• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

Budget deficit jumps to $779 billion

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

dawp

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
10,314
1,529
126
well what do you expect from a "businessman" who had to file bankruptcy multiple time on a casino.
 

sourceninja

Diamond Member
Mar 8, 2005
8,807
64
91
Repeat after me. SSI is not an entitlement. The program was designed to be self funding. If it can not be self funding then it needs to be stopped. SSI isn't something for nothing. Your pay out is based on what you pay in. Entitlement programs are something for nothing. SSI is one of the few social programs run by the government that everyone in the country is promised will pay out to them. It's a silly program with little purpose, but I payed into it. I want my money back out of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bitek and ivwshane

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
70,206
19,030
136
Repeat after me. SSI is not an entitlement. The program was designed to be self funding. If it can not be self funding then it needs to be stopped. SSI isn't something for nothing. Your pay out is based on what you pay in. Entitlement programs are something for nothing. SSI is one of the few social programs run by the government that everyone in the country is promised will pay out to them. It's a silly program with little purpose, but I payed into it. I want my money back out of it.
Hmm, today I learned that the most successful poverty reduction program in US history is silly and has no purpose, haha.

To be clear though, your payments into social security create no binding obligations on the part of the government and they can change your payouts at any time. You aren’t entitled to your money back out here any more than you are any other taxes.

Social Security is fundamentally funded the same way any other social program is, through current year revenues. (The social security trust fund is an accounting fiction) The only reason we should stop the program is if we think it is not accomplishing its goals.
 

Majes

Golden Member
Apr 8, 2008
1,134
112
106
Most of you mocking conservatives don't realize how frustrating it is for us. Financial conservatives had the Tea Party movement years ago to try to get the budget balanced and to pay down the debt. That movement was murdered since it was seen as a threat to the two-party system.

That left financial conservatives with the following choice... We could throw our votes to the Democrats who have advocated spending for as long as I can remember or we could go back to the Republicans who run on conservative platforms but turn into spending frenzied neo-cons when they get to Washington.

What on earth do I vote for when both of my options run contrary to what I'd like?

The country's deficit is the fault of both parties. The current budget is mostly the fault of the Republicans. But honestly no "conservative" person would ever approve of these deficits...
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
60,270
12,793
136
The Tea Party was a Republican sub-brand, period. It wasn't movement and it was never fiscally conservative. The Tea Party brand was the attack dog wing of the party and allowed the Republican leadership to deny responsibility for the deplorable conduct of their own party members. It was no more a threat to the Republican Party than Chevrolet is a threat to GM.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie and Vic

UberNeuman

Lifer
Nov 4, 1999
16,939
3,079
126
Most of you mocking conservatives don't realize how frustrating it is for us. Financial conservatives had the Tea Party movement years ago to try to get the budget balanced and to pay down the debt. That movement was murdered since it was seen as a threat to the two-party system.

That left financial conservatives with the following choice... We could throw our votes to the Democrats who have advocated spending for as long as I can remember or we could go back to the Republicans who run on conservative platforms but turn into spending frenzied neo-cons when they get to Washington.

What on earth do I vote for when both of my options run contrary to what I'd like?

The country's deficit is the fault of both parties. The current budget is mostly the fault of the Republicans. But honestly no "conservative" person would ever approve of these deficits...
Lol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Engineer

thilanliyan

Lifer
Jun 21, 2005
11,121
977
126
Most of you mocking conservatives don't realize how frustrating it is for us. Financial conservatives had the Tea Party movement years ago to try to get the budget balanced and to pay down the debt. That movement was murdered since it was seen as a threat to the two-party system.

That left financial conservatives with the following choice... We could throw our votes to the Democrats who have advocated spending for as long as I can remember or we could go back to the Republicans who run on conservative platforms but turn into spending frenzied neo-cons when they get to Washington.

What on earth do I vote for when both of my options run contrary to what I'd like?

The country's deficit is the fault of both parties. The current budget is mostly the fault of the Republicans. But honestly no "conservative" person would ever approve of these deficits...
Correct me if I'm wrong but it's been GOP governments that have run up massive debts (outside of the financial meltdown for Obama, and even he did a decent job of it) in the last 25 yrs or so. That should be enough evidence to NOT vote for them.
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
61,146
13,088
136
Most of you mocking conservatives don't realize how frustrating it is for us. Financial conservatives had the Tea Party movement years ago to try to get the budget balanced and to pay down the debt. That movement was murdered since it was seen as a threat to the two-party system.

That left financial conservatives with the following choice... We could throw our votes to the Democrats who have advocated spending for as long as I can remember or we could go back to the Republicans who run on conservative platforms but turn into spending frenzied neo-cons when they get to Washington.

What on earth do I vote for when both of my options run contrary to what I'd like?

The country's deficit is the fault of both parties. The current budget is mostly the fault of the Republicans. But honestly no "conservative" person would ever approve of these deficits...
Vote for the party whose actions are consistent with their rhetoric. That's not the GOP.
 

Majes

Golden Member
Apr 8, 2008
1,134
112
106
The Tea Party was a Republican sub-brand, period. It wasn't movement and it was never fiscally conservative. The Tea Party brand was the attack dog wing of the party and allowed the Republican leadership to deny responsibility for the deplorable conduct of their own party members. It was no more a threat to the Republican Party than Chevrolet is a threat to GM.
That's simply incorrect... The creation of the Tea Party was in response to ridiculous spending. There's a reason people thought the GOP was dead. I don't have a clue why you think what you posted is true...
 

Majes

Golden Member
Apr 8, 2008
1,134
112
106
Correct me if I'm wrong but it's been GOP governments that have run up massive debts (outside of the financial meltdown for Obama, and even he did a decent job of it) in the last 25 yrs or so. That should be enough evidence to NOT vote for them.
Yeah, I've been voting third party mostly. It's just frustrating.
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
34,661
4,483
126
Repeat after me. SSI is not an entitlement. The program was designed to be self funding. If it can not be self funding then it needs to be stopped. SSI isn't something for nothing. Your pay out is based on what you pay in. Entitlement programs are something for nothing. SSI is one of the few social programs run by the government that everyone in the country is promised will pay out to them. It's a silly program with little purpose, but I payed into it. I want my money back out of it.
Sounds like you don't even know the difference between SSI (Supplemental Security Income) and Social Security. Maybe you should stick to opining on subjects you have competence in, which should, I suspect, keep you fairly quiet.
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
60,270
12,793
136
That's simply incorrect... The creation of the Tea Party was in response to ridiculous spending. There's a reason people thought the GOP was dead. I don't have a clue why you think what you posted is true...
That every "Tea Party" member sent to Congress caucused with the Republicans is your first clue. The Tea Party was born when Obama won in 2008 and Fox News went an open mic bus tour to organize the sore losers of that election.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
70,206
19,030
136
Most of you mocking conservatives don't realize how frustrating it is for us. Financial conservatives had the Tea Party movement years ago to try to get the budget balanced and to pay down the debt. That movement was murdered since it was seen as a threat to the two-party system.

That left financial conservatives with the following choice... We could throw our votes to the Democrats who have advocated spending for as long as I can remember or we could go back to the Republicans who run on conservative platforms but turn into spending frenzied neo-cons when they get to Washington.

What on earth do I vote for when both of my options run contrary to what I'd like?

The country's deficit is the fault of both parties. The current budget is mostly the fault of the Republicans. But honestly no "conservative" person would ever approve of these deficits...
I would suggest looking at what both parties actually do when they are in power. Look at the Democrats' signature legislation last time they had full power - the ACA. It actually REDUCED the deficit. Then look at the last few times Republicans have had full power, they exploded the deficit.

If you actually care primarily about the debt then Democrats are the clear answer. It's not even close.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
70,206
19,030
136
That's simply incorrect... The creation of the Tea Party was in response to ridiculous spending. There's a reason people thought the GOP was dead. I don't have a clue why you think what you posted is true...
If the creation of the Tea Party was in response to ridiculous spending why is it that people who identify as Tea Party members are some of the strongest supporters of the current Republican Party that has not only ramped up spending but cut taxes?
 
  • Like
Reactions: greatnoob

Majes

Golden Member
Apr 8, 2008
1,134
112
106
That every "Tea Party" member sent to Congress caucused with the Republicans is your first clue. The Tea Party was born when Obama won in 2008 and Fox News went an open mic bus tour to organize the sore losers of that election.
Apparently I'm going to need more than one clue... I assumed they grouped with Republicans because that was their only hope of implementing any policy. I also remember all news networks openly mocking and ridiculing Tea Party members. Of course Fox News tried to organize the sore losers. They brought the base back together by killing the Tea Party.
 

sourceninja

Diamond Member
Mar 8, 2005
8,807
64
91
Sounds like you don't even know the difference between SSI (Supplemental Security Income) and Social Security. Maybe you should stick to opining on subjects you have competence in, which should, I suspect, keep you fairly quiet.
Glad to know we don't have conversations here, just ad hominem attacks. This surely moves any conversation forward and has 100% convinced me I need to learn my place! Next time, maybe use your effort to educate and just maybe you could have some useful effect on the conversation. I guess I thought I might find stimulating conversation here. That was a mistake.

I also find it fairly pathetic you felt the need to attack me. What does that say about you as a person?
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
34,661
4,483
126
Glad to know we don't have conversations here, just ad hominem attacks. This surely moves any conversation forward and has 100% convinced me I need to learn my place! Next time, maybe use your effort to educate and just maybe you could have some useful effect on the conversation. I guess I thought I might find stimulating conversation here. That was a mistake.
I also find it fairly pathetic you felt the need to attack me. What does that say about you as a person?
Not PC enough for you, snowflake? Do you at least understand that SSI is not Social Security? If so, we have moved the conversation forward.
 

Majes

Golden Member
Apr 8, 2008
1,134
112
106
If the creation of the Tea Party was in response to ridiculous spending why is it that people who identify as Tea Party members are some of the strongest supporters of the current Republican Party that has not only ramped up spending but cut taxes?

I'm pretty sure the Tea Party is a dead movement and didn't actually accomplish anything. They were absorbed back into the GOP and that's a big reason Republicans are in control at the moment. It was primarily a financial movement and I'm not surprised if some people still staunchly support the rest of the Republican agenda.
 

sourceninja

Diamond Member
Mar 8, 2005
8,807
64
91
Not PC enough for you, snowflake? Do you at least understand that SSI is not Social Security? If so, we have moved the conversation forward.
See again just an attack. Let's try this.

Hey, you are wrong on SSI, it's not the same as SS. Here's a link.

That might have a positive effect. Someone may learn something. It's ok I know you don't see this my way. You like the feeling you get from insulting people. It helps you feel big inside and fills that hole in your heart. I'll block you now.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
70,206
19,030
136
I'm pretty sure the Tea Party is a dead movement and didn't actually accomplish anything. They were absorbed back into the GOP and that's a big reason Republicans are in control at the moment. It was primarily a financial movement and I'm not surprised if some people still staunchly support the rest of the Republican agenda.
It's hard for me to imagine it was primarily a financial movement considering it was just basically the Republican base. They never had problems with deficits before Obama and they don't have problems with them after Obama.

It was a reactionary movement to a perceived loss of social status.
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
60,270
12,793
136
Apparently I'm going to need more than one clue... I assumed they grouped with Republicans because that was their only hope of implementing any policy. I also remember all news networks openly mocking and ridiculing Tea Party members. Of course Fox News tried to organize the sore losers. They brought the base back together by killing the Tea Party.
Fox worked with the Republican Party to build the Tea Party brand out of the sore losers of the 2008 election. When the brand no longer served the purposes of the Republican Party leadership, they phased it out. It was like Toyota ditching the Scion brand; the cars are still there and called Toyotas again like they were before the brand was created. It was all just marketing. The Tea Party was never an independent movement.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
20,212
633
126
Remember how when the US was fighting the biggest economic crisis since the Great Depression conservatives were in hysterics about the budget deficit, so much so that they attempted to cause a global financial crisis to prevent US debt from rising?

They don’t seem very worried now. I wonder what changed?
Politics as usual I suspect.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY