Obama announces plan to dismantle social security, federal government & US Military

As conservative as I may be, I completely agree. I mean, did anyone look at the timeline for raising the age on Social Security? The first raise in age doesn’t occur until 2050! Presumably by then our medical experts will have concocted a way for humans to raise their average life expectancy (and what if its exponential? what then? :D)

Defense spending also needs to be reined in, again, as much of a strong military fanboy I might be. Spending on intelligence, training and covert operations could increase ten fold and we could still shave a nice portion off the defense budget if we take a pause from trying to build the world’s best fighter aircraft, a role that has become somewhat diminished in this lower-grade, “boots on the ground” type of conflicts we see. Especially in light of the advancement of the technology of drones. Especially.

Anyway, OP is a fail and I even share much of his ideology. We need to be a faster government these days. We need to keep pace with the myriad problems we face. In order to be able to afford to transition ourselves into a society that’s based more off self-preservation than aggression we will need to restructure our entire way of thinking when it comes to government spending. Its our fucking money and our votes.

Its a tall order any way you look at it though. Complicated.

Complicated? Nah.

Tax cuts. And it that is not producing results, you probably didn’t cut enough. So cut taxes again.

Followed by tax cuts.

Fiscal conservatives need to find a party to support that is able to look at both sides of the equation when trying to balance the budget.

This report was about four weeks too late.

Please, Sir, may I have some military pension cuts, some government pension cuts, some cuts to the government employees health plans and to the franking and travel privileges of our elected officials? Some cutbacks in salaries would be nice, as well as some moratoriums on salary increases until the budget is balanced. I’m sure other things will occur to me as time goes on.

Just to sort of say that we are all in this shit together? As it is, some of us are more in this shit than others.

The plan calls for an across-the-board salary freeze.

I’m not sure even that is a great idea. In my line of work, you take about a 60% pay cut to work for the federal government, and the salary divergence only increases over time. If they freeze the salaries, they’re gonna get a lower quality of applicants. Even aside from the impact on quality of work, it can sometimes cost more to operate with lower quality workers than it does to pay higher salary and get better talent.

Government employee health benefits are pretty sweet though. But that’s not because the feds are paying more for them, I don’t think. It’s because they have a huge pool of workers.

Apparently, only 2 of the 18 committee members were willing to endorse their own recommendations, which include:

-Top marginal tax rate of 23% (:rolleyes:)
-Cap government revenue at 21% of GDP (:rolleyes:)
-Cutting print costs by mandating double-sided printing on government printers, and increased use of instant messaging (:rolleyes:)
-Adding co-pays to the VA (:mad:)
Obama should have a pie smashed in his face for this.

They are the co-chairs. The full committee doesn’t vote until December.

What’s wrong with those proposals?

Want to fix it all. Just take the cap off Social Security. Pay the same rate all the way to the top. It would be not only solvent but would allow us to increase benefits helping out the economy. It would be a win/win. The rich could feel good actually paying their share and they would feel good because they helped so many who need it.

Richard…please.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!

You slay me!

So you think they’re not only bad, but self-evidently bad.

Let me ask you this, do you know what the current effective tax rate for the top 1% of earners is?

Can’t say I do.

No, look, this proposal is to start discussion.

The top marginal tax rate as defined is dependent upon removing many tax breaks.

The top government income as a percentage of GDP I’m not sure I’d wish to write in stone.

Default double-sided b&w printing is already saving my company boatloads of money. If I must have single-sided and/or color, that’s still an option, it’s just not the default. I’m fine with that and I don’t understand the rolleyes on that one. Every little bit helps, eh?

And I agree, requiring co-pays from those who have earned medical care from the VA is probably a non-starter.

I don’t, by the way, see either of the latter two in the article linked to in the OP. Where did you get them?

Regardless, all of these are worth discussing, not dismissing.

So you don’t even know what effect lowering the top rate while cutting deductions and credits will have? How can you know it is self-evidently bad?

Gonzo, it is OK to admit that you have no idea how Social Security is funded and distributed. I know it is a boring topic and you would have to look at number tables and whatnot.

The wealthy already subsidize lower earners through their Social Security tax. It would be politically impossible to make an argument that taxing it “all the way to the top” would be fair. What might work would be to make Social Security 100% taxable for those that pay taxes. Right now it is either 0% taxable, 50% or 85% (for most people). I don’t think most non recipients understand the system anyway, so it may be more palatable than raising the retirement age or cutting benefits.

Call it a hunch.

My beef is that this commission was set up to appease the greedy misers who bankroll the Republican Party, since they have such huuuuuuuuge, scaly boners over reducing government spending, and their grand plan to tackle the deficit is to lower taxes (surprise!) and reduce printer waste?

C’mon, son.

Fair. Who says the tax system is fair? Like Buffet said, his secretary pays a higher rate than he does. Who is subsidizing who? You obviously are clueless about who gets off easiest from the tax system.
I suppose in your brilliance ,you are aware that Social Security can not contribute to the debt and never has. In 37 years when it runs short, it will cut benefits to 80 percent and then go on forever. But a simple tweaking could fix it. I do think lets go beyond the tweak and make it a stronger and better system. I suppose you are also aware that over 40 percent of Social Security goes to kids whose parents died and for people badly injured and can not make a living.
It is politically impossible to fix the system because people are too damn ignorant to really understand what is happening. you are proof of that.

Read up on Social Security disability and get back. people who are injured in an accident can survive through it. People born with conditions that make it impossible to work get help. Yeah, ;lets kill Social Security. Good thinking.

Do you mean more co-pays than there already are at the VA? Say, like for prescriptions (unless you’re being treated for a disability)?

I love it when I run across something in the Pit that cracks me up: Cow bell. That hit me just right. tears in eyes Fuckin’ cow bell. Ha! Oh, Jesus. Cow bell. Heeheeheehee.

I tried to type it like Christopher Walken but that’s harder than you might think.