• 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?

Ryan Booed At AARP Convention

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

Mursilis

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2001
7,760
11
81
Pssst. They paid for it themselves during their entire working lives.
They paid in dimes and are getting back dollars. For many retirees, they're getting back in benefits far more than they ever paid in (including interest), and most don't care - they only want their free drugs and scooters, and don't care about the massive debt they're leaving.
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
61,108
13,043
136
They paid in dimes and are getting back dollars. For many retirees, they're getting back in benefits far more than they ever paid in (including interest), and most don't care - they only want their free drugs and scooters, and don't care about the massive debt they're leaving.
Please. There's the small matter of the SS trust, nearly $3T, built up over the last 30 years. Until just recently, SS has been a cash cow enabling tax cuts at the top.

Don't start up over deficits, either. Reagan/GHWB more than quadrupled the national debt, GWB doubled it again. If Americans have spent more than they should have, it's been at the insistence of their "Conservative" leadership. Deficits have served as cover for the massive shift of income to the tippy-top & the dearth of jobs from automation & offshoring. The public never would have bought trickledown w/o deficits, because the effects would have been too obvious.

Boomers have done what was asked of them, so it's reasonable that they ask to receive what was promised for their efforts. If that's really not possible, then we need to re-examine the leadership & ideology of the past in light of the realities of today, understand who benefited & who lost out, adjust accordingly.
 

Mursilis

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2001
7,760
11
81
Please. There's the small matter of the SS trust, nearly $3T, built up over the last 30 years. Until just recently, SS has been a cash cow enabling tax cuts at the top.

Don't start up over deficits, either. Reagan/GHWB more than quadrupled the national debt, GWB doubled it again. If Americans have spent more than they should have, it's been at the insistence of their "Conservative" leadership. Deficits have served as cover for the massive shift of income to the tippy-top & the dearth of jobs from automation & offshoring. The public never would have bought trickledown w/o deficits, because the effects would have been too obvious.

Boomers have done what was asked of them, so it's reasonable that they ask to receive what was promised for their efforts. If that's really not possible, then we need to re-examine the leadership & ideology of the past in light of the realities of today, understand who benefited & who lost out, adjust accordingly.
And of course in your world the Democratic Congresses that passed spending bill after spending bill, and promised more and more entitlements are completely blameless, as is Clinton, who had both the chance and the charisma to actually address this impending disaster, and instead decided to chase skirts around the Oval Office. You are such a hack.

Of course the Repubs encouraged fleecing by the rich - that's what they do. But the Dems encouraged fleecing by everyone else - that's what they do. Future generations are going to be stuck holding the bag for the greedy rich and the "I got mine!" seniors, but they're too busy watching Jersey Shore to care, I guess.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,587
9
81
So you're okay with being blamed for what this current administration has done even though chances are you didn't vote for them.
Me personally? No. My generation? Yes. My generation is going to have to suffer for putting assholes like Bush and Obama in office. Will I be annoyed at my generation for voting for these assholes? I already am. And my generation should STFU if things don't go our way in 20 or 30 years.
 

a777pilot

Diamond Member
Apr 26, 2011
4,261
21
81
Romney was correct. There are approximately 47% of the electorate that will vote for obama no matter what. Why should he worry about them during this campaign? His attention needs to be on the 6% to 7% that are in the middle and undecided.

You must really pay attention to what Mr. Romney said, to whom he said it, when he said it and the reason for the speech. LOL! Don't worry I will not be holding my breath waiting for the left wing loons to learn anything.....like listening.
 

D-Man

Platinum Member
Oct 18, 1999
2,991
0
71
Well actually saying SS dollars are at a value of 30 years ago is false at best. What about the interest? Also you pay this until the moment you retire so it is not all 30yr old dollars. Actually with simple interest at top of the line wages payment should be around 3,300 per month. After disability and survivor benefits. I am not complaining just saying at the rate I am getting the government did better. For me it is just manna from heaven that let me retire early at a reduced rate so I am saving you guys money cause I have a lot of miles on me. I have 5 Adult children with very good jobs so thank me for paying my own way.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,991
2
0
Given the 47% crapola Mitt is willing to ignore as lost to Obama voters, what gives Mitt the idea that all 53% of the remainder will vote all for Mitt, and thus put him over the top in the general election of 2012?

On the surface it sounds like the most stupid political strategy in the history of elective politics even if Romney mispoke but still saying what he really believed in.

After all if the 47% votes Obama, all Obama has to do is peel off only 4% off the Mitt Romney imagined 53% solid support to win the 2012 popular and electorial vote.

Not to mention that the so called 47% pay the lion share of their taxes in the form of regressive taxes like sale taxes and Federal gas taxes.
 

tweaker2

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
11,486
2,697
136
Ryan's and Romney's plans to shift SS and Medicare to the private sector is only meant to increase profit margins of Wall Street and the health care industries by an obscene amount of $$$.

If these guys were truly for the average American, their plans would reflect that sentiment. Their plans would have the average American actually receive guaranteed profit from any kind of shift away from gov't control.

Voucher programs could include some form of investment strategy that gave a return on any unused portion of a voucher amount that was tied to the average cost a person on Medicare spends annually. A separate fund could be established for catastrophic care paid for by employer contributions.

Same with SS. Establish private accounts with a guaranteed rate of return equal to T-bills and bonds and cannot by law be used for any other use, with all profits going tax free to each account holder, or something like it.

But then, the profit motive behind privatizing would simply vanish into thin air, wouldn't it? Because most of the return in investment would go right back to the account holder rather than the account "managers" huh?
__
 

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,324
4
0
What do you expect when you plan on taking anything from voters.
 
Apr 27, 2012
10,086
58
86
Ryan's and Romney's plans to shift SS and Medicare to the private sector is only meant to increase profit margins of Wall Street and the health care industries by an obscene amount of $$$.

If these guys were truly for the average American, their plans would reflect that sentiment. Their plans would have the average American actually receive guaranteed profit from any kind of shift away from gov't control.

Voucher programs could include some form of investment strategy that gave a return on any unused portion of a voucher amount that was tied to the average cost a person on Medicare spends annually. A separate fund could be established for catastrophic care paid for by employer contributions.

Same with SS. Establish private accounts with a guaranteed rate of return equal to T-bills and bonds and cannot by law be used for any other use, with all profits going tax free to each account holder, or something like it.

But then, the profit motive behind privatizing would simply vanish into thin air, wouldn't it? Because most of the return in investment would go right back to the account holder rather than the account "managers" huh?
__
More lying and exaggerating
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
61,108
13,043
136
And of course in your world the Democratic Congresses that passed spending bill after spending bill, and promised more and more entitlements are completely blameless, as is Clinton, who had both the chance and the charisma to actually address this impending disaster, and instead decided to chase skirts around the Oval Office. You are such a hack.

Of course the Repubs encouraged fleecing by the rich - that's what they do. But the Dems encouraged fleecing by everyone else - that's what they do. Future generations are going to be stuck holding the bag for the greedy rich and the "I got mine!" seniors, but they're too busy watching Jersey Shore to care, I guess.
It's truly unfortunate that facts have no effect on your opinions-

http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

Not that you actually read links, let alone links within links. Might poison your mind, pollute your precious bodily fluids. But you'll stay strong, keep the faith.
 

michal1980

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2003
8,019
43
91
Pssst. They paid for it themselves during their entire working lives.

You embody what is wrong with today's GOP with every post. Stuck on talking points without understanding what you're using them on.
psst.

They think they paid for. they paid for a small part of it.

They are now living off the backs of working younger americans
 

michal1980

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2003
8,019
43
91
Given the 47% crapola Mitt is willing to ignore as lost to Obama voters, what gives Mitt the idea that all 53% of the remainder will vote all for Mitt, and thus put him over the top in the general election of 2012?

On the surface it sounds like the most stupid political strategy in the history of elective politics even if Romney mispoke but still saying what he really believed in.

After all if the 47% votes Obama, all Obama has to do is peel off only 4% off the Mitt Romney imagined 53% solid support to win the 2012 popular and electorial vote.

Not to mention that the so called 47% pay the lion share of their taxes in the form of regressive taxes like sale taxes and Federal gas taxes.
The 47 % still pay for nothing in this country.

Sales tax regessive? LOL only when you use liberal math.
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
61,108
13,043
136
The 47 % still pay for nothing in this country.

Sales tax regessive? LOL only when you use liberal math.
Of course it's regressive, because median earners & below spend a much large % of their incomes on taxable items.

No sales tax on real estate, financial instruments, personal trainers & groomers, lavish vacations booked in tax havens- the first stop, obviously, and no sales tax on a lot of other things that more affluent Americans buy. There are a lot of other hidden regressive taxes, as well.

Total taxes are what count, and people towards the low end pay lots of them.
 
Last edited:

Thump553

Lifer
Jun 2, 2000
11,698
1,009
126
psst.

They think they paid for. they paid for a small part of it.

They are now living off the backs of working younger americans
You mean the ones we spent hundreds of thousands of dollars and a good chunk of our time raising and educating? The ones many of us still support in these tough times? Congrats, you are a full fledged member of the I've got mine so FU to the rest of society gang. You'd fit right in at the RR country club gatherings.

Personally I think one of the largest reasons for humanity's success is the continual evolution and improvement of human society.
 

michal1980

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2003
8,019
43
91
You mean the ones we spent hundreds of thousands of dollars and a good chunk of our time raising and educating? The ones many of us still support in these tough times? Congrats, you are a full fledged member of the I've got mine so FU to the rest of society gang. You'd fit right in at the RR country club gatherings.

Personally I think one of the largest reasons for humanity's success is the continual evolution and improvement of human society.
How stupid can you be.

The old farts are the people saying FU to the rest of society. Thats the problem asshole.

http://www.jsonline.com/business/medicare-spending-caps-likely-under-obama-or-romney-af6pf4c-171060611.html

About 42% of Medicare's cost - roughly $235 billion of the total cost of $560 billion in the 2011 fiscal year - now is funded by general tax revenues, leaving less money to reduce the federal budget deficit or fund other programs. The balance comes from payroll taxes, premiums paid by beneficiaries and other sources.
wow those payroll taxes seem to really pay for medicare. Oh right they dont. No wonder the 47% lover medicare so much, they hardly pay for it.

single people and couples with two incomes who earned the average wage can expect to receive about $3 in Medicare benefits for every $1 paid in payroll taxes.
hmmm, wow some on medicare loves medicare, and doesn't want cuts. I wonder why?

Oh thats right, because they won a jackpot.

Who really is a greedy fuck? The people currently paying the taxes? Or the leeches that paid almost nothing and dont want their golden goos slimed down?

hmmm.

Think about it you dumb ass.
 

michal1980

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2003
8,019
43
91
Of course it's regressive, because median earners & below spend a much large % of their incomes on taxable items.

No sales tax on real estate, financial instruments, personal trainers & groomers, lavish vacations booked in tax havens- the first stop, obviously, and no sales tax on a lot of other things that more affluent Americans buy. There are a lot of other hidden regressive taxes, as well.

Total taxes are what count, and people towards the low end pay lots of them.
like i said, liberal tax math.
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
61,108
13,043
136
like i said, liberal tax math.
Taxes are taxes- they all cut into the bottom line just the same, regardless of how they're structured or which govt entity collects them.

Perhaps you'd care to address that contention directly.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY