Liberals, Democrats ...and Entitlement Oh My!

Seems the Liberals and Democrats still think that hard working, dedicated American think that everyone should get entitlements out of working public wages.

Entitlement vs Budget Cuts ? What it going to be?
Entitlement vs Low Taxes ? You make the call?
Entitlement vs Balance Budget ? Which one is more important?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/04/26/liberals-try-rekindle-town-hall-fury-inflamed-health-care-debate/

I love the "Editorial" article by fair and balanced Fox News.
But, anyways, last I saw, many, most people still like their entitlements, not just liberals. Maybe I missed that.

It is a tough sell, one that so far the R's haven't made yet to the public. They are going to have to get into to the wonky details in order to sway the public. I'm for entitlement cuts, but that's just me, young and 26. It is a tougher sell for most Americans.

Hmmm.

I don't have a problem with entitlements (whatever they might be) just for the sake of having a problem with them, I guess.
The problems I have are:
- what areas
- how much
- who decides
- affordability
- time limits
- stackability issues
All of those issues have HUGE and drastic problems within. I don't think that there's a way to correct the problem. That is to say, that nobody wants to or else they would have. Those that do try to make the effort are summarily crucified, villified and essentially mummified.

Yeah, it isn't that what we call "entitlements" are bad, it's just that we need to figure out how to best provide the ones we want to provide without sacrificing our financial stability. I really don't think I've seen a good plan on this.

Very big and complex issue that I'd be shocked if we take care of properly anytime soon.

Saw the other day where the OECD (?) predicts China's economy will be larger than the US by 2015 (they are adjusting for China devaluing its currency, where other less optimistic forecasts don't adjust for that). Broad implications, perhaps, for at least a second reserve currency emerging (at best, for the US). Although I think it will take more than just being the largest economy to unseat the dollar as the global reserve currency, but the US certainly isn't helping by continuing to pile on debt.

I've never been a huge proponent of protecting jobs or keeping mfring in the US, but it is interesting that pretty much the only economies doing well these days are emerging economies that are still mostly mfring based and economies heavily geared toward commodities. As much as we bash the US debt, most developed countries are struggling with similar issues.

I also think the old economic models are a bit dated in a global economy. You can't really export services, other than financial services (and plenty of competition to Wall Street around the world now). So most developed economies that have moved more toward service are going to be net importers. So producers are the ones with "healthy" balance sheets, but those jobs are typically lower paying and are lower on the food chain. What is really happening with producer countries is they are providing a form of "seller financing" to the importing countries. The picture gets cloudier still when you realize that much of this is still driven by multinational corporations headquartered in developed nations. Sort of like GE paying lower wages around the globe to produce while the higher paying jobs are here at corporate in the US.

But that's a different debate than the federal debt. At the end of the day, IWearPants is spot-on: the issues is what entitlements we want to provide and what we can afford. The harsh reality you don't hear discussed much is as your work force ages you get a dip in consumption (people spend less in retirement on fixed incomes) and you're also producing less due to a smaller workforce. Double--whammy and you economic growth slows to a crawl. This isn't just the US - Japan is facing this as is much of Western Europe. And the fundamental flaw in the federal budget is entitlements are mostly pay-as-you-go, and as people retire those entitlements grow but, as mentioned, you're economic growth isn't nearly keeping pace. ALL taxes are a drag on the economy - there is no method of taxation that can magically create a surplus just by increasing taxes in certain areas.

ptown_trojans_1;750936 wrote:I'm for entitlement cuts, but that's just me, young and 26. It is a tougher sell for most Americans.

When politicians create "entitlements" I'm of the opinion that you can always go forward but you can never go back. As a conservative this is precisely why I'm opposed to government-run public assistance programs. Once those programs are in place it is nearly impossible to make them or some variation of them go away.

I'm twice your age, ptown. You are correct that it would be a tough sell to my age group.

I've had heated discussions before with regard to Social Security for example. I don't really view SS as an "entitlement" program other than the fact that the Feds mandated that I participate through forced FICA deductions in their "retirement" program. The way I see it whether my money was going into a 401K of my choice or into Social Security by federal mandate that money is MY money. So if SS is an "entitlement" program I'm at least entitled to get back all of my money that was confiscated plus a reasonable interest rate on my contributions compounded over the past 40 years.

So - yes - it's going to be a tough sell.

I'm of the opinion that reform and reductions in entitlements is going to have to be a slow, painful and graduated weening period that will take decades to correct. Immediate draconian cuts will do serious political, social, and financial damage across-the-board.

believer;751294 wrote:When politicians create "entitlements" I'm of the opinion that you can always go forward but you can never go back. As a conservative this is precisely why I'm opposed to government-run public assistance programs. Once those programs are in place it is nearly impossible to make them or some variation of them go away.

I'm twice your age, ptown. You are correct that it would be a tough sell to my age group.

I've had heated discussions before with regard to Social Security for example. I don't really view SS as an "entitlement" program other than the fact that the Feds mandated that I participate through forced FICA deductions in their "retirement" program. The way I see it whether my money was going into a 401K of my choice or into Social Security by federal mandate that money is MY money. So if SS is an "entitlement" program I'm at least entitled to get back all of my money that was confiscated plus a reasonable interest rate on my contributions compounded over the past 40 years.

So - yes - it's going to be a tough sell.

I'm of the opinion that reform and reductions in entitlements is going to have to be a slow, painful and graduated weening period that will take decades to correct. Immediate draconian cuts will do serious political, social, and financial damage across-the-board.

Wow....



This... ( this felt really awkward)

belly,
Maybe you should open your eyes a little to the corporations who are playing the system and getting entitlements from our tax dollars and putting money into their pockets. Take a look at this.

http://www.policymattersohio.org/pdf/ShabbyBenefits2011_04.pdf

gut;751252 wrote:Saw the other day where the OECD (?) predicts China's economy will be larger than the US by 2015 (they are adjusting for China devaluing its currency, where other less optimistic forecasts don't adjust for that). Broad implications, perhaps, for at least a second reserve currency emerging (at best, for the US). Although I think it will take more than just being the largest economy to unseat the dollar as the global reserve currency, but the US certainly isn't helping by continuing to pile on debt.

I've never been a huge proponent of protecting jobs or keeping mfring in the US, but it is interesting that pretty much the only economies doing well these days are emerging economies that are still mostly mfring based and economies heavily geared toward commodities. As much as we bash the US debt, most developed countries are struggling with similar issues.

I also think the old economic models are a bit dated in a global economy. You can't really export services, other than financial services (and plenty of competition to Wall Street around the world now). So most developed economies that have moved more toward service are going to be net importers. So producers are the ones with "healthy" balance sheets, but those jobs are typically lower paying and are lower on the food chain. What is really happening with producer countries is they are providing a form of "seller financing" to the importing countries. The picture gets cloudier still when you realize that much of this is still driven by multinational corporations headquartered in developed nations. Sort of like GE paying lower wages around the globe to produce while the higher paying jobs are here at corporate in the US.

But that's a different debate than the federal debt. At the end of the day, IWearPants is spot-on: the issues is what entitlements we want to provide and what we can afford. The harsh reality you don't hear discussed much is as your work force ages you get a dip in consumption (people spend less in retirement on fixed incomes) and you're also producing less due to a smaller workforce. Double--whammy and you economic growth slows to a crawl. This isn't just the US - Japan is facing this as is much of Western Europe. And the fundamental flaw in the federal budget is entitlements are mostly pay-as-you-go, and as people retire those entitlements grow but, as mentioned, you're economic growth isn't nearly keeping pace. ALL taxes are a drag on the economy - there is no method of taxation that can magically create a surplus just by increasing taxes in certain areas.

YES!

believer;751294 wrote:When politicians create "entitlements" I'm of the opinion that you can always go forward but you can never go back. As a conservative this is precisely why I'm opposed to government-run public assistance programs. Once those programs are in place it is nearly impossible to make them or some variation of them go away.

I'm twice your age, ptown. You are correct that it would be a tough sell to my age group.

I've had heated discussions before with regard to Social Security for example. I don't really view SS as an "entitlement" program other than the fact that the Feds mandated that I participate through forced FICA deductions in their "retirement" program. The way I see it whether my money was going into a 401K of my choice or into Social Security by federal mandate that money is MY money. So if SS is an "entitlement" program I'm at least entitled to get back all of my money that was confiscated plus a reasonable interest rate on my contributions compounded over the past 40 years.

So - yes - it's going to be a tough sell.

I'm of the opinion that reform and reductions in entitlements is going to have to be a slow, painful and graduated weening period that will take decades to correct. Immediate draconian cuts will do serious political, social, and financial damage across-the-board.

YES!! YES!! I'll bet that made you spit up your coffee, huh? I agree with your entire post. Another sign that the apocalypse is nigh.

Bigdogg;751376 wrote:belly,
Maybe you should open your eyes a little to the corporations who are playing the system and getting entitlements from our tax dollars and putting money into their pockets. Take a look at this.

http://www.policymattersohio.org/pdf/ShabbyBenefits2011_04.pdf

Looks like the Bob Evans employees need to (In the famous words of the Documented Community Organizer…. “Sacrifice more&#8221 more air in the tires, one less tattoo, pay less Union dues, live within the means, live with a budget, higher education, no more babies, less taxes, stop looking for entitlement and move out of the situation they put themselves and their family in, work two jobs… mofo

Let’s burn Bob Evans and have them for breakfast…… so there are no jobs at all in Ohio.

Where would this people be and how much more would the Bob Evan employees be draining from the system without Bob Evans? Twice and much or three time more … It’s not Bob Evan that draining the system .. is it?

Hey! Look at Bob Evans they are a food chain with minim wage employees … Acorn material… Hell Yes! Their employee will need support but that where the Democrat party wants America to be…(needy).

Is it really my job … NO AMERICAN PRODUCTIVE CITIZEN, my hard work, my labor, my income, my wealth, my business, my risk as entrepreneur that has to pay for their lot in life?

Where does it end?

At what point does the entitlements surpass common senses and the 45% of the population that provides nothing but take more, start getting less, so those who want to achieve more can…

If this Administration want to keep providing entitlements then other programs have to be cut (cut deep) and the government has to be down sized “Sacrifice more” …walk the walk or shut the fuck up…. You can’t have it both ways

Belly35;751747 wrote:Looks like the Bob Evans employees need to (In the famous words of the Documented Community Organizer…. “Sacrifice more&#8221 more air in the tires, one less tattoo, pay less Union dues, live within the means, live with a budget, higher education, no more babies, less taxes, stop looking for entitlement and move out of the situation they put themselves and their family in, work two jobs… mofo

Let’s burn Bob Evans and have them for breakfast…… so there are no jobs at all in Ohio.

Where would this people be and how much more would the Bob Evan employees be draining from the system without Bob Evans? Twice and much or three time more … It’s not Bob Evan that draining the system .. is it?

Hey! Look at Bob Evans they are a food chain with minim wage employees … Acorn material… Hell Yes! Their employee will need support but that where the Democrat party wants America to be…(needy).

Is it really my job … NO AMERICAN PRODUCTIVE CITIZEN, my hard work, my labor, my income, my wealth, my business, my risk as entrepreneur that has to pay for their lot in life?

Where does it end?

At what point does the entitlements surpass common senses and the 45% of the population that provides nothing but take more, start getting less, so those who want to achieve more can…

If this Administration want to keep providing entitlements then other programs have to be cut (cut deep) and the government has to be down sized “Sacrifice more” …walk the walk or shut the fuck up…. You can’t have it both ways

Again, you failed to read the entire piece. This is just not about Bob Evans. There is a whole list of companies who let us taxpayers subsidies their employees benefits, including the LARGEST employer in the country. You talk out of both side of your mouth and you are a chicken Hawk Conservative.

Bigdogg;751755 wrote:Again, you failed to read the entire piece. This is just not about Bob Evans. There is a whole list of companies who let us taxpayers subsidies their employees benefits, including the LARGEST employer in the country. You talk out of both side of your mouth and you are a chicken Hawk Conservative.

I will ask you again.

How much more would be drained from the system of entitlements if those companies did not hire low minimum wage employee?

So those companies IMO are doing me and the citizen of America and Ohio a favor.

But you want is to make those company less profitable so less will get hired or better yet just close ….

You however expect the employer to fit the bill for everything because ..Why?
They make money and you want what they have, You expect something because you work their and you think you’ve earn it above your pay check, Maybe because you have invested nothing in yourself or your future and what to spread the wealth because it easier, or You just want handouts because that what you do best…

WTF is a Chich Hawk Conservative…. Bigdog talk like a man with a paper asshole…

Paper asshole? WTF?

I Wear Pants;751952 wrote:Paper asshole? WTF?

Old time saying .... to reply to a query in a foolish or stupid manner

Belly35;751949 wrote:WTF is a Chich Hawk Conservative…. Bigdog talk like a man with a paper asshole…

Belly you're slipping! You forgot the "mofo" part...

CenterBHSFan;752149 wrote:Belly you're slipping! You forgot the "mofo" part...

I think that "mofo" is coming back now that I mention it and have used it a few times..... I see it being use more on the mofo OC