we can stick with a one word notion and it's benefit without detailing it, other then me taking your word on it... Sad how the media has tainted you.


--------------------
"Their is one overriding question that concerns us all: How can we get out of the fatal groove we are in, the one that is leading towards the brink?" Albert Szent-Gyorgyi
"We may not be capable of eradicating the corruption of reason, but we must nevertheless counter it at every instance and with every means." Dan Agin
"Politics is the best religion and politicians are the worst followers."
-It's ok to trip as long as you don't fall.
-Substance over Style.
-Common sense is uncommon.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Privatization of Social Security Pros and Cons [Re: Frappy]
    #4021029 -

I don't know if this relates to the private pension proposals being put forward in the US, but I will say a little about private pensions in the UK.

A few years back there were a series of pension schemes go under, and public confidence in pensions took a serious knock. So much, that investment in private pensions is not dangerously low in the UK.
Since then laws have been tightened to prevent the forms of legal fraud that robbed people of their pension, although many doubt the system is now safe.

The problem was made worse by the fact that you would loose pound for pound a big lump of your state pension if you had a private pension, this destroyed the incentive for people on low incomes to invest.

Then at the end of the day, what do you do with someone that has not planned for their old age? Euthanasia?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Privatization of Social Security Pros and Cons [Re: psilomonkey]
    #4021769 -

One of the best parts of privatization is that poor people would benefit. They generally don't save much on their own, and the rate of return for social security is appalling. They need the money more than anyone, so an increased rate of return would really help them out.

Another benefit to the poor and especially minorities is the fact that they have shorter life expectancies than the middle and upper classes. That means that many of them pay into the system for years only to die before they can get benefits. Social Security in that regard is actually a transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich.

If those people had private accounts, they could will those assets to their children. It would probably be their biggest asset, and after years of saving it would be enough for their children to put down a down payment on a home. Privatizing social security has a chance at breaking the cycle of poverty in that respect.

Most teachers are pretty liberal, so your prof may be dead set against anything George Bush stands for. If you think that this is the case, use the above only to present a counter argument. Then proceed to trash Bush and his greedy plan to terminate this great and fantastic socialist program that gives are poor and infirm a critical safety net.

And for your own personal situation, I would recomend that you live your life under the assumption that social security will not be there for you when you retire. Get an IRA and start contributing while you are young, even if it is just small amounts. When you get a job, participate in your 401K to the fullest extent possible. By starting early you will enjoy the miracle of compound interesst. That way when the whole system hits the wall you will at least have a fighting chance compared to the mindless idiots who had faith in the socialist nanny state.

Good luck to you. Get your work done early and go chase some tail.


--------------------
Tastes just like chicken

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Privatization of Social Security Pros and Cons [Re: JesusChrist]
    #4021957 -

:lol: Words of wisdom.


--------------------
"Their is one overriding question that concerns us all: How can we get out of the fatal groove we are in, the one that is leading towards the brink?" Albert Szent-Gyorgyi
"We may not be capable of eradicating the corruption of reason, but we must nevertheless counter it at every instance and with every means." Dan Agin
"Politics is the best religion and politicians are the worst followers."
-It's ok to trip as long as you don't fall.
-Substance over Style.
-Common sense is uncommon.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Privatization of Social Security Pros and Cons [Re: JesusChrist]
    #4021965 -


One of the best parts of privatization is that poor people would benefit. They generally don't save much on their own, and the rate of return for social security is appalling. They need the money more than anyone, so an increased rate of return would really help them out.


I agree there is a poor rate of return on government pension scheme, especially when you pay in as much as me. But why would the poor benefit from getting conned by a private firm rather than the government?
My point was that legal safe guards were not in place in the UK, and a lot of people got ripped. Just don't let them pull the same one on you. And don't let them pull the 'well you got a private pension you don't need the state one'.



Another benefit to the poor and especially minorities is the fact that they have shorter life expectancies than the middle and upper classes. That means that many of them pay into the system for years only to die before they can get benefits.


Please explain how they obtain that benefit?


Social Security in that regard is actually a transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich.



Sorry, but bollocks.  I don't know your system that well. Over here you pay in more the more you earn, and the more you own when you retire the less you are entitled too. Means testing they call it. That is the rich funding the poor.


If those people had private accounts, they could will those assets to their children. It would probably be their biggest asset, and after years of saving it would be enough for their children to put down a down payment on a home. Privatizing social security has a chance at breaking the cycle of poverty in that respect.


That requires they die with money left over, I see an opportunity to integrate this with health care policy. :evil:


Most teachers are pretty liberal, so your prof may be dead set against anything George Bush stands for. If you think that this is the case, use the above only to present a counter argument. Then proceed to trash Bush and his greedy plan to terminate this great and fantastic socialist program that gives are poor and infirm a critical safety net.


My prof?  :rolleyes:

EDIT: Sorry, guess that was to frappy, tired.


And for your own personal situation, I would recommend that you live your life under the assumption that social security will not be there for you when you retire.


It won't be, certainly not enough to keep my lifestyle.


Get an IRA and start contributing while you are young, even if it is just small amounts. When you get a job, participate in your 401K to the fullest extent possible. By starting early you will enjoy the miracle of compound interest. That way when the whole system hits the wall you will at least have a fighting chance compared to the mindless idiots who had faith in the socialist nanny state.


I have a job, a freehold on my house, and a nice pension scheme going, thank you. :smile:

EDIT: But good advice to someone just starting out, I did the same sort of thing, then cashed it in a mortgage deposit.

Edited by psilomonkey (04/06/05 03:41 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Privatization of Social Security Pros and Cons [Re: psilomonkey]
    #4022655 -

I messed up the "reply to" psilomonkey. Sorry about the confusion.

Here is the states we don't yet have means testing. It is moving in that direction, and then it will be an entitlement program. If that happens many seniors will be opposed to the program, and they are the strongest supporters for obvious reasons.

Since you have means testing in the UK, do many people that you know shelter assets offshore or give them to their children so that they can qualify for more money? It seems like the natural thing to do.


--------------------
Tastes just like chicken

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Privatization of Social Security Pros and Cons [Re: psilomonkey]
    #4022665 -

On more thing, since you are from the United Kingdom I would like to know your opinion of the following article.


?Reforming Social Security: Lessons from Great Britain?
Manhattan Institute Forum
The Yale Club, New York, NY, October 16, 2000

Daniel Finkelstein

Let me start with three facts.

First, although the ratio of pensioners to the population of working age in the United Kingdom is forecast to rise from 30% in 1995 to 38% in 2030, the ratio of public expenditure on pensions to GDP is expected to fall over the same period from 4.2 % to 3.3%.

Second, UK private sector pension funds have ?700 billion worth of investments, more than the rest of the European Union put together.

Third, over the past decade pensioner incomes have risen by 50%, there have been increases at all points in the pensioner income distribution and pensioners are no longer concentrated right at the bottom of the population income distribution.

How has this been achieved? What more needs to be done? And what lessons can be learnt by countries with different systems?

The answers to these questions can be found in an examination of the history of the British pension system since the war.

Read more at the link...
?Reforming Social Security: Lessons from Great Britain?


--------------------
Tastes just like chicken

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Privatization of Social Security Pros and Cons [Re: Frappy]
    #4023135 -

All the following text is from the Powerline blog.

From the Powerline

More Social Security Follies

The New York Times reports on President Bush's most recent effort to promote Social Security reform:

Quote:
He visited the Treasury Department's Bureau of the Public Debt accounting office here on Tuesday, a trip orchestrated to show that there is no physical vault containing workers' payments into Social Security.




"You see, a lot of people in America think there's a trust, in this sense: that we take your money through payroll taxes and then we hold it for you, and then when you retire, we give it back to you," Mr. Bush said. "But that's not the way it works."





"There is no 'trust fund,' just I.O.U.'s that I saw firsthand, that future generations will pay - will pay for either in higher taxes or reduced benefits or cuts to other critical government programs," Mr. Bush said.


It is indicative of the fraudulent basis on which Social Security has been sold to the American people since the 1930's that the President has to go to a vault in the Treasury Department to explain that peoples' money isn't being stored there. To its credit, the Times acknowledges that President Bush is correct:

Quote:
Although there is literally a trust fund that can be found in the federal budget, Mr. Bush was on solid ground when he said it was basically "just I.O.U.'s."




The Social Security trust fund is an accounting device representing the billions of dollars in government bonds that were bought over the years as Social Security taxes have exceeded benefits. In the next decade, benefits will begin to exceed taxes, and the government is supposed to redeem the bonds in the trust fund to meet the cost of benefits.






But Social Security will then be competing with all other costs of the government from the military to farm subsidies, and there is nothing to stop Congress from reducing benefits so that fewer bonds need to be redeemed.



That is a refreshingly honest description of the "trust fund." The Democrats, however, were in no mood for candor:

Quote:
Democrats called Mr. Bush's remarks irresponsible, saying the president was essentially warning that the United States might not repay its borrowed debt. Representative Peter A. DeFazio of Oregon accused Mr. Bush of saying that "this nation's financial house is in such disarray that the rest of the world might as well stop doing business with us."


This is frankly idiotic. In the first place, the Dems cannot deny that what President Bush said was true; their point seems to be that no one should tell the truth about Social Security. Second, President Bush plainly did not warn that the U.S. may default on its obligations; he warned that there are only three ways in which the government's IOUs to itself can be redeemed: through higher taxes, reduced spending in other programs, or reduced Social Security benefits. This statement is, in fact, a tautology; but it is one that the Democrats will never acknowledge, and they apparently think their voters are so dumb that they don't need to.

The matter of the Social Security "trust fund" is really not complicated. It contains notes from the federal government to itself. These are not assets. If I write you a note for a million dollars, my note is an asset. It may not be worth a million dollars, but it is an asset that has value, and you would properly put it on your financial statement when you apply for a loan at a bank. The banker would want to know something about my net worth--ha!--but he wouldn't question that my note to you is an asset. But if I go to that same banker and show him a financial statement that shows a note from me to myself as an asset, he will think I am a prankster and throw me out of his office. An IOU from me to you is an asset; an IOU from me to me is not. That's really all you need to understand about the Social Security trust fund. It's not complicated, but the Democrats seem to think they can prevent voters from figuring it out.


--------------------
Tastes just like chicken

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Privatization of Social Security Pros and Cons [Re: JesusChrist]
    #4023190 -

I don't know who to be more pissed at in this whole situation; the Democrats who are afraid to be frank and are lying to the American public or the Republicans who want to run up a bunch more debt to pay for a privatization scheme.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Privatization of Social Security Pros and Cons [Re: RandalFlagg]
    #4023559 -

Quote:
I don't know who to be more pissed at in this whole situation; the Democrats who are afraid to be frank and are lying to the American public or the Republicans who want to run up a bunch more debt to pay for a privatization scheme.


That's easy -- the Democrats, of course.

SS is broken and has been broken for a long time. There is no question privatization is the only way to fix it -- all that remains is to decide when to implement privatization. The sooner it is done the less painful it will be in the long run.

Unfortunately, this is one of those times when there is no good solution to a problem -- the choice is between a bad solution and a terrible one. Privatization is the "bad" solution. Will it increase debt? Yup -- unless the government reduces spending, which it won't. Bush couldn't even push through his budget proposals containing a modest one per cent decrease in spending so any chance of real reductions is non-existent.

The fact of the matter is that SS should never have been introduced in the first place. That's just one more boondoggle to be laid at the feet of Roosevelt the pinko. But we can't rewind the tape and do it over, so the bullet will have to be bitten eventually. Better now than years from now.



Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Privatization of Social Security Pros and Cons [Re: Phred]
    #4024529 -

I agree with the concept of privatization and would not be averse to having it happen. I realize that it is going to cost money. Bush wants to borrow that money.

I think we should raise that money by increasing the Social Security tax ceiling. SS taxes are paid on the first $80 some thousand of income. I think we should raise that ceiling so that we can pay for privatization. That would mean sticking it to the upper class and the rich pretty badly. They have been screwed a lot in my opinion (they've been carrying this country for years), but I think it is preferrable to take their money than to leave even more debt for our kids.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Privatization of Social Security Pros and Cons [Re: RandalFlagg]
    #4025427 -

The thing is, it isn't going to "cost money" beyond the salaries of the government workers required to administer it. What it will do is lower annual government revenue -- to the extent that people opt into it.

It is true the administration of the private accounts will require the hiring of new government workers. I can see why Republicans and Libertarians would be unhappy with this, but the Democrats should be loving it. They're the ones wailing about the "worst unemployment since Herbert Hoover" so you'd think the hiring of a few thousand people would be met with approval. Finally Bush would be "creating jobs".

I disagree completely that the best way to pay for it is to raise the cap on contributions. The best way to pay for it is to reduce government spending.



Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 |  [ show all ]

Myyco.com Shop: Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* How Would You Fix Social Security, Senator Kerry?
( 1 2 all )		 Ancalagon 4,762 31 08/16/04 08:55 PM
by Ancalagon
* Social Security Reform
( 1 2 all )		 snoopaloop53 2,631 28 03/13/05 02:31 AM
by Psychoactive1984
* The Social Security Abomination: A Primer Ancalagon 1,115 7 09/18/04 07:26 PM
by Evolving
* Bush to Announce Social Security Plans
( 1 2 all )		 RandalFlagg 2,532 29 05/04/05 03:12 PM
by Autonomous
* Privatization of Social Security: What Do You Think? Redstorm 326 0 10/26/03 07:49 PM
by Redstorm
* Social security phi1618 796 15 11/15/04 12:11 AM
by Xlea321
* Battle Lines Form on Social Security RandalFlagg 733 2 12/22/04 11:09 AM
by ZippoZ
* Key Lawmakers Cast Doubt on Social Security 'Crisis' RandalFlagg 646 1 01/23/05 10:44 PM
by SWEDEN

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
4,166 topic views. 0 members, 53 guests and 26 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.025 seconds spending 0.005 seconds on 18 queries.