it kinda was that simple...and this is what Paul Ryan will fight for just to stay on track. http://www.econ.tcu.edu/quinn/crisis/De ... Crisis.pdf
Recent Economic Activity
A combination of economic factors over the early to mid-2000s led to Iceland’s
current economic and banking distress. In particular, access to easy credit, a boom in
domestic construction that fueled rapid economic growth, and a broad deregulation of
Iceland’s financial sector spurred the banks to expand rapidly abroad and eventually
played a role in the eventual financial collapse. Iceland benefitted from favorable global
financial conditions that reduced the cost of credit and a sweeping liberalization of its
domestic financial sector that spurred rapid growth and encouraged Iceland’s banks to
spread quickly throughout Europe.
In 2004, Iceland’s commercial banks increased their activity in the country’s
mortgage market by competing directly with the state-run Housing Financing Fund (HFF),
which had been the major provider of mortgage loans. In contrast to the Housing
Financing Fund, the commercial banks began offering loans with lower interest rates,
longer maturities, and a higher loan to value ratio. Also, the banks did not require a real
estate purchase as a precondition for a loan, which made it possible for homeowners to
refinance existing mortgages and to access the equity in their homes for consumption or
investment purposes. These measures spurred an expansion in credit and caused real
estate prices to soar. In addition, the improving economic conditions led to an expansion
in consumer spending which resulted in rising inflation and a larger trade deficit. As a
further stimulus to the economy, the Icelandic government reduced both direct and
indirect taxes, which provided further impetus to consumer spending.
You aren't trying to understand the point, clearly.
Government is inherently inefficient. Name one "efficient" government? Just one.
I'm not saying government can't get things right on occasion. I'm also not saying government serves no purpose. What I am saying is they government tends to get stuck in the mud when they stretch, and government always tries to stretch if unconstrained. So, my main point is the larger the government gets, the more inefficient it becomes. I'd point to the terms bureaucracy, red-tape, etc.
norway
the size of gov't should have nothing to do with efficiency ... size should be related to services ... if the gov't is responsible for many services - then it will naturally grow ... same thing if they decide to nationalize something like oil or the banking sector ...
Uh oh - here comes the "!??" nonsense again. Every time I read that I envision this guy slamming keys on his computer saying "oh really, eh...." all frustrated and whatnot. Might as well go all CAPS.
Well, I guess first we'd need to ensure we're looking at the correct numbers - which I don't think you are - you're probably looking at nominal. Most people would know you'd need to look at PPP. It's not perfect, but that's the only way to truly compare. If you do look at GDP per capita PPP - US is always in the top 10, regardless of who publishes the report. Smaller countries tend to dominate the top spots. These countries typically include - oil rich countries (Norway, Quatar, United Arab Emerits, Kuwait), tax havens (Luxembourg, Bermuda), and countries who lean free-market (Singapore, Hong Kong). But, US has the largest population by far of all the above. Yet, they're still in the top 10.
Not that I'm touting the US' horn. They used to be higher in these areas, and are falling fast.... as we move towards more big government.
... sorry - i forgot you had a thing against this ... i didn't know it was poor forum etiquette - i don't really see it being brought up anywhere ... but hey ... whatever ... i'll try to remember this when discussing things with you ...
Does anyone really believe that a program enacted in 1935 will really serve the people of today? It seems to me that changes to these types of programs should occur, hell, should be mandated after a period of time. Instead we scare the bejesus out of people so they don;t want anything to change. All we do is increase the age when you can start receiving it.
It's needed today for the same reason it was needed in 1935. When people are too old to work they need help. Before Social Security old people worked until they collapsed or starved or just killed themselves.
Also, SS has been modified several times since 1935, last done under Reagan to solve the budget at the time (bipartisan). This is when the SSNRA was pushed back to 67 for my generation. It needs further moderation, obviously, as the projections show. But it does not need an extreme makeover, just a couple of tweaks that wouldn't be all that bad for anyone (see my suggestions from before in this thread).
I think Grandma might want to find her own insurance especially if that means what doctor she can see.
Who's trying to dictate Grandma's doctor? More Right Wing scare tactics. Show me where Grandma's choice of doctor is restricted, if you will.
My grandma doesn't even know what day of the week it is. How the hell is she going to pick an insurance plan?
Spectrum 10/27/09; New Orleans JazzFest 5/1/10; Made in America 9/2/12; Phila, PA 10/21/13; Phila, PA 10/22/13; Baltimore Arena 10/27/13; Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22; Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
For all this talk of free handouts and people leeching off the system and paying nothing back i call bullshit. I'm the oldest of 8. When it was just my two sisters and myself my mother stayed at home with us and my dad got laid off from a Union job (yeah that shit is possible despite what republicans might have you believe). So we had nothing, my dad worked on a neighbors farm to keep paying off our mortgage and we went on welfare. He would bounce back and forth at the Union job, until the company decided to outsource its labor effectively destroying its local labor force. He eventually landed a non-union job 2 hours south in a more expensive area to live. By that point there were 6 kids and my 2 parents living in a 2 bedroom 1 bath rental, we were on WiC, got free and reduced lunches, (though my parents refused to stay on food stamps after he got his job my mom started daycare for teachers to make ends meet on the food front), and got reduction on tuition to college. Just to let you know how glorious this leaching felt, we would often wear hand-me-downs from other kids at our high school (or for my younger sibs from older sibs) so that everyone knew we were relatively poor. Did we let that hold us down? Fuck no. Did it really fucking suck not only knowing that other people had it much more comfortable but also that they knew we were poor? Yes.
Regardless, for the oldest 6, 4 of us went to community college, and went on to earn our 2 and 4 year degrees. The other two went straight to state school and graduated in 4 years. 3 of us have gone on to earn our Masters, and I have a PhD. None of this would have happened without those government handouts some of you are bitching about. Where would we be without it? I don't even want to know, but we are all able to provide things for our children that our parents (leaches to some of you here) couldn't provide to us financially - even though they tried their best. Did some people at the welfare and wic office take from the system and give nothing back? Probably, but the type of living someone in that situation is going through for "free" isn't some fucking paradise island. All I know is that without welfare I probably wouldn't be here and I'll be damed if I take that option away from another human being because it's not my problem to worry about.
a perfect example of right-wing scare tactics. That article was written by guys from The Motley Fool. They're a company that convinced people with little or no economic understanding that they could make a fortune on the stock market. They're kinda "pump and dumpers," if I understand... people who make money by convincing you that you're going to be broke at 60 if you don't buy their expensive service where they suggest which stocks you should buy.
The user Johnny Abruzzo here actually works with it every day and made a post that sums it up... the scare tactics you've fallen for are made up.
You need to stop being so gullible.
And you clueless tag of "keep raising taxes on the working class to cover it anyways right?" just shows that you weren't and aren't paying attention. We've been talking about lowering the tax burden on the middle class and making the mage-rich pay their fair share.
a perfect example of right-wing scare tactics. That article was written by guys from The Motley Fool. They're a company that convinced people with little or no economic understanding that they could make a fortune on the stock market. They're kinda "pump and dumpers," if I understand... people who make money by convincing you that you're going to be broke at 60 if you don't buy their expensive service where they suggest which stocks you should buy.
The user Johnny Abruzzo here actually works with it every day and made a post that sums it up... the scare tactics you've fallen for are made up.
You need to stop being so gullible.
And you clueless tag of "keep raising taxes on the working class to cover it anyways right?" just shows that you weren't and aren't paying attention. We've been talking about lowering the tax burden on the middle class and making the mage-rich pay their fair share.
Please try to keep up.
:P
I know what we are talking about ...
I am more inclined towards corporation receiving tax breaks
to help with unemployment issues.
This more so then lowering taxes on the middle class.
To continue to raise taxes on the working class though for years to come could be avoided by
just employing more people ...
and the govt doesn't have to pay unemployment benefits out either... win win.
And my unemployment insurance premium as an employer goes down. Less money
out of my pocket, more money to help business grow, helping the economy,
helping all people, providing more jobs.
As far as gullible there is two sides to every story.
I'm going with the one from the Budget Administration from last February.
It says more tax will be needed with less money benefits coming to those eligible.
Maybe I'm wrong but that sounds like a failure there to me.
For all this talk of free handouts and people leeching off the system and paying nothing back i call bullshit. I'm the oldest of 8. When it was just my two sisters and myself my mother stayed at home with us and my dad got laid off from a Union job (yeah that shit is possible despite what republicans might have you believe). So we had nothing, my dad worked on a neighbors farm to keep paying off our mortgage and we went on welfare. He would bounce back and forth at the Union job, until the company decided to outsource its labor effectively destroying its local labor force. He eventually landed a non-union job 2 hours south in a more expensive area to live. By that point there were 6 kids and my 2 parents living in a 2 bedroom 1 bath rental, we were on WiC, got free and reduced lunches, (though my parents refused to stay on food stamps after he got his job my mom started daycare for teachers to make ends meet on the food front), and got reduction on tuition to college. Just to let you know how glorious this leaching felt, we would often wear hand-me-downs from other kids at our high school (or for my younger sibs from older sibs) so that everyone knew we were relatively poor. Did we let that hold us down? Fuck no. Did it really fucking suck not only knowing that other people had it much more comfortable but also that they knew we were poor? Yes.
Regardless, for the oldest 6, 4 of us went to community college, and went on to earn our 2 and 4 year degrees. The other two went straight to state school and graduated in 4 years. 3 of us have gone on to earn our Masters, and I have a PhD. None of this would have happened without those government handouts some of you are bitching about. Where would we be without it? I don't even want to know, but we are all able to provide things for our children that our parents (leaches to some of you here) couldn't provide to us financially - even though they tried their best. Did some people at the welfare and wic office take from the system and give nothing back? Probably, but the type of living someone in that situation is going through for "free" isn't some fucking paradise island. All I know is that without welfare I probably wouldn't be here and I'll be damed if I take that option away from another human being because it's not my problem to worry about.
Wow. :thumbup:
also thanks to everyone and their parents and grandparents for paying taxes so that I could get through school with no financial burden...oh wait after all those handouts for my leach parents I still owed 72k in school loans. Some free handout leach I turned out to be.
the size of gov't should have nothing to do with efficiency ... size should be related to services ... if the gov't is responsible for many services - then it will naturally grow ... same thing if they decide to nationalize something like oil or the banking sector ...
Of course the size of a government has to do with efficiency, just like the size of a company would. Your latter point makes no sense. Like I said previously, government always grows unless there's constraints placed upon it.
... sorry - i forgot you had a thing against this ... i didn't know it was poor forum etiquette - i don't really see it being brought up anywhere ... but hey ... whatever ... i'll try to remember this when discussing things with you ...
Yeh, like I said, you were looking at the wrong one - nominal. You should probably look at the one that comes up 1st in google, not the other one that comes up 2nd that fits your story better. Look at this one:
glad you think tho that a list that has Qatar and UAE is the best to describe standard of living ... just must suck if you are a gay woman tho ...
The truth is the truth. They are very wealthy places, whether you like it or not. I know they are oil producers and muslim - which you seemingly don't like and I know they don't fit your vision of what the world should be like, but that holds absolutely no water in our discussion. That's kinda the point. They are oil producers/exporters - just like your beloved Norway.
Does anyone really believe that a program enacted in 1935 will really serve the people of today? It seems to me that changes to these types of programs should occur, hell, should be mandated after a period of time. Instead we scare the bejesus out of people so they don;t want anything to change. All we do is increase the age when you can start receiving it.
It's needed today for the same reason it was needed in 1935. When people are too old to work they need help. Before Social Security old people worked until they collapsed or starved or just killed themselves.
Also, SS has been modified several times since 1935, last done under Reagan to solve the budget at the time (bipartisan). This is when the SSNRA was pushed back to 67 for my generation. It needs further moderation, obviously, as the projections show. But it does not need an extreme makeover, just a couple of tweaks that wouldn't be all that bad for anyone (see my suggestions from before in this thread).
As you know Soc Security covers people of all ages not just our elderly.
I wonder what the stats are on that?
Maybe you could help her...
I know a lot about SS. The disability program has annoying idiosyncrasies; we both seem to know people getting it who really don't deserve it. But in general SS disability is known to have relatively strict criteria. Some pension plans even have provisions giving employees higher benefits if they are considered disabled under the employer plan but NOT under Social Security. That said, I would be interested in hearing suggestions for reforming it.
Obviously I would try to help her if this came to pass (although even Ryan exempts those currently over 55 from his voucher program).
Spectrum 10/27/09; New Orleans JazzFest 5/1/10; Made in America 9/2/12; Phila, PA 10/21/13; Phila, PA 10/22/13; Baltimore Arena 10/27/13; Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22; Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
Edwards got 64%. Cheney got 55%. Maybe we shouldn't trust our first instincts too much.
Still that is not a good sign for Willard.
Spectrum 10/27/09; New Orleans JazzFest 5/1/10; Made in America 9/2/12; Phila, PA 10/21/13; Phila, PA 10/22/13; Baltimore Arena 10/27/13; Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22; Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
The word handouts is a joke. There are millions of kids in this country who don't have a chance at a normal life, not a fucking chance. No shot at a normal education, no shot at a normal job, no shot at anything that resembles a normal life. How people don't think we should do anything we can to support these kids and try to give them at least somewhat of a chance, boggles my mind. What's an extra $10 bucks out of my paycheck. One less beer at a concert or sporting event, if that.
My family’s foundation (that I am a board member of) gives money to in need libraries. Libraries that support kids in terrible situations and teach them the importance of reading. Applications in the past year have increased 400% and the situations in these communities is depressing. 95% on the free lunch programs (that’s a handout, right? might as well take that away make these little dark kids starve to death, then there will be less handouts), well over 85% of parents don't speak english or have an high school diploma. These kids don't have a chance.
How anyone can not think that the inequality in this country is a sick thing and not want to fix it, whether it means giving something up or not, absolutely boggles my mind and I honestly think that anyone that can look at the situation in our inner cities and think these kids don't deserve some help is a bigot.
Wealthy white people not wanting to help this country depresses me. We live in the greatest country in the world according to many, yet there are millions of kids who won't eat lunch today while people who are bitching about taxes have filet and scotch at lunch.
it kinda was that simple...and this is what Paul Ryan will fight for just to stay on track. http://www.econ.tcu.edu/quinn/crisis/De ... Crisis.pdf
Recent Economic Activity
A combination of economic factors over the early to mid-2000s led to Iceland’s
current economic and banking distress. In particular, access to easy credit, a boom in
domestic construction that fueled rapid economic growth, and a broad deregulation of
Iceland’s financial sector spurred the banks to expand rapidly abroad and eventually
played a role in the eventual financial collapse. Iceland benefitted from favorable global
financial conditions that reduced the cost of credit and a sweeping liberalization of its
domestic financial sector that spurred rapid growth and encouraged Iceland’s banks to
spread quickly throughout Europe.
In 2004, Iceland’s commercial banks increased their activity in the country’s
mortgage market by competing directly with the state-run Housing Financing Fund (HFF),
which had been the major provider of mortgage loans. In contrast to the Housing
Financing Fund, the commercial banks began offering loans with lower interest rates,
longer maturities, and a higher loan to value ratio. Also, the banks did not require a real
estate purchase as a precondition for a loan, which made it possible for homeowners to
refinance existing mortgages and to access the equity in their homes for consumption or
investment purposes. These measures spurred an expansion in credit and caused real
estate prices to soar. In addition, the improving economic conditions led to an expansion
in consumer spending which resulted in rising inflation and a larger trade deficit. As a
further stimulus to the economy, the Icelandic government reduced both direct and
indirect taxes, which provided further impetus to consumer spending.
the central bank in Iceland was a joke.
By mid-decade 90 percent of Icelandic households had government loans
so if mortgage debt's were the problem...and the gov't had 90% of them...yep...it must have been all the free market's fault.
stupid deregulation forcing the gov't to give out those loans...
why blame the free market and not crony capitalism...which is what it was?
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
Mitt Romney didn't just pick a running mate. He decided to undergo a brand transplant.
By tapping Paul Ryan, the high-profile mastermind of the House GOP's economic agenda, Romney appeared to concede that weeks of punishing attacks by the Obama campaign had done serious damage to his own brand. Far from the image he'd hoped to project to general election voters – of a competent business whiz hungry to work his turnaround magic on the American economy – Romney's been tagged instead by Team Obama as a job-killing outsourcing pioneer and as a tax cheat with who knows what to hide.
The Ryan pick represents a bold effort by Team Romney to hit the reset button, to forge a new impression with the electorate by transforming the endlessly malleable Romney into the pitchman for the Ryan brand. It's a risky move, with five fatal flaws that could cost Romney the election:
1) Who's the Boss?
Romney is the most awkward GOP nominee since George H.W. Bush. Ideally, he ought to have picked a dutiful, competent running-mate who wouldn't risk upstaging him. But Romney – like McCain before him – felt he needed a game changer. So he went with Ryan, a man who electrifies the party base farthan he ever could. At the ceremony where he introduced Ryan, Romney looked less like he was introducing his new side kick, and more like he was passing the torch to the party's replacement nominee – an impression Romney gaffetastically reinforced by lauding Ryan as "the next president of the United States!"
2) All Right, Right Now!?
For all the talk of Etch-a-Sketching a more centrist Romney for the general election, the Ryan pick actually drags Romney farther to the right than he was willing to venture during the primary, when he refused to go the Full Ryan. In winning the nomination, Romney left significant daylight between his own, pragmatic brand of free-market conservatism and the heartless, New-Deal rollback championed his radical future runningmate and the radically unpopular GOP-run House. Over the weekend, that daylight vanished. The Ryan Budget has become Romney's de-facto platform – and possibly his electoral albatross.
3) Don't Tax Me, Bro
Romney has been twisting in the wind over his tax returns. But the Ryan pick doesn't change the subject, it just raises more difficult questions. Like: "Governor Romney, do you really think you deserve to pay nothing in taxes?"
The Ryan plan, unlike the proposals that Romney put forward in the primaries, would zero out taxes on capital gains and dividends, the vast bulk of Romney's earnings. Now, Harry Reid may have been full of shit when he gossiped about Romney not paying taxes for 10 years; but if the Ryan plan were to pass – and top Romney adviser Ed Gillespie insisted Sunday that "of course" it would be law by now had Romney been president – Mitt would pay nothing in taxes going forward.
Don't take my word for it: Check out this exchange between Newt Gingrich and Romney during a GOP debate in Tampa, where Mitt zinged Gingrich's tax plan for its treatment of investment income:
ROMNEY: Mr. Speaker, is the tax on capital gains also 15 percent or is it zero?
GINGRICH: Zero.
ROMNEY: Well, under that – under that plan, I'd have paid no taxes in the last two years.
4) It's the Medicare, Stupid
Romney wanted this campaign to be a referendum on President Obama's handling of the economy. The Ryan pick makes this solidly a choice election – about Medicare. And that's not a showdown Romney is going to win if the Ryan plan gets a fair vetting.
Medicare recipients under the Ryan plan "would bear a much larger share of their health care costs than they would under the current program," according to the Congressional Budget Office. That's because Ryan privatizes medical insurance for the elderly, sending future seniors out into the individual market with a voucher that covers what the government now pays for each senior's Medicare.
Ryan hits the elderly two ways. First: The same money buys far less in the individual market than it does with government acting as the single payer. Right off the bat, seniors will be forced to pay more for the same coverage, with insurers reaping the windfall profit. Second: The voucher isn't pegged to healthcare inflation, which rages far above regular inflation. The voucher system would neatly cap the cost to Uncle Sam, but it would shift those spiraling costs onto seniors living on fixed incomes.
Ryan's cost shifting starts out painful – doubling the out-of-pocket costs for a 65-year-old in 2022 – but becomes absurdly draconian in the out years. In 2050, according to an analysis by the Center for Economic and Policy Research, an 85-year-old would have to spend more than $50,000 over and above their voucher to afford a policy as decent as present-day Medicare.
5) Even Reagan Republicans Call Ryan's Approach "Class Warfare"
Privatizing Medicare gets all of the attention, but it's far from the craziest thing in the Ryan budget. Just take a look at Ryan's spending cuts. Federal discretionary spending – excluding Social Security and health-care entitlements, but including defense – now stands at 12 percent of GDP. The Ryan plan would cut this spending in half by 2022 and nearly in half again by 2050, until it hits just 3.5 percent.
The CBO notes of the Ryan’s budget that "no proposals were specified that would generate that path." That’s because the Ryan budget is a fantasy document. Discretionary federal spending has exceeded 8 percent of GDP in every year since World War II. To reach the Ryan target, Romney – who has called for a massive increase in defense spending – would have to savage programs like college loans, food stamps, and low-income housing to pay for a new round of tax cuts for the wealthiest.
Take it from David Stockman, Ronald Reagan's former budget director, whom I interviewed last year: "Ryan takes out the ax and goes after the very small part of the budget that’s either discretionary spending or means-tested programs for the poor – which is the last thing you ought to cut, not the first thing," Stockman said. "That just doesn’t make any sense. It can’t work. And it simply exacerbates class warfare within the fiscal debate."
The trouble with rebranding Romney as Ryan isn't that it's a bold step for the campaign. It's that it's out of line with the American electorate.
But at least the Koch brothers appear happy with the choice. Their dark-money group, Americans For Prosperity, announced a $27 million ad buy on Ryan's signature issue, the debt, four days before Romney announced his running mate to the general public.
how does capitalism work if people spend within their means?
fine
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
I think the whole Medicare debate goes out the window now that I've learned Obama has implemented $700B in Medicare cuts over the next ten years.
i believe these so called cuts are freezes to growth programs in the future ... not out of the current budget ...
yeah, I thought it was a shifting of some dollars, but not actual program or benefit cuts.
but that is what all "cuts" are in government. they are promises to not increase spending quite so much in the future.
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
I think the whole Medicare debate goes out the window now that I've learned Obama has implemented $700B in Medicare cuts over the next ten years.
i believe these so called cuts are freezes to growth programs in the future ... not out of the current budget ...
Medicare is, indeed, headed for financial ruin (unlike SS). Something has to be done about it. But turning it into a voucher program is not a humane way to do it.
The Obamacare Medicare cuts are intended to make the program more efficient. We'll see if it works out.
Spectrum 10/27/09; New Orleans JazzFest 5/1/10; Made in America 9/2/12; Phila, PA 10/21/13; Phila, PA 10/22/13; Baltimore Arena 10/27/13; Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22; Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
yeah, I thought it was a shifting of some dollars, but not actual program or benefit cuts.
but that is what all "cuts" are in government. they are promises to not increase spending quite so much in the future.
so ryan's cuts are all related to future spending and that actual dollars will still stay the same?
Ryan doesn't change anything for those who are over 55 (within 10 years of Medicare eligibility). No cuts until ten years from now.
Spectrum 10/27/09; New Orleans JazzFest 5/1/10; Made in America 9/2/12; Phila, PA 10/21/13; Phila, PA 10/22/13; Baltimore Arena 10/27/13; Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22; Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
Whether you agree with Ryan's budget plan or not ... at least he actually put together a budget plan. How many of our 533 elected officials can make such a claim?
The GOP can't attack Obama's specific budget plan because it doesn't exist. Savvy move by Obama.
Comments
http://www.econ.tcu.edu/quinn/crisis/De ... Crisis.pdf
Recent Economic Activity
A combination of economic factors over the early to mid-2000s led to Iceland’s
current economic and banking distress. In particular, access to easy credit, a boom in
domestic construction that fueled rapid economic growth, and a broad deregulation of
Iceland’s financial sector spurred the banks to expand rapidly abroad and eventually
played a role in the eventual financial collapse. Iceland benefitted from favorable global
financial conditions that reduced the cost of credit and a sweeping liberalization of its
domestic financial sector that spurred rapid growth and encouraged Iceland’s banks to
spread quickly throughout Europe.
In 2004, Iceland’s commercial banks increased their activity in the country’s
mortgage market by competing directly with the state-run Housing Financing Fund (HFF),
which had been the major provider of mortgage loans. In contrast to the Housing
Financing Fund, the commercial banks began offering loans with lower interest rates,
longer maturities, and a higher loan to value ratio. Also, the banks did not require a real
estate purchase as a precondition for a loan, which made it possible for homeowners to
refinance existing mortgages and to access the equity in their homes for consumption or
investment purposes. These measures spurred an expansion in credit and caused real
estate prices to soar. In addition, the improving economic conditions led to an expansion
in consumer spending which resulted in rising inflation and a larger trade deficit. As a
further stimulus to the economy, the Icelandic government reduced both direct and
indirect taxes, which provided further impetus to consumer spending.
norway
the size of gov't should have nothing to do with efficiency ... size should be related to services ... if the gov't is responsible for many services - then it will naturally grow ... same thing if they decide to nationalize something like oil or the banking sector ...
this is the list i looked at ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... per_capita
glad you think tho that a list that has Qatar and UAE is the best to describe standard of living ... just must suck if you are a gay woman tho ...
It's needed today for the same reason it was needed in 1935. When people are too old to work they need help. Before Social Security old people worked until they collapsed or starved or just killed themselves.
Also, SS has been modified several times since 1935, last done under Reagan to solve the budget at the time (bipartisan). This is when the SSNRA was pushed back to 67 for my generation. It needs further moderation, obviously, as the projections show. But it does not need an extreme makeover, just a couple of tweaks that wouldn't be all that bad for anyone (see my suggestions from before in this thread).
Who's trying to dictate Grandma's doctor? More Right Wing scare tactics. Show me where Grandma's choice of doctor is restricted, if you will.
My grandma doesn't even know what day of the week it is. How the hell is she going to pick an insurance plan?
Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22;
Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
Wow. :thumbup:
edit:
Oops. I forgot you were Canadian! :oops: Judge away! :thumbup:
I know what we are talking about ...
I am more inclined towards corporation receiving tax breaks
to help with unemployment issues.
This more so then lowering taxes on the middle class.
To continue to raise taxes on the working class though for years to come could be avoided by
just employing more people ...
and the govt doesn't have to pay unemployment benefits out either... win win.
And my unemployment insurance premium as an employer goes down. Less money
out of my pocket, more money to help business grow, helping the economy,
helping all people, providing more jobs.
As far as gullible there is two sides to every story.
I'm going with the one from the Budget Administration from last February.
It says more tax will be needed with less money benefits coming to those eligible.
Maybe I'm wrong but that sounds like a failure there to me.
Ha ha ha... they are the third highest oil exporter on earth. lol. Aren't you all against that stuff? Kinda seem hypocritical, eh?
Of course the size of a government has to do with efficiency, just like the size of a company would. Your latter point makes no sense. Like I said previously, government always grows unless there's constraints placed upon it.
Yeh, like I said, you were looking at the wrong one - nominal. You should probably look at the one that comes up 1st in google, not the other one that comes up 2nd that fits your story better. Look at this one:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... per_capita
The truth is the truth. They are very wealthy places, whether you like it or not. I know they are oil producers and muslim - which you seemingly don't like and I know they don't fit your vision of what the world should be like, but that holds absolutely no water in our discussion. That's kinda the point. They are oil producers/exporters - just like your beloved Norway.
<object height="81" width="100%"> <param name="movie" value="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869"></param> <param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param> <embed allowscriptaccess="always" height="81" src="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%"></embed> </object> <span><a href=" - In the Fire (demo)</a> by <a href="
As you know Soc Security covers people of all ages not just our elderly.
I wonder what the stats are on that?
Maybe you could help her...
http://www.businessinsider.com/paul-ryan-vp-poll-vice-president-dan-quayle-romney-gallup-2012-8
So he has that going for him ... :think:
I know a lot about SS. The disability program has annoying idiosyncrasies; we both seem to know people getting it who really don't deserve it. But in general SS disability is known to have relatively strict criteria. Some pension plans even have provisions giving employees higher benefits if they are considered disabled under the employer plan but NOT under Social Security. That said, I would be interested in hearing suggestions for reforming it.
Obviously I would try to help her if this came to pass (although even Ryan exempts those currently over 55 from his voucher program).
Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22;
Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
Edwards got 64%. Cheney got 55%. Maybe we shouldn't trust our first instincts too much.
Still that is not a good sign for Willard.
Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22;
Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
Great post. :thumbup:
Hmm I guess they'ed have to keep working as many seniors are doing right now.
Teach 'em young how to manage money and live within means. Save for retirement.
the central bank in Iceland was a joke.
By mid-decade 90 percent of Icelandic households had government loans
so if mortgage debt's were the problem...and the gov't had 90% of them...yep...it must have been all the free market's fault.
stupid deregulation forcing the gov't to give out those loans...
http://reason.com/archives/2011/10/27/i ... anks-finds
why blame the free market and not crony capitalism...which is what it was?
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
fine
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
To borrow from mikepeg44...
That dude hates old people and autistic kids.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-06-2 ... niors.html
i believe these so called cuts are freezes to growth programs in the future ... not out of the current budget ...
yeah, I thought it was a shifting of some dollars, but not actual program or benefit cuts.
but that is what all "cuts" are in government. they are promises to not increase spending quite so much in the future.
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
Medicare is, indeed, headed for financial ruin (unlike SS). Something has to be done about it. But turning it into a voucher program is not a humane way to do it.
The Obamacare Medicare cuts are intended to make the program more efficient. We'll see if it works out.
Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22;
Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
so ryan's cuts are all related to future spending and that actual dollars will still stay the same?
Ryan doesn't change anything for those who are over 55 (within 10 years of Medicare eligibility). No cuts until ten years from now.
Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22;
Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
The GOP can't attack Obama's specific budget plan because it doesn't exist. Savvy move by Obama.