Why I'm not voting for "W" (Resume)
-
See..now this is what I was hoping would happen when I started these posts, actually get some good positive ideas. I'll be the first to say that spending needs to be decreased, unfortunately I don't see Bush (or Kerry for that matter) doing that in the near future. Kerry at least admits that he needs to raise taxes to sustain the spending, I'm not sure what Bush's plan is.
I agree w/ you dave, if I could pull out my savings from SS I would in a heartbeat, unfortunately if we do that w/o some sort of plan to pay for SS for those that have paid their whole lives and are counting on it to be there for at least part, if not all, of their incomes. Would you agree though, that some people MIGHT be better off w/ SS if they are complete idiots and don't understand the risk of stocks? That is why I suggested a 50/50 private vs. SS plan, to put some sort of learning curve in there for people who aren't following their investmentst the way they should. Maybe, after some serious education that could be a 100% private investment for those that opt to do so. This country is about choices, and some people will always feel more comfortable going w/ what has always been (SS in this instance) and are reluctant to change anything (ie. Most of North Dakota).
So, Dave, when I run for Governor, you want a spot in my cabinet? With you doing everything you think is "right" and me fixing everything that is "left" we could make a good team....LOL
-
This sorta goes to my point above... if the people that have paid into SS actually had control over the money... I think there would have been hell to pay when they noticed that somebody (the Govt) started spending some of it.
I suppose you could leave SS in place for people to choose if they wanted. But then what happens 20 years down the road when then next generation of politicians spends that money again? (because nobody in the government really cares to watch money very closely).
I don't have much sympathy for the idiots... It's their retirement... it's their duty to learn how to manage their retirement money IMO. (I know, thats the cold hard conservative in me).
Sign me up for a cabinet position... by the time you get to run for governor I ought to have you converted to the "right" way of looking at things.
tjamz wrote:
I agree w/ you dave, if I could pull out my savings from SS I would in a heartbeat, unfortunately if we do that w/o some sort of plan to pay for SS for those that have paid their whole lives and are counting on it to be there for at least part, if not all, of their incomes. Would you agree though, that some people MIGHT be better off w/ SS if they are complete idiots and don't understand the risk of stocks? That is why I suggested a 50/50 private vs. SS plan, to put some sort of learning curve in there for people who aren't following their investmentst the way they should. Maybe, after some serious education that could be a 100% private investment for those that opt to do so. This country is about choices, and some people will always feel more comfortable going w/ what has always been (SS in this instance) and are reluctant to change anything (ie. Most of North Dakota).
So, Dave, when I run for Governor, you want a spot in my cabinet? With you doing everything you think is "right" and me fixing everything that is "left" we could make a good team....LOLDaveH
'94 Supra- 7.77 @ 176mph -
http://www.ebaumsworld.com/johnkerry-sb.html found this on ebaums...funny shit
-
DaveH wrote:
I suppose you could leave SS in place for people to choose if they wanted. But then what happens 20 years down the road when then next generation of politicians spends that money again? (because nobody in the government really cares to watch money very closely).I don't have much sympathy for the idiots... It's their retirement... it's their duty to learn how to manage their retirement money IMO. (I know, thats the cold hard conservative in me).
Sign me up for a cabinet position... by the time you get to run for governor I ought to have you converted to the "right" way of looking at things.
I'm with you on the idiots thing, however, the reality (of current politics anyway) is that they would just end up on the welfare system and we'd end up paying for it all over again...I will say this, I am not quite middle of the road, but you could say that on a 4 lane road, I would be in the middle left lane. Not the far left...it's not like my car has a bad "Wellstone" and always veers violently left....
-
I hope this does't continue on forever after the Election; Otherwise I'll go Insane!!
-
DaveH wrote:
I hope not, Wellstone veered violently into the earth.
True. To be honest, I LOVED those anti-wellstone ads, for no other reason than the humor. I did feel pretty bad after hearing the "you have a bad wellstone in your field" and then finding out his plane crashed into a field. -
bluesrt4 wrote:
I hope this does't continue on forever after the Election; Otherwise I'll go Insane!!
Nah, it's actually quieted down the last two days (slowly) -
From what I understand of SS, in 2014 the US will for the first time be short on SS money taken in, to SS money paid out, and in something like 2032, the US will not have enough employees available to even keep SS around, and/or have any prayer of it ever being near the black again.
-
you hear the same things I do. That is why I have a scaled plan (which I admit kerry doesn't) to allow some privatization now and more as time progresses. My question to you is what do we do if all the sudden everyone stops paying into SS and the people that rely on it and have relied on it being there their whole lives no longer have it available? There is a definate need to continually fund it (at least partially) for the next 20-30 years. George Bush had a plan to set aside 2 Trillion dollars of surplus that was acquired during the 90's to help offset that gap. He made it clear in one of his early speeches as president that he would do that. He didn't. That money is long gone. I know we had a recession underway when Bush took office. In fact, I think that is why he said he was going to earmark it for SS (could be wrong, going off what I remember here). Telling 75 year old people to go back to work won't always work either. They worked their whole lives to get to the point where they (thought) could retire and collect on what they've been paying into all these years, some physically are unable to go back to work.
I'm all for your plan of privatization. Make the numbers work for me, because right now I certainly don't expect to see SS when I retire...not in its current form. Thats why I fund both my Roth IRA and 401k to the max amounts every year. Have for the last 11 years (8 years for 401k, didn't have an employer that offered it until I was 21) and plan on being retired by 55 from non-political work. I'd be very happy if a plan was devised for the short term, mid term and long term to cover our commitments to people that relied on it. Give me a plan.
-
heh, after reading my last post, it sounds like I'm running for president...
-
Well, first of all there is no real fund for SS, or any other government program. It all gets tossed into a big pile and gets handed out from there. You can do some accounting to see if the IN equals the OUT for certain programs, but as far as the actual money running out, that really isn't the case.
The solution is the same as in my previous posts... We need to reduce spending while growing the economy (which grows the tax base). We also need to change the peoples mindset on Govt programs. No more I need to get my piece of the pie mentality. This needs to come from the top, we need a president that needs to convince the american people that Govt programs are just to be used as a extreme measure, sort of a safety net. We need a president that says something like Kennedy did Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country. Once the american mindset is changed from the gimme gimme way of thinking we have now it will be easy to balance the budget, to run in the black, have a surplus, etc. Changing the mindset will not be easy. Too many slackers that don't want to work hard and still get their easy money from the govt. This mindset I blame mostly on the liberals, whose ideals were good, but whose programs were just terrible. GWB is really a little too liberal for my taste, but is the best chance we have for heading in the right direction (pun intended).
DaveH
'94 Supra- 7.77 @ 176mph -
I agree on the need to cut gov't spending, there are too many programs out there right now that cater to people who are capable of working (at least some job) but choose not to because welfare pays better. There, now how many Dems will you hear say that? Some programs are good, some programs MIGHT need to be created to counter programs that are being ended. I'd much rather pay for someones education w/ tax money than pay for their entire lazy-ass life.
The other side of this is a quote I got from a buddy of mine who farms "Farming is the only profession you could be in the last 4 years, where no matter what you did, you couldn't lose money". That seems wrong to me.
-
You couldn't lose money?
tjamz wrote:
The other side of this is a quote I got from a buddy of mine who farms "Farming is the only profession you could be in the last 4 years, where no matter what you did, you couldn't lose money". That seems wrong to me.DaveH
'94 Supra- 7.77 @ 176mph -
My boy kerry......
-
DaveH wrote:
You couldn't lose money?
That was his qoute to me, and he is a republican. I don't know, I no longer help my dad farm, he got all his land into CRP and only does cattle now, so I don't keep up on Gov't programs and commodity prices like I used to when I lived in Harvey/Devils Lake. -
Since when is talking badly about a war an unlawful act? It is a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to voice your opinion. I know of @ least one person who was in vietnam as a gunner on a helicopter. He said it was an order to get intel from them however possible, including the following: Capture vietcong soldiers and blindfold them, take them up in a helicopter about 300' above the ground in groups of 3 and interrogate them. They'd start w/ one of them, if he didn't answer they threw him out of the helicopter, then they'd ask the second guy, if he was silent he got the same treatment. By the time guy #3 was up he'd be singing like a bird.
Another "technique" was to place splinters of bamboo stalk under the fingernails slightly and tap on the splinter w/ the barrel of the gun until they'd talk. That was fairly effective I am told as well.
These were things they were told to do from up above. I agree w/ Kerry when he said that the soldiers were just following orders when they napalmed villages and that the people that should have been up on war crimes are those that made the orders to do so.
Had some of the soldiers not come back and spoke out on Vietnam, we could very well still be fighting there today.
Just because he opposes the wars doesn't mean that he opposes the warriors. There is a big difference.
Notice that the website you posted doesn't list that 9 of the 10 people on his swiftboat verified his claim for his final purple heart (the one that got him shipped home). Or the fact that his swiftboat was out of commission for 3 weeks being repaired after a, according the the anti-kerry swiftboat vets, gun battle that never occured. I didn't see those guys turning down their Bronze Stars at the time.
EDIT: Notice there was no copy/paste there dave
-
Man, I would laugh my ass off if that actually made it to the air. I'd laugh even if it was Kerry up there. Stupid FCC....
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login