US Politics: all assertions sourced, or your subsidy returned

[ThinkerX]

Feudalism never really died. It just changed labels with the times.

Or as I put it, an 'economic caste system'.

[Inigima]

Terra, thanks for that post. I work in public education and I'm horrified by the assault on public sector workers.

[Jaxom 1974]

I can't speak for conservatives, but most libertarians I've spoken with seem to think that public sector workers don't have real jobs and are worthy of only contempt. Unless they're a politician, then public sector work is A-OK.

I live in Illinois and I think it's a pretty shitty way to try and solve their budget woes. Clearly they should change their pension programs going forward, but reneging on existing contracts is just downright slimy. If a private company did something like this, they'd likely get slapped down hard. Thankfully, the last I heard, unions were threatening to sue the state if the bill passed and I wish them all the luck with that.

Just when we thought it couldn't get more interesting here in Illinois...that there hadn't been a good solution to the problem yet is galling, but this issue, more than maybe anything else, had got to play into next year's election...why anyone wants to govern Illinois is beyond me sometimes...

[Summah]

The other thing about cutting public pensions which makes it even more sick is that most (all?) government employees (certainly federal government employees and at least some states) don't pay into social security, so unless they've spent a considerable amount of time working in the private sector or have substantial savings (not likely not most government job salaries), cutting the pensions really screws them over because there isn't anything else to fall back on. As disgusting as it is when private companies try to get rid of their pension obligations, at least those employees paid into social security and will get something for retirement.

[Persicaria]

Hey, this is a little out of the conversation , but fitting in with the general theme.

There was an article in npr on December 5, about the wage cap and how lifting it could make social security solvent for atleast 30 more years. Considering the environment within the congress, I sincerely doubt such a bill could pass now. It would be nice if it could. It would be great if we could close a lot of the loop holes that only benefit the super rich.

http://www.npr.org/2013/12/05/249068448/to-fix-social-security-some-democrats-want-to-lift-wage-cap?utm_content=socialflow&utm_campaign=nprnews&utm_source=npr&utm_medium=twitter

[Inigima]

The other thing about cutting public pensions which makes it even more sick is that most (all?) government employees (certainly federal government employees and at least some states) don't pay into social security, so unless they've spent a considerable amount of time working in the private sector or have substantial savings (not likely not most government job salaries), cutting the pensions really screws them over because there isn't anything else to fall back on. As disgusting as it is when private companies try to get rid of their pension obligations, at least those employees paid into social security and will get something for retirement.

What? I certainly pay In.

[TerraPrime]

What? I certainly pay In.

In Illinois, all the pulic teachers and some of the other public employees are not allowed to pay Social Security and are forced instead to use the state retirement pension system. I can still do my own IRA (which I will have to, now, given how they're cutting pensions), but I do not get social security.

[Borsabil]

In Illinois, all the pulic teachers and some of the other public employees are not allowed to pay Social Security and are forced instead to use the state retirement pension system. I can still do my own IRA (which I will have to, now, given how they're cutting pensions), but I do not get social security.

Section 8 U.S constitution:

"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;"

States can pass as many exemptions, priorities and clauses as they like, at the end of the day it will be Federal judges referring to Federal law who will decide these matters. Saying that the General Motors bailout proved that even Federal bankruptcy law don't mean shit when the executive decides it expedient to ignore. We are after all living in a demos monarchy.

[TerraPrime]

What? How's the Constitutional right to regulate commerce relate to the pension-stealing antics of Illinois?

ETA

Got those links to the catastrophic coverage plans that cost only a few dollars a week that are available to everyone?

You know, it's not that difficult to say "I don't have those links and I will not be providing them, so suck it."

[Serious Callers Only]

http://spaceflightnow.com/atlas/av042/payload/

like a onion article, but in real life (see the logo)

status: upping my encryption

[Borsabil]

What? How's the Constitutional right to regulate commerce relate to the pension-stealing antics of Illinois?ETAGot those links to the catastrophic coverage plans that cost only a few dollars a week that are available to everyone?You know, it's not that difficult to say "I don't have those links and I will not be providing them, so suck it."

The ruling on the Detroit bankruptcy that pensions would not take priority despite state laws. Suck it.

Number 2, I already gave you an example of pooled cat cover costing only a few bucks a week for YOUNG people. You chose to ignore it and drone on. You should also clarify your previous post about Obamacare cat cover only being available to under 30s.

[TerraPrime]

The ruling on the Detroit bankruptcy that pensions would not take priority despite state laws. Suck it.

Ah, ok, that makes more sense now.

But what isn't clear is what is your take one it. Does your disdain for public sector workers win out over your compulsion to oppose government regulation? Or the other way around? I'm curious.

And yes, I did, this morning, but thanks for caring.

Number 2, I already gave you an example of pooled cat cover costing only a few bucks a week for YOUNG people. You chose to ignore it and drone on. You should also clarify your previous post about Obamacare cat cover only being available to under 30s.

I wasn't the one who made the claim that such plans were available to everyone. You were. If you're not going to provide citations for claims when called on them, then that's your choice.

[Merentha]

Number 2, I already gave you an example of pooled cat cover costing only a few bucks a week for YOUNG people. You chose to ignore it and drone on. You should also clarify your previous post about Obamacare cat cover only being available to under 30s.

The example that only applied to people at a specific small college? Because four years ago, my insurance coverage didn't offer a catastrophic insurance plan for any less than 200/month. You've been asked to provide evidence that catastrophic coverage was widely available, which you have utterly failed to do.

[Tempra]

In Illinois, all the pulic teachers and some of the other public employees are not allowed to pay Social Security and are forced instead to use the state retirement pension system. I can still do my own IRA (which I will have to, now, given how they're cutting pensions), but I do not get social security.

This is how federal pensions work for federal employees hired pre 1986. Post 1986 hires have a far less generous pension plan (even taking into account social security).

[sToNED_CAT]

Hey, this is a little out of the conversation , but fitting in with the general theme.

There was an article in npr on December 5, about the wage cap and how lifting it could make social security solvent for atleast 30 more years. Considering the environment within the congress, I sincerely doubt such a bill could pass now. It would be nice if it could. It would be great if we could close a lot of the loop holes that only benefit the super rich.

http://www.npr.org/2013/12/05/249068448/to-fix-social-security-some-democrats-want-to-lift-wage-cap?utm_content=socialflow&utm_campaign=nprnews&utm_source=npr&utm_medium=twitter

So, that's basically 13% tax increase for everyone making over 113 000, just to fund unsustainable system for 30 more years. And THAT only if it would have no effect on tax avoidance, which I highly doubt. Now I know many liberal don't think too much about Laffer curve, but together with federal taxes in states like NY or Cali those people would end up paying over 60% of their income to state. Those are already EU taxation levels, without corresponding benefits.

[Swift]

Actually, this is inaccurate because of the risk corridors built into the law.

This gives insurers an incentive to keep prices low even if the invincibles are slow to sign up in order to retain customers into the future.

It's only a transitional program, and it depends on how insurance companies decide to price their products. Rather than losing 100% above a certain threshold, they may only lose $0.50 or $0.20 per dollar above the threshold. This may cause some aggressive pricing, but if the companies are relying on the risk corridor program to keep their premiums down, then they will likely have to have large increases once the program ends. Ditto for the transitional reinsurance fee.

[The Progressive]

Federal employees do have to pay into social security.

Thanks for paying your taxes so we can have a modest pension though borsabils. God bless you. :-)

[Inigima]

So, that's basically 13% tax increase for everyone making over 113 000, just to fund unsustainable system for 30 more years. And THAT only if it would have no effect on tax avoidance, which I highly doubt. Now I know many liberal don't think too much about Laffer curve, but together with federal taxes in states like NY or Cali those people would end up paying over 60% of their income to state. Those are already EU taxation levels, without corresponding benefits.

Good point. Let's have EU style benefits.

Also, wasn't the Laffer Curve shown to be nonsense? I don't think liberals are the aberration there.

[Swift]

How was the Laffer Curve shown to be nonsense? It at least makes sense that there would be no government revenue if taxes were 0% or 100%, and we know revenue is greater than 0 right now with tax rates between 0% and 100%. The GOP just wants you to believe that we're always to the right of the local maximum.

[The Progressive]

Borsie reminds me of my batshit insane rightwing uncle who recently told me that government agencies are facing budget cut because thanks to our comrade barrack.

I just laugh it off because you cant argue with the crazies.