so....social security

[The Outsider]

If I paid my money in and you paid your money in, your statement is lacking.

So because you paid in you get to have my money too?

[mdb1958]

If I paid my money in and you paid your money in, your statement is lacking.

So because you paid in you get to have my money too?

You get yourn and keep you greedy not paying long enough fingers off of mine.

[mdb1958]

And if you change jobs roll over your retirement accounts, do not cash them in.

[beardmcdoug]

Yes. Shitting the bed by eschewing its responsibility to the public.

Yes, I'm serious. How is it that the "Free Market" is completely blameless?

Did the government force Ken Lay to lie to his shareholders?

Did the government force tobacco companies into marketing their products as perfectly safe and even beneficial for health?

Did the government force banks into creating bogus accounts and loans at Wells Fargo?

No. But the government did get left to pick up the pieces.

You believe we have any facet of a free market? Everything is so deep in politics that there's not way to test any sort of free market practices.

The government and it's regulations allowed Wells Fargo to become the super power they became in the first place. Other regulations caused the recession/housing crash. Afterwards the new regulations that have been put in place are killing all of the smaller banks in the country and creating more banking mergers than we've had in history. We went from 26 Banks in NC last year to 6 due to the new regulations and the smothering of smaller FIs. The regulations are bolster the mid-large tier banks who were the biggest issue in the first place.

A heavy handed government and a free market cannot exist together by definition. The pieces the government is "forced" to pick up it's culpable for and honestly, in most cases, uncalled for.

I've never stated anything about anarchy. Any sort of criminal acts absolutely need repercussions. There needs to be some governmental control, but it's gotten too big and too encompassing.To allow an overtly corrupt group of people who run one of the worst organizations in the world control everything is asinine.

Instead of allowing consumers to take losses and learn from mistakes, allowing the market to make corrections, you believe the government should step in and control everything? This same government that bleeds losses on a daily basis.

Usc, it just occurred to me that there's a huge gap in perception, between you and MB, of what "regulations" means:

- You see regulations as something that primarily ends up damaging the little guy, which leads to this sort of distillation of a market sector, which leads to mega corps. You see regulations as a rising tide that drowns the little guy, and that the mega corps can withstand and keep their head above the water.

- MB imagines regulations as something that are supposed primarily affect mega corps, reigning them in, making them play by the rules, which gives the little guy a fair chance at competing against an "opponent" that has the money and resources to, if left unchecked, rewrite rules in their favor, or buy up competition. MB see regulations as putting a ceiling to the room - a ceiling that the little guy isn't even close to touching - a ceiling that keeps mega corps from growing too tall - a ceiling that prevents anyone from growing so tall that they can step out of the room and decide what the room looks like in the first place

You both don't like megacorps and monopolies, you just think they're created in two different ways.

USC, you have to ask yourself, in a scenario where you have absolute unfettered capitalism, where there's no rules, do you honestly think monopolies wouldn't develop? Do you honestly think that, with greater and greater funds and resources (and we're talking about amounts equivalent to entire nations), that a company wouldn't begin to attempt to influence the rule making process so that it further grants itself a greater and greater competitive advantage? If you've got a bad taste in your mouth about regulations, maybe it's because they've all been written by politicians who are bought off by mega corps that have already out grown the room...

[mdb1958]

Having the millions of citizens that choose not to do the 40,50, 60 hour a week thing for most of their life is what sucks money away. Then the redirection is to blame old people ---- get real.

[The Outsider]

So because you paid in you get to have my money too?

You get yourn and keep you greedy not paying long enough fingers off of mine.

How would I get yours if the people you voted for while I was young already blew it?

[The Outsider]

Having the millions of citizens that choose not to do the 40,50, 60 hour a week thing for most of their life is what sucks money away. Then the redirection is to blame old people ---- get real.

Ah, yes, the millions of citizens who literally live in poverty for no reason other than their desire to live in poverty.

[mdb1958]

If I paid my money in and you paid your money in, your statement is lacking.

So because you paid in you get to have my money too?

Blame your granddaddy son and I'll take the heat from my family.

[mdb1958]

Having the millions of citizens that choose not to do the 40,50, 60 hour a week thing for most of their life is what sucks money away. Then the redirection is to blame old people ---- get real.

Ah, yes, the millions of citizens who literally live in poverty for no reason other than their desire to live in poverty.

You say poverty when we both know its working the system for many.

[mdb1958]

You sound like you will be bragging about having your handicap sticker since you were 25 because of migraines from lack of medical marijuana.

[uscbucsfan]

You believe we have any facet of a free market? Everything is so deep in politics that there's not way to test any sort of free market practices.

The government and it's regulations allowed Wells Fargo to become the super power they became in the first place. Other regulations caused the recession/housing crash. Afterwards the new regulations that have been put in place are killing all of the smaller banks in the country and creating more banking mergers than we've had in history. We went from 26 Banks in NC last year to 6 due to the new regulations and the smothering of smaller FIs. The regulations are bolster the mid-large tier banks who were the biggest issue in the first place.

A heavy handed government and a free market cannot exist together by definition. The pieces the government is "forced" to pick up it's culpable for and honestly, in most cases, uncalled for.

I've never stated anything about anarchy. Any sort of criminal acts absolutely need repercussions. There needs to be some governmental control, but it's gotten too big and too encompassing.To allow an overtly corrupt group of people who run one of the worst organizations in the world control everything is asinine.

Instead of allowing consumers to take losses and learn from mistakes, allowing the market to make corrections, you believe the government should step in and control everything? This same government that bleeds losses on a daily basis.

Usc, it just occurred to me that there's a huge gap in perception, between you and MB, of what "regulations" means:

- You see regulations as something that primarily ends up damaging the little guy, which leads to this sort of distillation of a market sector, which leads to mega corps. You see regulations as a rising tide that drowns the little guy, and that the mega corps can withstand and keep their head above the water.

- MB imagines regulations as something that are supposed primarily affect mega corps, reigning them in, making them play by the rules, which gives the little guy a fair chance at competing against an "opponent" that has the money and resources to, if left unchecked, rewrite rules in their favor, or buy up competition. MB see regulations as putting a ceiling to the room - a ceiling that the little guy isn't even close to touching - a ceiling that keeps mega corps from growing too tall - a ceiling that prevents anyone from growing so tall that they can step out of the room and decide what the room looks like in the first place

You both don't like megacorps and monopolies, you just think they're created in two different ways.

USC, you have to ask yourself, in a scenario where you have absolute unfettered capitalism, where there's no rules, do you honestly think monopolies wouldn't develop? Do you honestly think that, with greater and greater funds and resources (and we're talking about amounts equivalent to entire nations), that a company wouldn't begin to attempt to influence the rule making process so that it further grants itself a greater and greater competitive advantage? If you've got a bad taste in your mouth about regulations, maybe it's because they've all been written by politicians who are bought off by mega corps that have already out grown the room...

Unfettered capitalism is fantasy. In fantasy land I do believe that when monopolies were created it would drive innovation; think Walmart to Amazon, but in every sector. In the world we live in there does need to be some government regulation, which is why I clarified I'm not arguing for anarchy. My problem is that there is too much government interference.

It's obviously a chicken or the egg quandary of did the government regulations cause the issues or the companies themselves. While the reality is both play a role, both meddling creates a higher failure rate as the company will not be able to self sustain, the consumers will not be able to fix market issues, and the government doesn't have complete control. It leaves us to what we have in these messy little peaks and valleys. I've listed in many threads how big government regulation to "fix" issues normally makes things worse i.e. Guns, Banks, Auto manufacturers, drugs, violence, etc.

I am NOT confused that regulations hurt the little guy. Stretching the verbiage of "little guy", regulations and big government are around to help the smallest common denominator. The people that many liberals champion for. I get their argument of trying to build up that sector of the population will benefit everyone as they will not be on the streets, they will not be skipping doctors bills, they will get educated, in theory they will begin to work. Giving them this money could make them contributors to the economic cycle as viable consumers. I just don't believe that has been proven true on a global scale or here in America. I could argue that it cripples a large portion of them and creates a cyclical sector of society, but the truth is...I really just don't care about the old and the poor who cannot or don't care for themselves. I don't want my money going to them as much as possible. I'm not screaming taxation is theft, but I do think smaller social programs and less taxes are a benefit to our society as a whole. And no.. I'm not just a typical republican hating the poor...I think the republican party on a whole is just as lost and contributes to the growth of big government as the democrats do. Obviously, showcased by the post above, I lean conservative...I just don't consider myself a part of any political party and haven't for years. Sometimes I play the libertarian.

I've lived all over the world, in many socialist countries. In those countries the rich are still rich, but most everyone else would be poor by our standards (like the UK). That's not what I want here. I want the excess that I've worked so hard for.

[The Outsider]

You sound like you will be bragging about having your handicap sticker since you were 25 because of migraines from lack of medical marijuana.

See, it's people like you. If we could just take every trogloditic **** like yourself that is currently tainting our gene pool and drop them in a volcano the world would be a much, much better place.

[Mountaineer Buc]

Perhaps I would understand better if you could cite some examples of this excessive interference.

I work in the private sector. In a small business and I deal with government regulations and taxes on a normal basis. Employment, environmental, public saftey, health care. I should be able to understand the context of your examples.

For me, the federal stuff is the easy part.

[mdb1958]

You sound like you will be bragging about having your handicap sticker since you were 25 because of migraines from lack of medical marijuana.

See, it's people like you. If we could just take every trogloditic **** like yourself that is currently tainting our gene pool and drop them in a volcano the world would be a much, much better place.

I, myself, did not cause whatever situation you are in right now. By the time I understood even a little, they were saying the money for SS was spent elsewhere.

If I understand you, you dont trust retirement accounts, I dont blame you at all. I dont either. but I did it anyways. Your only other choice is to save without any growth attached to your savings and that is going to take a lifetime. Limit yourself to 2 dime bags a week and save the rest.

From as long as I have been posting I have said it was stupid for the government to run on a credit card. You and I both are experiencing the animal that is 20 trillion in debt.

[Brazen331]

See, it's people like you. If we could just take every trogloditic **** like yourself that is currently tainting our gene pool and drop them in a volcano the world would be a much, much better place.

I, myself, did not cause whatever situation you are in right now. By the time I understood even a little, they were saying the money for SS was spent elsewhere.

If I understand you, you dont trust retirement accounts, I dont blame you at all. I dont either. but I did it anyways. Your only other choice is to save without any growth attached to your savings and that is going to take a lifetime. Limit yourself to 2 dime bags a week and save the rest.

From as long as I have been posting I have said it was stupid for the government to run on a credit card. You and I both are experiencing the animal that is 20 trillion in debt.

I agree that we shouldn’t blame mdb for the debt and the Social Security mess. He’s going to get more Social Security than most of us because he’s older than most of us. That’s just the way it is and some things will never change.

[mdb1958]

I, myself, did not cause whatever situation you are in right now. By the time I understood even a little, they were saying the money for SS was spent elsewhere.

If I understand you, you dont trust retirement accounts, I dont blame you at all. I dont either. but I did it anyways. Your only other choice is to save without any growth attached to your savings and that is going to take a lifetime. Limit yourself to 2 dime bags a week and save the rest.

From as long as I have been posting I have said it was stupid for the government to run on a credit card. You and I both are experiencing the animal that is 20 trillion in debt.

I agree that we shouldn’t blame mdb for the debt and the Social Security mess. He’s going to get more Social Security than most of us because he’s older than most of us. That’s just the way it is and some things will never change.

What they give you wont even pay the bills if you factor in property tax and insurance. Well maybe you can make a salami sandwich and watch NCIS reruns.

If you want to do more than look at the walls, you better plan for it.

You would think inflation and all that other stuff would give you more money but I doubt I get as much as my Dad did and I prolly paid in a little more. So what he got helped him much more than the lesser amount will help me.

[mdb1958]

My little boat floats but it really aint all that much to look at, ya'll better go after Zarni's yacht.

[Pirate Life]

Reinstate the lock box that we had the last bit of the Clinton administration. Stop Congress from using SS funds to pay for gov't expenses.

This is an absolute must ... and reason number 5,987 you can trust any government official .... they took our money to help pay for older retired folks. They then gave that money away. Now they have to collect from our kids to pay for the older folks we already paid for.


Seems like good management to me ... where can I sign up?

Ah, no. They didn't take our money to pay for older retired folks. They took money from SS as loans to the gov't so they could use it to cover spending for the budget. Social Security is a wealth redistribution program only in that the gov't keeps using the collected funds for things other than the intended purpose.

https://www.cato.org/publications/comme ... l-security

[mdb1958]

And if the wealthy, who didnt even need it had the attitude of I paid it and I want it, well back then it would have been considered shameful.

[Zarniwoop]

This is an absolute must ... and reason number 5,987 you can trust any government official .... they took our money to help pay for older retired folks. They then gave that money away. Now they have to collect from our kids to pay for the older folks we already paid for.


Seems like good management to me ... where can I sign up?

Ah, no. They didn't take our money to pay for older retired folks. They took money from SS as loans to the gov't so they could use it to cover spending for the budget. Social Security is a wealth redistribution program only in that the gov't keeps using the collected funds for things other than the intended purpose.

https://www.cato.org/publications/comme ... l-security

Yes that’s what I was saying, I guess I was loose in my composition


It would read more precise if I said ... they told us they were taking our money to pay older folks, then they spent it on other things, now they will have to take money from our kids to pay the older folks we supposedly paid for

How anyone can think our hard earned money is in good hands in Washington is mind blowing to me.

[bucfanclw]

And if the wealthy, who didnt even need it had the attitude of I paid it and I want it, well back then it would have been considered shameful.

Back then it would have been shameful because people had morals. Now the wealthy have got the middle and lower classes fighting the battle on their behalf thanks to catch phrases like "class warfare" and "redistribution of wealth".

[Buc2]

No.

Of course you say no. You love the idea redistributing wealth by the government.

How is SS redistributing wealth when I'm the one that ****ing paid into the GD thing? It's my wealth to begin with.

[Zarniwoop]

Of course you say no. You love the idea redistributing wealth by the government.

How is SS redistributing wealth when I'm the one that ****ing paid into the GD thing? It's my wealth to begin with.

Anyone who makes a decent living will never receive nearly the benefits they put it....their money will go to people who didn't contribute as much

as such a good chunk of what you put it will be redistributed to others

[uscbucsfan]

With winners like


Commodity Futures Modernization Act
Community Reinvestment Act (specifically the re-writing of it)
Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act
Dodd-Frank Act
Affordable Care Act

and the great government practices/plans such as:

The War on Drugs
Marijuana in general
Government Bailout of the car manufacturers
Government's involvement in subsidizing companies to grow monopolies like the ISPs, telephone companies
Patriot Act
The deficit in general
The SS blunders we are discussing in this very thread

I don't see why anyone can argue that we have a small government, a pure free market society, and that you can trust big government with more responsibility with things like health care, more retirement money (or more of our money in general), or a UBI. These are things just off the top of my head.

MB, I think most of our conversation would serve a better place in the ideology thread, but we are at a big disconnect with our perspective of government size and intervention. I could provide an extensive list of things that I believe should either be handled at a state level or allow free movement within the markets. We don't agree, but I'd like to continue the conversation at some point. Unfortunately I'll be tied up the rest of the day.

[Buc2]

Give me back every single $ I've paid into SS since I began earning taxable paychecks (around 1974) and add in a reasonable rate of return (10% APR? 15%?) on my investment based on 44 years worth of contributions and I'll gladly take my money today and walk away from the SS system. Otherwise, I will join the huge class action lawsuit that will happen should government just do away with SS altogether. Many of us are too close to retirement to be able to make that money back at this point in their lives.

[Buc2]

How is SS redistributing wealth when I'm the one that ****ing paid into the GD thing? It's my wealth to begin with.

Anyone who makes a decent living will never receive nearly the benefits they put it....their money will go to people who didn't contribute as much

as such a good chunk of what you put it will be redistributed to others

I understand this.

[Zarniwoop]

Give me back every single $ I've paid into SS since I began earning taxable paychecks (around 1974) and add in a reasonable rate of return (10% APR? 15%?) on my investment based on 44 years worth of contributions and I'll gladly take my money today and walk away from the SS system. Otherwise, I will join the huge class action lawsuit that will happen should government just do away with SS altogether. Many of us are too close to retirement to be able to make that money back at this point in their lives.

it's not going away anytime soon

[Mountaineer Buc]

With winners like


Commodity Futures Modernization Act
Community Reinvestment Act (specifically the re-writing of it)
Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act
Dodd-Frank Act
Affordable Care Act

and the great government practices/plans such as:

The War on Drugs
Marijuana in general
Government Bailout of the car manufacturers
Government's involvement in subsidizing companies to grow monopolies like the ISPs, telephone companies
Patriot Act
The deficit in general
The SS blunders we are discussing in this very thread

I don't see why anyone can argue that we have a small government, a pure free market society, and that you can trust big government with more responsibility with things like health care, more retirement money (or more of our money in general), or a UBI. These are things just off the top of my head.

MB, I think most of our conversation would serve a better place in the ideology thread, but we are at a big disconnect with our perspective of government size and intervention. I could provide an extensive list of things that I believe should either be handled at a state level or allow free movement within the markets. We don't agree, but I'd like to continue the conversation at some point. Unfortunately I'll be tied up the rest of the day.

Agreed. No need to derail the discussion here.

[NYBF]

I agree that we shouldn’t blame mdb for the debt and the Social Security mess. He’s going to get more Social Security than most of us because he’s older than most of us.

Also, he's clearly mentally diminished.

[Deuce]

I agree that we shouldn’t blame mdb for the debt and the Social Security mess. He’s going to get more Social Security than most of us because he’s older than most of us. That’s just the way it is and some things will never change.

What they give you wont even pay the bills if you factor in property tax and insurance. Well maybe you can make a salami sandwich and watch NCIS reruns.

If you want to do more than look at the walls, you better plan for it.

You would think inflation and all that other stuff would give you more money but I doubt I get as much as my Dad did and I prolly paid in a little more. So what he got helped him much more than the lesser amount will help me.

Apparently mdb is no financial expert.