US politics

[TrackerNeil]

With term limits the member at some point stops focusing solely on the next re-election and instead has the courage to vote for those measures that are really in the best interest of the country, rather than only his/her self-interest in an upcoming election. It frees them after a few terms to make the hard decisions for the greater good because their own self interest is no longer on the radar screen.

A politician will promise to enact term limits if enough pressure is applied by voters. If they break the promise, they're voted off the congressional island. :D

Someone else has already pointed out that term limits may simply make congressmen vote in terms of their next job, but I'll something else. Most voters really don't keep track of their representatives' voting record on most issues, and I can't imagine that term limits would change that. You're proceeding on the premise that voters are rational actors, which is pretty clearly false.

RE: DOMA

I'm happy about this, but pessimistic about our chances on appeal. I sincerely doubt that the Roberts court is going to rule in our favor on this one. However, it will be interesting to hear the cries of judicial activism from the same conservatives currently running to the courts to overturn the Affordable Care Act.

[Annelise]

But it's not an indicator of how serious the 'threat' is.

This coming from someone who thinks it's never a serious threat and never will be. :) I think you should give AARP a little credit for making it look easier than it is, that's all.

[Swordfish]

This coming from someone who thinks it's never a serious threat and never will be. :)

True, but I've been right so far, so my track record is impeccable.

:)

I think you should give AARP a little credit for making it look easier than it is, that's all.

Actually, isn't that pretty much what I've been saying? That the AARP is making it seem a lot more likely than it is in order to rile up the old folks?

[Ser Vlad]

Maybe Alberta, CA does have a leeeetle more in common with the Right Wingers. WTF, Alberta. That better be one export you do not send to us.

Albertan jurisprudence is... unique. Yeah, that's the word I want. Their current definition of same-sex marriage, if I recall, is something to the effect of "continuous adult partnership" and legally equivalent to a civil union, which by this point I believe is unconstitutional (our SC has not yet ruled on the constitutionality of same-sex marriage as a recall, though lower courts like the SC in Ontario found it constitutional).

[The Iceman of the North]

Humungus indeed the U.S. Treasury Department on June 1st 2010 quoted the U.S. National Debt as being $13 trillion. All Western european 'democracies' have this serious problem, National debt as at least 50%+ of GDP. Why so much debt?, because money is the psychic means of enslaving people, and someone has made Government their bitch.

This is a slight exaggeration, both the "all Western European 'deomcracies'" part, and to some extent the "serious problem" part.

[Annelise]

Actually, isn't that pretty much what I've been saying?

Is it? I think of it like severe weather: if conditions are favorable, they issue a watch. Obviously we are only in the watch stage at this point. If 14 of that commission actually work out an agreement that includes SS, thus sending it to both chambers for a vote, I would say they will move beyond the watch into a warning, haha. That's where riled old folk are most effective, I think. Although if what was said in that article bore out, it wouldn't apply to the baby boomers. I don't think my generation and younger even expect it to be there at all, so I have to wonder who would really throw a fit from the younger crowd about raising the retirement age on us.

[jack-be-lucky]

Is it? I think of it like severe weather: if conditions are favorable, they issue a watch. Obviously we are only in the watch stage at this point. If 14 of that commission actually work out an agreement that includes SS, thus sending it to both chambers for a vote, I would say they will move beyond the watch into a warning, haha. That's where riled old folk are most effective, I think. Although if what was said in that article bore out, it wouldn't apply to the baby boomers. I don't think my generation and younger even expect it to be there at all, so I have to wonder who would really throw a fit from the younger crowd about raising the retirement age on us.

Well, my wife and I, having been born in the fifties are still considered to be baby-boomers, but we are under the cut-off of 58 they're using, so let me say this:

We've got close to a half-million paid into the system, which by the way is fully funded until 2040 or so, and I've watched the moronic cuts in the inheritance tax, the capital gains tax, the top tax rates all of which benefited the most well off in society. I've seen the dumb-ass spending on B-1 bombers, star-wars missile defense, Iraq, and billions through AIG to some of the wealthiest institutions in the world. So when they tell me that I have to take a cut in what I've been promised, AND PAID FOR, my reply is FUCK YOU, FUCK YOU, FUCK YOU. Oh, And I vote, early and often.

[Tormund Ukrainesbane]

We've got close to a half-million paid into the system, which by the way is fully funded until 2040 or so, and I've watched the moronic cuts in the inheritance tax, the capital gains tax, the top tax rates all of which benefited the most well off in society. I've seen the dumb-ass spending on B-1 bombers, star-wars missile defense, Iraq, and billions through AIG to some of the wealthiest institutions in the world. So when they tell me that I have to take a cut in what I've been promised, AND PAID FOR, my reply is FUCK YOU, FUCK YOU, FUCK YOU. Oh, And I vote, early and often.

Which is why the system will never be fixed. Everyone knows someone is getting fucked. No one is willing for it to be them. You think that those 5 years younger than you have it any better?

[jack-be-lucky]

Which is why the system will never be fixed. Everyone knows someone is getting fucked. No one is willing for it to be them. You think that those 5 years younger than you have it any better?

Tormund, SS was fixed back in 1983. My wife and I both got fucked then. But we accepted it and paid the higher rates and had our retirement age raised. And as I said, its fully funded until 2040 or so. If the discussion is about fixing it past that point for future generations, I'm all ears. But what I get from the current discussion is using SS to fix the federal deficit and public debt. SS has nothing to do with either of those problems and the excess SS funds have been used for years to mask the the depth of the problem. I'm sure you know all that already.

I'm in agreement with Warren Buffet. If you want to fix the budget deficit you have to fix the trade deficit first.

I also think you have to do something about the decline in personal incomes. As incomes decline, its only natural that government revenue declines. And yes, people are going to have to pay more, including me. Most of my life I paid an aggregate tax,[fed,state,fica, not sales or property], of around 27%. Never much bothered me, compared to my parents lifestyle I've lived like a king. But when I read that the highest paid Americans, people who earn hundreds of millions annually, pay around 20% because of the special capital gains rate, I'm just astounded. Is there truly no way they can afford to pay more? I mean if they love their country like they claim.

[TrackerNeil]

Which is why the system will never be fixed. Everyone knows someone is getting fucked. No one is willing for it to be them. You think that those 5 years younger than you have it any better?

I don't understand why the system has to be fixed. This program has paid for itself for about 80 years, and would still be doing so if the government hadn't raided the trust fund for other reasons. As I understand it, the amount in the trust fund was in the trillions, and would have financed payments for another twenty or thirty years, at which point something would then have to be done to strengthen the system. That could easily be done by increasing the cap or wage base or whatever it's called. So when I look at Social Security I don't see a system in crisis. I see a government program that is widely popular, widely successful, and that was able to fully fund itself for the first century of its existence.

[Tormund Ukrainesbane]

I don't understand why the system has to be fixed. This program has paid for itself for about 80 years, and would still be doing so if the government hadn't raided the trust fund for other reasons.

The trust wasn't "raided", the issue is systemic. The only thing the Social Security Administration is allowed to do with its surplus is loan it to the federal government. That's the law. I'm also pretty sure that those loans don't actually go on the official national debt figure, but I could be wrong about that.

ETA: Basically, this means a couple of things, you can go with Al Gore's "lockbox" (cancel the loans) which would mean huge cuts to other government services, or you can raise the retirement age/cut benefits.

[Shryke]

The trust wasn't "raided", the issue is systemic. The only thing the Social Security Administration is allowed to do with its surplus is loan it to the federal government. That's the law. I'm also pretty sure that those loans don't actually go on the official national debt figure, but I could be wrong about that.

No, AFAIK the government can just treat it like magical revenue from nowhere or something.

The SS money essentially goes in the big pool of money that shit can be funded out of. so rather then raising taxes to pay for shit, they've been spending the SS money instead and now are all whiny that SS is suddenly having issues paying for itself.

[The Progressive]

Lol, it seems like we have a new resident teabagger now that RAddichio has graced the board with his/her presence.

I have to give Stephen Moore some credit. He does advocate raising taxes a little, but only on the poor so that we can avoid doing it to the rich, or perhaps even cut taxes even more for the rich. I wonder if Murdock will fire him from the WSJ for breaking ranks like this?

Well at least he hasn't told the poor to eat their own youngs yet.

[awesome possum]

In the case of the US, agree w/you about the bitch and the current administration is the enabler through an insane tax policy, anti-business environment, expansion of gov, all of which is damaging a once great country.

Wow, it's like I'm reading straight off Sarah Palin's hand.

[TrackerNeil]

The trust wasn't "raided", the issue is systemic. The only thing the Social Security Administration is allowed to do with its surplus is loan it to the federal government. That's the law. I'm also pretty sure that those loans don't actually go on the official national debt figure, but I could be wrong about that.

ETA: Basically, this means a couple of things, you can go with Al Gore's "lockbox" (cancel the loans) which would mean huge cuts to other government services, or you can raise the retirement age/cut benefits.

So really what we're saying here is that the government has not always been prudent with deficit spending, which is a news flash on the level of, "The sun rises in the east." That has very little to do with the solvency or effectiveness of Social Security. As far as I can see, Social Security as a program is jim-dandy both in terms of fiscal standing and popular support.

[RAddichio]

Wow, it's like I'm reading straight off Sarah Palin's hand.

Once the snarky make an appearance, civilized political discussion comes to a grinding halt. All the lefty brilliance creates so much shock & awe, everyone must bow and pay homage. :bowdown: That's why American voters are so grateful that the current POTUS is solving all our problems. :thumbsup:

[The Progressive]

Raddichio,

There are at least 3 or 4 substantive posts in response to your hit-and-run teabagger rants in this thread. The civilized thing would have been trying to address them first before responding to any snark. ;)

You've been doing quite an admirable job at avoiding any actual discussion though I have to say. Great job!

[Tormund Ukrainesbane]

So really what we're saying here is that the government has not always been prudent with deficit spending, which is a news flash on the level of, "The sun rises in the east." That has very little to do with the solvency or effectiveness of Social Security. As far as I can see, Social Security as a program is jim-dandy both in terms of fiscal standing and popular support.

No, I'm saying that the doom of social security is written right into the Social Security Act. The program is not allowed to save for the future. It is required to give up all surpluses and hope that future "investment" keeps up with future claims.

The problem is, that clearly isn't going to happen. Therefore you have to change the program itself in order to keep it solvent.

Once the snarky make an appearance, civilized political discussion comes to a grinding halt. All the lefty brilliance creates so much shock & awe, everyone must bow and pay homage. That's why American voters are so grateful that the current POTUS is solving all our problems.

This doesn't mean anything. I am usually somewhat sympathetic to the conservative view point, but you need to start making some substantiative arguments.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

Once the snarky make an appearance, civilized political discussion comes to a grinding halt. All the lefty brilliance creates so much shock & awe, everyone must bow and pay homage. :bowdown: That's why American voters are so grateful that the current POTUS is solving all our problems. :thumbsup:

No offense, but it's your own fault for thinking it is possible to have civilized political discourse with those posters who toss around the "teabagger" label. It's like reasoning with 8 year olds who think fart jokes are comedic genius.

There are lefties here who do engage in civilized discourse, but by definition, none of them are the ones who toss around "teabagger". A good way to start the ignore list.

[The Progressive]

Lol ...... quickly Flow, somewhere out there are teabaggers being called out!

To the teamobile!