Military spending is never wasteful, and also through the magic of Republicanomics, doesn't ever contribute to the national debt!Originally Posted by Humbert
Military spending is never wasteful, and also through the magic of Republicanomics, doesn't ever contribute to the national debt!Originally Posted by Humbert
for many people today "entitlement" programs has become pejorative. I'm glad it is not for you. Welfare should also not be pejorative, as it is a very positive term.
In general, when it comes to government largess, most of it goes to corporations, not to people in need. This is a simple result of the fact that corporations lobby government for all kinds of goodies, and eventually they get them. It's not new, it's been going on for a long time.
IMO, we need much less corporate welfare & much more citizen welfare. Corporations will look after themselves and their own interests - it is what they are designed to do in the first place. People, however, don't have the same resources and actually do need help when things go south.
Yes, the Corporate welfare is big and bad. Military-Industrial Complex is one example of many.
Here what I found today. People that ignore this are in fantasy land. The Boomers will get theirs and more. And those behind them will be f*cked.
Entire: Young workers’ retirement hopes grow bleaker amid economic downturn - The Washington PostAs Washington turns in the coming weeks from the presidential election to the long-term debt issues facing the nation, the discussions will center on whether the country can afford programs such as Social Security and Medicare in their current form.
So far, these debates have focused little on how potential cuts in federal benefits may affect retirement for younger generations of workers who already are seeing employers shrink their safety nets.
The confluence of events is creating a dichotomy in the nation’s workforce and a massive burden for the country that will not be fully evident until the next generation approaches retirement.
“We have a looming retirement-income crisis in this country,” said Diane Oakley, executive director of the National Institute on Retirement Security. “The problem is we won’t see the ultimate brunt of it until 30 years down the road when it is too late to do something about it.”
............
Social security tax is only deducted from the first $100,000 or so from wages. If that is raised to a higher level, say $200,000, the problem of benefits not being available to upcoming generations would be solved.
^When I lived in the US I used to have my contribution complete by about July every year. It was like getting a raise for the remaining months of the year. I reckon that would be a feasible solution but it would not be an easy sell.
^ I maxed mine out during the year also when I worked in the States, though the cut off wasn't as high as it is now. It goes up every year anyway, doesn't it?
This is one of the things which bothers me when people say lower incomes individuals don't pay any taxes. They pay social security and a much larger percentage of their income than the wealthy.
"much larger percentage of their income than the wealthy"
correct.
In addition to Buffet's secretary paying a higher marginal tax on her last $ earned than M. Buffet does, the low-paid workers carry their fair share of the load through payroll taxes.
Yet the right wants to, ... aw he11 - never mind. Let's see who wins.
Social Security is not the drama that the right and some media make it out to be. It needs tweaking, not scrapping and the program will be just fine. Especially for those coming after the boomers.
Now the issue of companies & public sector reducing pensions - that will hit retirees harder, but not uniformly, since there is not a "system" per se for pensions. It's every man for himself in the USA.
Just a few hours and we will be getting the first exit polls from New Hampshire. I am going to be glued to my TV or computer, and have let the house know. Leave me alone. May the better man win.
Last edited by aging one; 06-11-2012 at 07:53 PM.
The first place in NH voted at midnight. It was a tie 5 votes for O and 5 for R.
^ dixville notch, NH--polls opened and closed in under a minute....literally.
VA polls close at 7 AM thai time. it will be nearly impossible for willard to get to 270 if he can't win there.
Just watching a report on the news saying Pensylvania is in play and that the Dems have taken there eye off the ball there and Romney is going to win and coupled with Ohio we are all going to wake up tomorrow morning with Willard as president.
ya can read them like a book,.fuckin' simpletons
The Romney camp, as well as surrogates like Haley Barbour and Karl Rove, are pushing the excuse for Romney’s loss on Hurricane Sandy, which they claim stalled out the otherwise-unstoppable Mittmentum.: Conservatives Blaming Romney's Pre-Existing Stall (and Looming Loss) on Sandy | MyFDL
Keep your friends close and your enemies closer.
So much interest in a country that professes to be truly democratic, yet each and every Senator or Congresperson elected are Millionaires. It has the highest percentage of prisioners of any country in the world. It has over 40 million living in exterme poverty. What can be done to solve that. Imagine what wonderful achivements could be made if its Government stopped Military spending, war mongering, and military interference in the affairs of other nations which i believe would bring about a more peaceful planet.
i can only assume you're watching fox or perhaps a hyper-conservative pundit on another channel, because this is little more than a GOP talking point.Originally Posted by buriramboy
the only reason anyone is giving romney even the slightest chance of winning in PA is because there isn't 'early voting' in the commonwealth and therefore it is allegedly unaffected by the obama groundgame. and republican spinmeisters are trying to convince all and sundry that this is somehow going to win it for him.
of course the possibility exists that romney could win PA, but all the polling data indicates that obama has at least a 3 point lead in PA.... in fact, i don't think i've ever seen a single poll which has romney ahead of obama in PA.
let's put it this way....if romney takes PA, then he's going to win in a popular vote and electoral landslide, because it means that people all over the mid-atlantic and midwest have had a dramatic change of heart from the last few weeks/months and have suddenly decided they want to go in another direction.
i'll believe it when i see it.
^The Murdoch owned SKY news and yes obviously they were interviewing some republican during the part of the report i saw.
yet murdoch himself tweeted this morning that it doesn't look likely for romney.
my guess is that Fox will call the election for Romney in about 30 minutes.
^surprised they haven't done it already.
i just looked at drudge and he's got the black panthers up on his site with red letters....the only odd thing is that he doesn't have the siren going.
Fox is playing the black panther in Philly race card on their home page - real Americans those a$$holes at Fox.
BTW, just saw that my friend and his wife in Philly were asked to present photo ID (which they had). It is not the law in PA, and they said no. They still managed to vote, but you can see the Republican efforts at voter suppression continue even up to the voting booth today...
just got in from a drive and Limbaugh is talking about the New Black Panther in Philly story but adds,.it's OK for them to intimidate people because Holder let them get away with it already
Frightening! Careful he just might open the door for you too
Last edited by S Landreth; 07-11-2012 at 05:29 AM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)