Re: just politics

This really isn't the place however I read your email and as I've already posted this once here it is again, you left out an important part of why Social Security is failing. It started in 1965 when President Johnson moved the Social Security money and payments to it from the Trust Fund to the General Fund where they would have additional congressional revenue to pay for the government and what they were already spending. Both the Democrats and the Republican's have been pointing at each other for years saying it was the other ones fault for the crises and telling the people that they are the heroes saving Social Security each time they put money into the account. This is all documented and available for public reading however you will not find it in the official Social Security History online nor will you hear anyone in Congress or the Senate talk about it. We can keep putting money into it however they will continue to help pay for the Iraq and Afghanistan war just like they did for the Viet Nam war.

If you haven't figured it out I'm registered as Non-Affiliated, I think there are people on the Democrats (lot's of rich folk there too) as well as the Republican's who are good and will try to do the right thing then there are those that are like a lot of people, out for themselves and try to cover up their never ending fund (which will go away eventually). Those that are elected are all people, just like we are all people. Here some play country, some are into Jazz, others rock and we can go on however playing music is the main idea on what we do here. There they are politicians, they have a better health plan, a better retirement, and better working hours, and again we can go on. This is for all politicians no just on party. Remember, Regan was a Democrat and couldn't get a bid for the Presidency so he switch sides. Oh yes, he was already rich when he was the Democratic Governor of California.

I already said more than I usually do as politics can be a hotbed for everyone... now I'm going back to what I hope would be discussions on anything bass.

"The Bishop" <Convery.Kevin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:85aa2b44-f6a5-4724-93f2-b325404567ee@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Nov 20, 10:41 am, pTooner <geddi...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Monkey Pi wrote:
> pTooner wrote:
>> Which reminds me of a quote that goes "Poor people have been voting
>> democratic for 50 years and they are still poor. Hmmmm"

>> Gerry

> Have you taken a look at the map of how the red voting followed the
> Appalachian mountains this month? Ever looked at a breakdown of which
> states give the most in taxes and which take the most in benefits?
> I think you're laboring under the falsehood that most poor in America
> are what you'd codeword "Urban". I believe that most of the poor are out
> in what you'd codeword "Real America". Those folks vote as red as what
> their hair ain't long enough to cover.

> Monkey Pi

Well, first off I don't use "codewords" at all. However, from an income
standpoint you can live pretty good in Appalachia on income that
wouldn't even pay your rent in Detroit. That's one of the problems with
setting poverty levels. An engineer friend a few years back was offered
a job in NYC at a pay increase of about 50%. She did the math including
checking local tax rates and apartment rentals and discovered she was
looking at a pay cut.

Oh, and lastly, it was just an anecdote and I didn't originate it.
However the Dems always claim that Republicans are rich people.
Gerry- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

In case you actually need it explained, which I suspect you don't, 10%
of Republicans are rich and know what the party is really up to. 90%
are poor-to-middling, poorly educated or else they didn't pay
attention or take any Poli Sci, either way, dumb as a stump, just the
way the 10% likes them. The 10% gets the 90% all riled up with God,
gays, and guns, then spend four years twisting the knife they've stuck
in the back of the working classes, fighting against racial and gender
equality, etc. About six months before the election, gas prices
mysteriously come down (just like they did this summer, gee!), and the
cycle begins again.

When pressed for specifics, they rely on absurdly twisted versions of
actual situations, like "Social Security is going bankrupt. We have to
let old people and orphans starve to save the country!" This from the
very people who will hire a PR firm for millions to smear you if you
make a squeak about removing the cap, which would make everything just
fine for the foseeable future. More rich people not content with MOST
of the money; they want it all. Nickel-and-diming the old and the sick
for a change in their bank balance they couldn't possibly feel. Oh,
and 1/3 of all Social Security benefits go to disability and payments
to orphans--how does the aging-population argument apply to them?

Another of their favorites is "Lowering taxes INCREASES government
revenues and creates jobs, STUPID!" Of course, that relies on the jobs
being created where the workers might pay some US income tax, but as
"Barry" from Bangalore can tell you, that ain't where the jobs are
being created. They leave that part out, the righties do.

But the worst is when they get people who will never be rich to argue
their ersatz talking points for them. These are the people who think
that if they're cagey, and keep their eyes open, and act all
entrepreneur-esque, they'll day-trade their way to a fortune. In fact,
W damn near sold us all on putting ALL of our retirement money in the
stock market. How would that be working out, if your 65th birthday
were today? What did that Dow Jones finish at yesterday?

Do you know that under national health care, the doctor is king, and
there is never, ever a bean-counter deciding that chemotherapy is
experimental, or they never heard of a "Trans-plant"? They'll never
tell you it's too expensive, that it doesn't have a 75% chance or
better of working, so they won't pay, etc. Everyone on Medicare enjoys
this right now. Think of the economy of scale if the whole country
were on one insurance plan. (Economy of scale and pooling of risk is
the basis for ALL insurance plans—which is what Social Security is.)
We can already see the difference in employee share of premiums at
bigger companies--they're significantly lower. Multiply by 340
million. And don't bother with the S word--single-payer is not
socialized medicine. That's another big lie they've been peddling
since 1993. It's precisely BECAUSE MRIs, etc. are so expensive that we
can't burden employers with the expense and paperwork anymore. Europe
doesn't, and their companies are eating our market share for
breakfast. And lending us money at the same time. Also, by not tying
doctor privileges to employment, we encourage entrepreneurship, since
if I want to quit my day job and develop something new, I won't be
taking my health in my hands.

This can all be summed up in one sentence: There is no Social Security
crisis. A small adjustment may be necessary some time between now and
2043. That's not a crisis. It wasn't considered a crisis in the 1980s,
when the last adjustment took place. It was considered housekeeping.
The reason the "crisis" balloon is being floated is as a stalking
horse for scrapping Social Security altogether. It's been repeatedly
debunked, and Republican't willingness to repeat exposed lies doesn't
change anything.

You just can't trust the very rich to set public policy. Of COURSE
Bill Frist is opposed to national health care—his family owns HMOs! OF
COURSE Paulsen wants $750 billion for his banker buddies but not a
penny for people who manufacture things--all his friends are still at
his old job at Goldman Sachs, and besides, if you let the Big Three go
under, you get to break a large union as a door prize! Of COURSE
people in the financial industry--who would have earned a king's
ransom in fees and commissions every year if Social Security
privatization went through--want you to think it's collapsing! And
they're praying to their black Amexes you don't find out about the
really blatant conflict of interest. In fact, given the revolving-door
boardroom-to-government-and-back dance that's still going on, and the
interlocking directorates, I think no one with a net worth of more
than $10 million should be able to hold office or run an exchange.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT: Youth In Asia
    ... by the rich, when in fact, your liberal heroes have only ... earners pay for 90% of all income taxes. ... I'm all for much harsher laws regarding white collar crime. ... The same one that loses money every year on the post office, ...
    (rec.music.beatles)
  • Re: just politics
    ... I think you're laboring under the falsehood that most poor in America ... a job in NYC at a pay increase of about 50%. ... However the Dems always claim that Republicans are rich people. ... like "Social Security is going bankrupt. ...
    (alt.guitar.bass)
  • Re: just politics
    ... I think you're laboring under the falsehood that most poor in America ... a job in NYC at a pay increase of about 50%. ... However the Dems always claim that Republicans are rich people. ... like "Social Security is going bankrupt. ...
    (alt.guitar.bass)
  • Re: just politics
    ... I think you're laboring under the falsehood that most poor in America ... a job in NYC at a pay increase of about 50%. ... However the Dems always claim that Republicans are rich people. ... like "Social Security is going bankrupt. ...
    (alt.guitar.bass)
  • Re: just politics
    ... I think you're laboring under the falsehood that most poor in America ... a job in NYC at a pay increase of about 50%. ... However the Dems always claim that Republicans are rich people. ... like "Social Security is going bankrupt. ...
    (alt.guitar.bass)