CNBC: Paul Ryan wants to cut entitlements to trim the deficit

[OldLady]

Cut the entitlements. Let the entitlement whores care for their own families...the way humans are supposed to do, and the way decent people do.

You are a government worker, yes? So you probably pay into a retirement plan rather than SS?
Or maybe you are eligible for both when you retire?
It's easy to talk about cutting other people's funds off, isn't it?

 

[TNHarley]

What makes a person incapable of planning for retirement?

I'm not chewing my cabbage twice. This is a quiz. What did I already say?

There is nothing stopping people from becoming successful except for their own choices and the govt.
Thank goodness someone is starting to cut that suppression down(govt)..

Oh, don't you turn into a self righteous prig, too.

Oh please OL. Our ideas of helping people out are different.
Give a man a fish, he has a meal. Teach a man to fish, he is fed for life.
I believe in personal responsibility. That is the roof over every familys economic head.

I know you worked hard for what you have and as they say Downeast, "you done good." That's high praise.
Not everyone has your drive, smarts and determination. And sometimes plain old luck plays into it. That is the only point I am making. It isn't that I want to see everyone sitting on their ass getting assistance. However, I'll be goddamned if I want to live in a place like India where people are starving in cardboard boxes on the sidewalks.
That has never been who we are. NightFox's vision would leave many in that predicament.

I agree it would. But at what point will society point to "personal responsibility?"
THATS what society needs. Not punishing successful people with taking care of the irresponsible.
People themselves and the govt cause their problems. We are working on the govt holding people back. Now we need to start working on the People. Build ACTUAL wealth.

 

[TNHarley]

As I said, cut the War Department.

Imagine if the asshole criminals of the imperial capital were to place a moratorium on "defense" spending (really war making) for say 10 years. Then, use all those multiple trillions to help make America great.

We don't have a War Department!

Grow up!

LMFAO!!!

This where you and I part ways on most topics. You go stupid like a liberal and there is no bringing you back!

That is laughable, but sad too. Many Americans refuse to believe their country has become an imperial empire, with a military intervening everywhere around the world. Doing the bidding of the Oligarchy. How they can think this way is strange, since the truth is plain to see.

Yes we call it leadership, and peace through strength. We don't conquer nations. Get a grip.

Yea, that works out so well :/

 

[Bush92]

How many times have you "worked" for the "government" in one form or another?

12 years. Well, if Job Corps counts, 15. So you call that "assistance?"

So you got a government job with preferential treatment because you were a single mom?

No. I got a college degree.

Me too. First in family to do so. Started out in a trailer...son of factory worker...but, hey my “white privilege” is what got me where I am today. Forget about working two jobs in high school and college...forget about serving in the U.S.Army and in United States Marines (combat vet). Nope. I guess I should have been a lazy, crybaby, worthless asshole and expected the rest of society to lift me up with their hard earned tax dollars. BTW went all the way to gradute school degree in my field of study. Earned one of the few government assistance programs necessary...GI Bill.

We're talking about Social Security, not lazy, crybaby worthless assholes. They WORKED and EARNED their benefits. So how do we continue to make the program work? If it worked this long, there IS a way.
Focus.

Social Security can be solvent if it is only for retirees. It now covers a whole plethora of situations it was not intended for.

 

[koshergrl]

Cut the entitlements. Let the entitlement whores care for their own families...the way humans are supposed to do, and the way decent people do.

You are a government worker, yes? So you probably pay into a retirement plan rather than SS?
Or maybe you are eligible for both when you retire?
It's easy to talk about cutting other people's funds off, isn't it?

Yes it sure as shit is. I work and I save, and I care for my family financially, physically, and in every other possible way. That includes children, grandchildren, and my elderly mother and brother. I will be just fine without social security. I will be just fine without my pension..because my children will care for me. That is the way a decent family operates, and it is the way my family has always operated.

None of my grandparents died in nursing homes, nor will my mother. We have never been concerned with social security. My grandparents and my father did not work in traditional jobs (self employed) and my grandparents were among the first generations that received social security..they had not paid into it and what they received per month was not what they lived on. They lived on their gardens and their vocations, and when they were older, their children provided them with homes.

Get rid of the entitlements. They aren't needed. Communities and families will care for their people happily..and people will take care of themselves easily when the government drag is removed. The only group that doubts this is the huge population of worthless entitlement networks that were created by these wonderful *entitlements*. Get rid of the entitlements, put the crazies and the criminals in prison, and let's get on with life.

 

[NightFox]

I know you worked hard for what you have and as they say Downeast, "you done good." That's high praise.
Not everyone has your drive, smarts and determination. And sometimes plain old luck plays into it. That is the only point I am making. It isn't that I want to see everyone sitting on their ass getting assistance. However, I'll be goddamned if I want to live in a place like India where people are starving in cardboard boxes on the sidewalks.
That has never been who we are. NightFox's vision would leave many in that predicament.

LOL, how do you figure that people owning real assets instead of depending on politicians underfunded promises would "leave many in that predicament"? Do you have any grasp of finance at all? or is it that you just blindly trust whatever politicians tell you without doing any fact checking?

The fact of the matter is that by arguing for the status quo you're the one that wants to leave people with no other option than "sitting on their ass getting assistance".

 

[TNHarley]

How many times have you "worked" for the "government" in one form or another?

12 years. Well, if Job Corps counts, 15. So you call that "assistance?"

So you got a government job with preferential treatment because you were a single mom?

No. I got a college degree.

Me too. First in family to do so. Started out in a trailer...son of factory worker...but, hey my “white privilege” is what got me where I am today. Forget about working two jobs in high school and college...forget about serving in the U.S.Army and in United States Marines (combat vet). Nope. I guess I should have been a lazy, crybaby, worthless asshole and expected the rest of society to lift me up with their hard earned tax dollars. BTW went all the way to gradute school degree in my field of study. Earned one of the few government assistance programs necessary...GI Bill.

We're talking about Social Security, not lazy, crybaby worthless assholes. They WORKED and EARNED their benefits. So how do we continue to make the program work? If it worked this long, there IS a way.
Focus.

BTW, i do want SS eliminated. But i dont want people to lose their money. People could do so much better handling that money themselves. The govt sucks a big one.

 

[OldLady]

I'm not chewing my cabbage twice. This is a quiz. What did I already say?

There is nothing stopping people from becoming successful except for their own choices and the govt.
Thank goodness someone is starting to cut that suppression down(govt)..

Oh, don't you turn into a self righteous prig, too.

Oh please OL. Our ideas of helping people out are different.
Give a man a fish, he has a meal. Teach a man to fish, he is fed for life.
I believe in personal responsibility. That is the roof over every familys economic head.

I know you worked hard for what you have and as they say Downeast, "you done good." That's high praise.
Not everyone has your drive, smarts and determination. And sometimes plain old luck plays into it. That is the only point I am making. It isn't that I want to see everyone sitting on their ass getting assistance. However, I'll be goddamned if I want to live in a place like India where people are starving in cardboard boxes on the sidewalks.
That has never been who we are. NightFox's vision would leave many in that predicament.

I agree it would. But at what point will society point to "personal responsibility?"
THATS what society needs. Not punishing successful people with taking care of the irresponsible.
People themselves and the govt cause their problems. We are working on the govt holding people back. Now we need to start working on the People. Build ACTUAL wealth.

When the government realized that SS was in trouble, many moons ago, they made 401K's tax shelters. That was the smartest thing the government did in a long time. It worked.
And I really think the huge majority of people want to do well and be successful and if they knew how and had the tools, they would do their damndest. NO ONE wants to live on welfare subsistence. It is so far from easy street you can't even imagine. So there's nothing wrong with your wish. But as my grandmother always said, "If wishes were horses, even beggars could ride."

 

[OldLady]

I know you worked hard for what you have and as they say Downeast, "you done good." That's high praise.
Not everyone has your drive, smarts and determination. And sometimes plain old luck plays into it. That is the only point I am making. It isn't that I want to see everyone sitting on their ass getting assistance. However, I'll be goddamned if I want to live in a place like India where people are starving in cardboard boxes on the sidewalks.
That has never been who we are. NightFox's vision would leave many in that predicament.

LOL, how do you figure that people owning real assets instead of depending on politicians underfunded promises would "leave many in that predicament"? Do you have any grasp of finance at all? or is it that you just blindly trust whatever politicians tell you without doing any fact checking?

The fact of the matter is that by arguing for the status quo you're the one that wants to leave people with no other option than "sitting on their ass getting assistance".

It's Social Security, not welfare.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

That’s the way it always has been and has led us to this point. Someone will pay for the huge deficits. It may not be now or 10 to 20 years but someone will pay and if we start doing the right things now, it won’t be as painful as it will be when we have no choice. Politicians won’t make those tough calls because they want re-elected, so doing the right thing if it is painful, is not the way of the politician.

It is our country's choice to spend more on the military than anything else. It is our country's choice to deny people universal health coverage. It is a choice. There is no reason for a "painful" choice here. It is what we find important, and the well being of individuals is not among them.

The choice is to pay down the deficit or not. Eventually our debt will effect our interest rating, our ability to borrow, and will devalue the dollar. The choice is to raise taxes and cut spending. As high as 25% cuts in all spending and ending most if not all corporate welfare. We need to cut and when we do, we will see a contraction in the economy. The contraction would be temporary however when our dollar strengthens, when our ratings go up we will see a stronger country and a more employed and more innovative America. If it is forced, expect a depression and for it to last many years. You can’t continue to borrow without paying it back. It will hurt us in the long run.

I'm sure you're right that we must get our debt under control. How did Clinton do it in the 90's? I don't remember a lot of cuts in welfare or Social Security? Or other government services? Can that be done again?

Clinton got the debt under control? Please explain that.

Dunno. I've heard he balanced the budget.

He balanced the budget? You mean the Republican Congress balanced the budget and that didn't last long.

 

[Papageorgio]

​

No free rides for those that aren't poor (at or below the poverty line), if you're not willing to make sacrifices in the present for your own future financial security then you don't deserve to have any.

​

Yeah; if you call advocating for the responsible management of finances, having the capacity for reason, thinking outside the unworkable status quo box and taking responsibility for ones own material well being "the problem".

What's you idea of being part of the solution? keep on ignoring reality until the bottom drops out?
"How more people live" is irrelevant, the numbers are what they are and failing to recognize that fact will only lead to "more people" living in an economic state that's materially WORSE than what they're living in today.

The signs are all around you (declining real wages, increasing structural unemployment, accelerating accumulation of personal and public debt and unfunded liabilities, etc..,etc..,), closing your eyes to them, stamping your feet and trying to pretend the status quo is hunky dory because you want to show how "compassionate" you are won't change the reality that our current system is a pathway to widespread economic misery and social unrest.

I'm not saying everything is "hunky dory" but there must be a way to save SS without stealing from the entire working population?

Yeah there is, I've been telling you how to do it all along, change SS from a system supported by promises based on the earnings of future tax payers into a system supported by privately owned real asset accounts.

Simply stomping YOUR foot and being angry with everyone

You mean kinda like this....

give up trying to get through to you. Who knew talking about Social Security would lead to such vituperative judgmental vomit?

Is that the kind of "stomping your foot and being angry" you're referring to ?

who doesn't have $ enough to save for an adequate retirement and healthcare isn't going to solve the problem either.

I'm not the one that's angry, I'm the one that wants to provide the means for working Americans to build actual wealth that can not only provide them with greater incomes in their retirements than the current system but will also act as a vehicle for them to pass that wealth forward to future generations rather than the current system that passes it backwards.

You seem to be angry that anyone would even dare suggest people should be held responsible for their own financial futures and fixated on why people cannot do it.

I simply have both feet on the ground.

Yeah I noticed, both feet on the ground standing in a puddle of financially unsustainable status quo.

On the bright side, you seem to be a pretty nice person for an emotionally driven reactionary.

You may not like it and you ARE angry as hell that people don't fit into your nice neat middle class scheme.

LOL, whatever you say, I'm quite amazed how your EQ extends across time, space and Internet message boards, perhaps you should take up a career as a carnival act.

"Holding people responsible for their own financial futures" is lovely. For every working person in this country who has had money deducted from their check in order to pay for SS and Medicare when we get old, we have been responsible already.

Uh-huh, they're not only getting money deducted from their checks their employers are forced to match those deductions, so what's your issue with those deductions going toward assets held in a private account versus going toward a "program" based on promises of confiscating the incomes of future generations? Do you think these people are too stupid to handle owning real assets or something?

Are you not aware that the current system is cash flow negative and that "trust fund" of government debt the SSA holds is being drawn down and will be completely exhausted in 15 or so years? Are you not aware that SS, Medicare and Fed Pensions are currently almost $110 trillion underfunded over the next 75 years?

Chucking it away and blaming anyone who isn't making enough to invest in a 401 K from the time they're 25 in order to have a stable retirement is not going to earn you any points with the vast majority of humans in this country who, regardless of income, know what's actually what.
Dream on.

LOL, There is no blame, there are only the consequences of one's own decisions and having to take responsibility for them, apparently all your time on this planet has not taught you that lesson.

Once again, anybody that is unwilling to defer present consumption in order to invest in their own financial security doesn't deserve to have any, what's the alternative? Everybody deserves financial security without having to do anything for it? If nobody is responsible for their own material well being who is?

You're not getting it.
I at least hear what you're saying. However, I have been hearing for YEARS that SS will be gone by the time I was 50, 55, 60....and it is still there. Maybe it needs to be funded differently or we need to accept that we need to actually PAY for it instead of grousing by you folks who want every cent you earn to stay in your own pockets and fuck everyone who isn't smart enough or fortunate enough to live like you.
Don't like your attitude, I admit.

Reagan, Bush and Clinton "borrowed" from the SSI trust, that is why I find the claims that Clinton balanced anything. George H. W. Bush could have borrowed from the SSI and not raised taxes, but he did the right thing and it cost him a second term.

This is the problem, doing the right thing may not be popular and you lose political points from the electorate. So, in a way we are responsible for the mess we have created. Now, if we keep borrowing and if we keep taking money from SS fund then we will be in big trouble by 2030. That is when the deficits, the lack of funds in the SS account, the credit rating, the interest rates will all come down on this economy.

We are digging a huge hole and by allowing the government to increase the deficits, to cut taxes is the wrong thing to do but if you are a politician, you figure you'll be safe for at least 13 more years.

 

[OldLady]

Cut the entitlements. Let the entitlement whores care for their own families...the way humans are supposed to do, and the way decent people do.

You are a government worker, yes? So you probably pay into a retirement plan rather than SS?
Or maybe you are eligible for both when you retire?
It's easy to talk about cutting other people's funds off, isn't it?

Yes it sure as shit is. I work and I save, and I care for my family financially, physically, and in every other possible way. That includes children, grandchildren, and my elderly mother and brother. I will be just fine without social security. I will be just fine without my pension..because my children will care for me. That is the way a decent family operates, and it is the way my family has always operated.

None of my grandparents died in nursing homes, nor will my mother. We have never been concerned with social security. My grandparents and my father did not work in traditional jobs (self employed) and my grandparents were among the first generations that received social security..they had not paid into it and what they received per month was not what they lived on. They lived on their gardens and their vocations, and when they were older, their children provided them with homes.

Get rid of the entitlements. They aren't needed. Communities and families will care for their people happily..and people will take care of themselves easily when the government drag is removed. The only group that doubts this is the huge population of worthless entitlement networks that were created by these wonderful *entitlements*. Get rid of the entitlements, put the crazies and the criminals in prison, and let's get on with life.

You are fortunate to have that kind of family, Koshergirl. I'm glad for you.

 

[Siete]

sure Republitards want entitlements eliminated ...... to pay for THEIR shit ,

always have, always will - F'em

 

[TNHarley]

There is nothing stopping people from becoming successful except for their own choices and the govt.
Thank goodness someone is starting to cut that suppression down(govt)..

Oh, don't you turn into a self righteous prig, too.

Oh please OL. Our ideas of helping people out are different.
Give a man a fish, he has a meal. Teach a man to fish, he is fed for life.
I believe in personal responsibility. That is the roof over every familys economic head.

I know you worked hard for what you have and as they say Downeast, "you done good." That's high praise.
Not everyone has your drive, smarts and determination. And sometimes plain old luck plays into it. That is the only point I am making. It isn't that I want to see everyone sitting on their ass getting assistance. However, I'll be goddamned if I want to live in a place like India where people are starving in cardboard boxes on the sidewalks.
That has never been who we are. NightFox's vision would leave many in that predicament.

I agree it would. But at what point will society point to "personal responsibility?"
THATS what society needs. Not punishing successful people with taking care of the irresponsible.
People themselves and the govt cause their problems. We are working on the govt holding people back. Now we need to start working on the People. Build ACTUAL wealth.

When the government realized that SS was in trouble, many moons ago, they made 401K's tax shelters. That was the smartest thing the government did in a long time. It worked.
And I really think the huge majority of people want to do well and be successful and if they knew how and had the tools, they would do their damndest. NO ONE wants to live on welfare subsistence. It is so far from easy street you can't even imagine. So there's nothing wrong with your wish. But as my grandmother always said, "If wishes were horses, even beggars could ride."

I have a customer that quit his full time job when his wife died. Because of all the shit he could get from the govt. I shit you not. He had like 5 kids. Made around (educated guess because of his title) 50-60K a year.
People have babies for more money. I also know someone like that. So, please, spare me the cliches.
If we focused on freedom from govt restraint and tried to tell society to make good choices and feed themselves, we would be the shiznit. Not normalizing irresponsibility.
Free schooling is a great idea to help with that. We are doing free school for all in my state being paid for by the lottery. I think that is absolutely amazing. No being forced to take care of peoples education or anything. Completely voluntary.

 

[Papageorgio]

It is our country's choice to spend more on the military than anything else. It is our country's choice to deny people universal health coverage. It is a choice. There is no reason for a "painful" choice here. It is what we find important, and the well being of individuals is not among them.

The choice is to pay down the deficit or not. Eventually our debt will effect our interest rating, our ability to borrow, and will devalue the dollar. The choice is to raise taxes and cut spending. As high as 25% cuts in all spending and ending most if not all corporate welfare. We need to cut and when we do, we will see a contraction in the economy. The contraction would be temporary however when our dollar strengthens, when our ratings go up we will see a stronger country and a more employed and more innovative America. If it is forced, expect a depression and for it to last many years. You can’t continue to borrow without paying it back. It will hurt us in the long run.

I'm sure you're right that we must get our debt under control. How did Clinton do it in the 90's? I don't remember a lot of cuts in welfare or Social Security? Or other government services? Can that be done again?

Clinton got the debt under control? Please explain that.

Dunno. I've heard he balanced the budget.

He balanced the budget? You mean the Republican Congress balanced the budget and that didn't last long.

He did sign the bills, I'll give him credit for that. I remember how our children would starve and go homeless, none of that happened, just more scare tactics. That is why I tend not to believe a lot of the propaganda that has been spewed.

 

[OldLady]

I'm not saying everything is "hunky dory" but there must be a way to save SS without stealing from the entire working population?

Yeah there is, I've been telling you how to do it all along, change SS from a system supported by promises based on the earnings of future tax payers into a system supported by privately owned real asset accounts.

Simply stomping YOUR foot and being angry with everyone

You mean kinda like this....

give up trying to get through to you. Who knew talking about Social Security would lead to such vituperative judgmental vomit?

Is that the kind of "stomping your foot and being angry" you're referring to ?

who doesn't have $ enough to save for an adequate retirement and healthcare isn't going to solve the problem either.

I'm not the one that's angry, I'm the one that wants to provide the means for working Americans to build actual wealth that can not only provide them with greater incomes in their retirements than the current system but will also act as a vehicle for them to pass that wealth forward to future generations rather than the current system that passes it backwards.

You seem to be angry that anyone would even dare suggest people should be held responsible for their own financial futures and fixated on why people cannot do it.

I simply have both feet on the ground.

Yeah I noticed, both feet on the ground standing in a puddle of financially unsustainable status quo.

On the bright side, you seem to be a pretty nice person for an emotionally driven reactionary.

You may not like it and you ARE angry as hell that people don't fit into your nice neat middle class scheme.

LOL, whatever you say, I'm quite amazed how your EQ extends across time, space and Internet message boards, perhaps you should take up a career as a carnival act.

"Holding people responsible for their own financial futures" is lovely. For every working person in this country who has had money deducted from their check in order to pay for SS and Medicare when we get old, we have been responsible already.

Uh-huh, they're not only getting money deducted from their checks their employers are forced to match those deductions, so what's your issue with those deductions going toward assets held in a private account versus going toward a "program" based on promises of confiscating the incomes of future generations? Do you think these people are too stupid to handle owning real assets or something?

Are you not aware that the current system is cash flow negative and that "trust fund" of government debt the SSA holds is being drawn down and will be completely exhausted in 15 or so years? Are you not aware that SS, Medicare and Fed Pensions are currently almost $110 trillion underfunded over the next 75 years?

Chucking it away and blaming anyone who isn't making enough to invest in a 401 K from the time they're 25 in order to have a stable retirement is not going to earn you any points with the vast majority of humans in this country who, regardless of income, know what's actually what.
Dream on.

LOL, There is no blame, there are only the consequences of one's own decisions and having to take responsibility for them, apparently all your time on this planet has not taught you that lesson.

Once again, anybody that is unwilling to defer present consumption in order to invest in their own financial security doesn't deserve to have any, what's the alternative? Everybody deserves financial security without having to do anything for it? If nobody is responsible for their own material well being who is?

You're not getting it.
I at least hear what you're saying. However, I have been hearing for YEARS that SS will be gone by the time I was 50, 55, 60....and it is still there. Maybe it needs to be funded differently or we need to accept that we need to actually PAY for it instead of grousing by you folks who want every cent you earn to stay in your own pockets and fuck everyone who isn't smart enough or fortunate enough to live like you.
Don't like your attitude, I admit.

Reagan, Bush and Clinton "borrowed" from the SSI trust, that is why I find the claims that Clinton balanced anything. George H. W. Bush could have borrowed from the SSI and not raised taxes, but he did the right thing and it cost him a second term.

This is the problem, doing the right thing may not be popular and you lose political points from the electorate. So, in a way we are responsible for the mess we have created. Now, if we keep borrowing and if we keep taking money from SS fund then we will be in big trouble by 2030. That is when the deficits, the lack of funds in the SS account, the credit rating, the interest rates will all come down on this economy.

We are digging a huge hole and by allowing the government to increase the deficits, to cut taxes is the wrong thing to do but if you are a politician, you figure you'll be safe for at least 13 more years.

Oh my, that doesn't sound good at all.
We'd better hope the Republicans are right that these tax cuts will stimulate the economy to such a degree that we will be rolling in dough within a couple of years.
I was hoping for more to bring companies back to the US. Companies are taking huge advantage right now. They are hiring "contractors" not employees, so they don't have to pay benefits. They are hiring the cheapest global workers they can find. Of course they're doing well. And the Republicans seem to want to give them their head even more. There are times when capitalism has to be reined in from too many abuses of its workers. We seem to be working toward another of those times.

 

[Bush92]

It is our country's choice to spend more on the military than anything else. It is our country's choice to deny people universal health coverage. It is a choice. There is no reason for a "painful" choice here. It is what we find important, and the well being of individuals is not among them.

The choice is to pay down the deficit or not. Eventually our debt will effect our interest rating, our ability to borrow, and will devalue the dollar. The choice is to raise taxes and cut spending. As high as 25% cuts in all spending and ending most if not all corporate welfare. We need to cut and when we do, we will see a contraction in the economy. The contraction would be temporary however when our dollar strengthens, when our ratings go up we will see a stronger country and a more employed and more innovative America. If it is forced, expect a depression and for it to last many years. You can’t continue to borrow without paying it back. It will hurt us in the long run.

I'm sure you're right that we must get our debt under control. How did Clinton do it in the 90's? I don't remember a lot of cuts in welfare or Social Security? Or other government services? Can that be done again?

Clinton got the debt under control? Please explain that.

Dunno. I've heard he balanced the budget.

He balanced the budget? You mean the Republican Congress balanced the budget and that didn't last long.

Contract With America was a success. Got rid of unfunded mandates.

 

[OldLady]

Oh, don't you turn into a self righteous prig, too.

Oh please OL. Our ideas of helping people out are different.
Give a man a fish, he has a meal. Teach a man to fish, he is fed for life.
I believe in personal responsibility. That is the roof over every familys economic head.

I know you worked hard for what you have and as they say Downeast, "you done good." That's high praise.
Not everyone has your drive, smarts and determination. And sometimes plain old luck plays into it. That is the only point I am making. It isn't that I want to see everyone sitting on their ass getting assistance. However, I'll be goddamned if I want to live in a place like India where people are starving in cardboard boxes on the sidewalks.
That has never been who we are. NightFox's vision would leave many in that predicament.

I agree it would. But at what point will society point to "personal responsibility?"
THATS what society needs. Not punishing successful people with taking care of the irresponsible.
People themselves and the govt cause their problems. We are working on the govt holding people back. Now we need to start working on the People. Build ACTUAL wealth.

When the government realized that SS was in trouble, many moons ago, they made 401K's tax shelters. That was the smartest thing the government did in a long time. It worked.
And I really think the huge majority of people want to do well and be successful and if they knew how and had the tools, they would do their damndest. NO ONE wants to live on welfare subsistence. It is so far from easy street you can't even imagine. So there's nothing wrong with your wish. But as my grandmother always said, "If wishes were horses, even beggars could ride."

I have a customer that quit his full time job when his wife died. Because of all the shit he could get from the govt. I shit you not. He had like 5 kids. Made around (educated guess because of his title) 50-60K a year.
People have babies for more money. I also know someone like that. So, please, spare me the cliches.
If we focused on freedom from govt restraint and tried to tell society to make good choices and feed themselves, we would be the shiznit. Not normalizing irresponsibility.
Free schooling is a great idea to help with that. We are doing free school for all in my state being paid for by the lottery. I think that is absolutely amazing. No being forced to take care of peoples education or anything. Completely voluntary.

You can't change people, TN. Some will always find a way to take the easiest ride. And the fella who had five kids and suddenly no wife, with the pitiful state of child care in this country, and the expense of medical insurance, OF COURSE he took the dole. He ain't getting rich on it. You live a bunch better than him, unless he's being dishonest about it.
We can invest in our people in a number of different ways. I agree welfare programs need a long hard look, but we need to invest in our children and our people's health, and a way for our elderly to survive with a modicum of dignity if they aren't lucky enough to be from a family like Koshergirl's.
Every family, every individual, who can take care of themselves is helping this country. Encouraging that isn't wrong. Throwing out all the safety nets? That's wrong.

 

[Papageorgio]

Cut the entitlements. Let the entitlement whores care for their own families...the way humans are supposed to do, and the way decent people do.

You are a government worker, yes? So you probably pay into a retirement plan rather than SS?
Or maybe you are eligible for both when you retire?
It's easy to talk about cutting other people's funds off, isn't it?

Yes it sure as shit is. I work and I save, and I care for my family financially, physically, and in every other possible way. That includes children, grandchildren, and my elderly mother and brother. I will be just fine without social security. I will be just fine without my pension..because my children will care for me. That is the way a decent family operates, and it is the way my family has always operated.

None of my grandparents died in nursing homes, nor will my mother. We have never been concerned with social security. My grandparents and my father did not work in traditional jobs (self employed) and my grandparents were among the first generations that received social security..they had not paid into it and what they received per month was not what they lived on. They lived on their gardens and their vocations, and when they were older, their children provided them with homes.

Get rid of the entitlements. They aren't needed. Communities and families will care for their people happily..and people will take care of themselves easily when the government drag is removed. The only group that doubts this is the huge population of worthless entitlement networks that were created by these wonderful *entitlements*. Get rid of the entitlements, put the crazies and the criminals in prison, and let's get on with life.

My wife and I have my parents living with us, they are in their 90's, my wife quit her job so she could take care of them full time. When our friends or family are in need we are there for each other.

It used to be communities would take care of their own, some how we lost that and now expect government to do that for us. All three of our remaining children have told us that we don't need to worry about what the future holds as they will take care of us as long as they need to.

Family and friends and relationships that you build and nourish is a better solution than the government trying to decide what is best for everyone.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I'm sure you're right that we must get our debt under control. How did Clinton do it in the 90's? I don't remember a lot of cuts in welfare or Social Security? Or other government services? Can that be done again?

You don't remember welfare reform? You don't remember block grants to the states? You don't remember Congress closing down three caucus buildings?

The Clinton era was the tech era, something we will likely never see again.

I didn't follow the news much then, especially not economic news. So, in a nutshell, what did he do? He shut down three buildings, saving on the heating bill? He sent $ back to the states to save on administration costs? I've never been on welfare, so I wouldn't have noticed that.
I definitely don't understand what/why a "tech era" is or why only that could possibly save it. I thought we WERE in the midst of the tech era. Google and Apple and robotics and Musk and all that.
You don't have to answer if you're not feeling patient. I really don't know much more than that, and I'm just guessing from your answer.

The tech era provided a lot of revenue to the federal government. It was the age of the internet when there really wasn't much around. People starting new businesses from home waking up one morning to find they became millionaires.

Welfare Reform was huge at the time. It was very controversial because the Republicans took over Congress for the first time in decades, and the left and MSM considered it an attack on the poor. In the end, it had very satisfying results although from my point of view, didn't go far enough.

If you were on welfare, food stamps, school lunch programs, you went to a local office, they would fill out paperwork, you would sign it, they would ship it off to Washington, then Washington would ship it back with a check, and then they'd mail the check to you, or you could stop by and pick it up. With block grants, it eliminated all that paperwork. The feds would just sent one check to cover everybody for the year, and let the state run those programs instead.

There was a lot going on at that time.

I don't understand why education can't be handled the same way, except that if I remember right, too many states were resistant to providing education to the disabled. That's when the feds took over and forced compliance. It's why our school systems are sinking--they are being expected to do too much, regardless of the cost. Even if the feds are "helping," the necessary paperwork and the final numbers are still defeating. And a lot of those kids do not belong in a regular school that wasn't designed to meet their needs.
I believe in mainstreaming in theory, but it has gone way too far. So has "diagnosing" far too many students as Special Ed when they're just being kids. But in order to get insurance to pay for counseling services, there MUST be a coverable diagnosis. So kids are labelled with some alphabet soup of "issues" and a whole slew of tracking and meetings and plans and special teachers and blah blah blah ensue.

I don't know. I'm pushing 60 now and I can't recall a time where disabled kids were not taken care of one way or another. Sure, we had our bad kids when I was in school, but real special needs children were segregated to other places.

As for our education system, it's a failure because they pass kids through school and they end up graduating without the ability to read their diploma. As a landlord, I've run across many of them. Their emails were so unreadable I couldn't even understand what they were asking or requesting. Misspelled words, no punctuation, no sentence structure. It was like reading emails from 8 year olds.

But we have to pass them and give them diplomas so that union run schools can stay on par for graduation rates with private schools, charter schools, and home schooling. We can't let it be known that union run schools are inferior to other education methods.

There you go with that idiocy of union-run schools. When are you going to learn that unions have little to no impact on what is taught, how it is taught, and when it is taught?

If I recall, you are a truck driver. Does the Teamsters union dictate the size of your truck? Do they set the maximum size engine or number of gears you can have? Do they require truck driver's to attend useless useless driver training classes in order to keep their CDLs?

Of course they don't!

In my 20 years of teaching, I can recall about 3 times where the union got involved in my schools and every single time it was because administrators were not following the contract in regards to working conditions, i.e. requiring teachers to attend additional trainings and meeting that were not in accordance with the contract. Never was there ever any union influence into the actual educational process. It is not their responsibility.

You educator wannabees trot out your ignorance on this topic at every opportunity. Many posters have tried to educate you and your ilk, but to no avail. You are like a special education child that refuses to learn, no matter what you do.

You are a great poster and I agree with you on many things, but on this topic you are simply "out to lunch".