View Full Version : April is the Cruelest Month
What a lousy month so far.
Paul Ryan throws in the towel, virtually guaranteeing there will be no meaningful entitlement reform for the foreseeable future.
One of my favorite writers gets purged from the Atlantic for various thought crimes.
The Russians seem to be increasingly nerve gas friendly.
They're coming after Apu now. Could the Bee Guy be next?
We're skipping along the edge of an idiotic trade war.
Inflation is yawning and stretching and thinking about its morning coffee. Nobody seems to care.
It's going to be a long summer.
iris lilies
4-12-18, 8:47am
What a lousy month so far.
Paul Ryan throws in the towel, virtually guaranteeing there will be no meaningful entitlement reform for the foreseeable future.
One of my favorite writers gets purged from the Atlantic for various thought crimes.
The Russians seem to be increasingly nerve gas friendly.
They're coming after Apu now. Could the Bee Guy be next?
We're skipping along the edge of an idiotic trade war.
Inflation is yawning and stretching and thinking about its morning coffee. Nobody seems to care.
It's going to be a long summer.
I was going to send you condolences yesterday about Paul Ryan.
I was going to send you condolences yesterday about Paul Ryan.
If he runs for president, I'll support him. But most signs seem to be pointing to a leftward lurch over the next couple of years. We may be entering a bleak period for the Bill of Rights, free markets and good taste.
gimmethesimplelife
4-12-18, 9:32am
In these parts, Paul Ryan is known as one of the pillars of the Evil Trio (Trump, Pence, and Ryan). Many are glad to see one of the pillars of the Evil Trio scram but the question does remain - why? And why now? And what does this mean for the quality of life of lower income Americans and those legitimately on social assistance?
I'm thinking someone even worse than Paul Ryan may take this position now as who in their right minds would accept a position working close to Trump at this point? Think of the career damage such a move would make!
Interesting times in the 85006 and beyond......Rob
iris lilies
4-12-18, 9:43am
I didnt know Williamson had left NR. I read Conor F’s long, super long, very very long defense. I mean it was good and all, but good lord it mist be 10 pages. Anyway, he made several good points two being
1) holders of “morally repugnant thoughts” cannot be, and should not be, stigmatized out of the mainstream
2) the Atlantic’s effort to broaden their tent of ideas by hiring conservative writers is forever damaged, because who will want to work for them knowing their ideas may get them fired
If he runs for president, I'll support him. But most signs seem to be pointing to a leftward lurch over the next couple of years. We may be entering a bleak period for the Bill of Rights, free markets and good taste.
I'd support him as well. I like him because he's a big thinker, not limiting himself to the next election cycle, but of course that's what others hate about him, the reminder that their short term benefit endangers entire systems long term survival. I hate to see him leave the House, but in reality we don't deserve him.
the Atlantic’s effort to broaden their tent of ideas by hiring conservative writers is forever damaged, because who will want to work for them knowing their ideas may get them fired
In this case, he was fired for things he wrote several years before being hired by the Atlantic. You'd think that progressives trying to appear fair would look beyond the day before yesterday to see if their token conservatives actually toed the party line. Or perhaps they should simply admit that they're really not interested in diversity of thought, I think I could respect that.
I guess I missed the news about conservative magazines hiring progressive writers to encourage diversity of thought.
Teacher Terry
4-12-18, 1:11pm
I am so very happy to see Ryan go. I still have many friends/family in WI and they are all happy with this event too. It is really ironic that we give huge tax breaks to wealthy corporations, etc and then want to cut programs that people have earned and paid into (SS, Medicare, etc). These are not entitlements they were earned. Plus we want to hurt the people that make the least $ in this country. I guess some will be happy when you have seniors on the streets not having anywhere to live, eat or be able to pay for their prescriptions because they are such a drag on our society. They can die from neglect and then there will be more $ for the wealthy. Happy days>:(
There was a comment on the world population in another thread, so I looked it up, and there was a color-coded map in an article about population trends that showed life expectancies in different countries. Certain countries, such as Canada and Western Europe and Japan, were dark blue, which meant life expectancy of above 80.
So I found a list of countries that have nationalized healthcare, and guess what--there was a direct correlation between the countries with high life expectancy and those with universal healthcare--many of them single-payer systems.
Then, #31 on the list for life expectancy: the USA.
Many people are lucky to have had employer-granted health insurance (and they had to be a lifelong slave wage to keep it), but many aren't so lucky. So, as Scrooge said, they may as well die and decrease the surplus population. Obviously if they can't afford exorbitant premiums, they don't deserve to live.
There was a comment on the world population in another thread, so I looked it up, and there was a color-coded map in an article about population trends that showed life expectancies in different countries. Certain countries, such as Canada and Western Europe and Japan, were dark blue, which meant life expectancy of above 80.
So I found a list of countries that have nationalized healthcare, and guess what--there was a direct correlation between the countries with high life expectancy and those with universal healthcare--many of them single-payer systems.
Then, #31 on the list for life expectancy: the USA.
Many people are lucky to have had employer-granted health insurance (and they had to be a lifelong slave wage to keep it), but many aren't so lucky. So, as Scrooge said, they may as well die and decrease the surplus population. Obviously if they can't afford exorbitant premiums, they don't deserve to live.
To be fair, if you adjust for us shooting and crashing our cars into each other more frequently than more docile countries, a significant part of the difference can be accounted for.
gimmethesimplelife
4-12-18, 2:24pm
There was a comment on the world population in another thread, so I looked it up, and there was a color-coded map in an article about population trends that showed life expectancies in different countries. Certain countries, such as Canada and Western Europe and Japan, were dark blue, which meant life expectancy of above 80.
So I found a list of countries that have nationalized healthcare, and guess what--there was a direct correlation between the countries with high life expectancy and those with universal healthcare--many of them single-payer systems.
Then, #31 on the list for life expectancy: the USA.
Many people are lucky to have had employer-granted health insurance (and they had to be a lifelong slave wage to keep it), but many aren't so lucky. So, as Scrooge said, they may as well die and decrease the surplus population. Obviously if they can't afford exorbitant premiums, they don't deserve to live.Welcome to the truth of America and a huge reason I have so much respect for Mexico......a kindly country in the sense of making health care accessible to Americans for whom America could care less about. Rob
Teacher Terry
4-12-18, 2:34pm
I have read that without illegal immigrants many jobs will go unfilled such as in agriculture because Americans won't do them. Instead of trying to make our border more secure I would rather see that $ get spent on helping homeless people get housing, job skills, mental health needs met, etc. It would be a much better use of our $ as a country. Immigrants from Mexico aren't coming here to commit crimes but to have a better standard of living for their families. In fact I read they commit fewer crimes then the general population. How about spending that $ on helping poor seniors who are choosing between meds and food?
frugal-one
4-12-18, 3:00pm
I am so very happy to see Ryan go. I still have many friends/family in WI and they are all happy with this event too. It is really ironic that we give huge tax breaks to wealthy corporations, etc and then want to cut programs that people have earned and paid into (SS, Medicare, etc). These are not entitlements they were earned. Plus we want to hurt the people that make the least $ in this country. I guess some will be happy when you have seniors on the streets not having anywhere to live, eat or be able to pay for their prescriptions because they are such a drag on our society. They can die from neglect and then there will be more $ for the wealthy. Happy days>:(
I'm glad he will is going also. He was not an asset IMO.
frugal-one
4-12-18, 3:01pm
To be fair, if you adjust for us shooting and crashing our cars into each other more frequently than more docile countries, a significant part of the difference can be accounted for.
BS... show us the numbers.
BS... show us the numbers.
Since you asked so nicely, here you are:
https://www.cnn.com/2016/02/09/health/american-life-expectancy-shorter-than-europeans/index.html
Since you asked so nicely, here you are:
https://www.cnn.com/2016/02/09/health/american-life-expectancy-shorter-than-europeans/index.html
Interesting how the article noted that 30 years ago the US did better than most of the comparison countries. Automobile deaths have declined since then. Not sure about guns and drugs. It would be interesting to see what other countries did that caused their numbers to improve relative to ours.
Interesting how the article noted that 30 years ago the US did better than most of the comparison countries. Automobile deaths have declined since then. Not sure about guns and drugs. It would be interesting to see what other countries did that caused their numbers to improve relative to ours.
I would guess there's a large number of factors involved. The U.S. hasn't aged as fast as many of those countries, and many life -shortening behaviors tend to be more popular among the young. The price of gasoline has risen faster outside the US, which may result in a difference in miles driven, or not as the case may be. Dietary fashions may differ. Who pays how much for antibiotics is just one part of it.
frugal-one
4-13-18, 6:40pm
BS... show us the numbers.
You're right. I should have asked more politely.
There was a comment on the world population in another thread, so I looked it up, and there was a color-coded map in an article about population trends that showed life expectancies in different countries. Certain countries, such as Canada and Western Europe and Japan, were dark blue, which meant life expectancy of above 80.
So I found a list of countries that have nationalized healthcare, and guess what--there was a direct correlation between the countries with high life expectancy and those with universal healthcare--many of them single-payer systems.
Then, #31 on the list for life expectancy: the USA.
Many people are lucky to have had employer-granted health insurance (and they had to be a lifelong slave wage to keep it), but many aren't so lucky. So, as Scrooge said, they may as well die and decrease the surplus population. Obviously if they can't afford exorbitant premiums, they don't deserve to live.
I'm all for universal care and imagine there is something to the numbers, but I don't know if all the necessary information is reflected. Most notable is the fact that most of the numbers I've seen rank the U.S. as the most obese nation in the world and has a notably poor western diet. I suspect heroin or alcohol abuse, suicides, smoking rates, and social and family supports may weigh the scale one way or another, but may be just as relevant as health care. So it may be correlation or it may be coincidence. What's the old saying, correlation does not imply causation.
I'm all for universal care and imagine there is something to the numbers, but I don't know if all the necessary information is reflected. Most notable is the fact that most of the numbers I've seen rank the U.S. as the most obese nation in the world and has a notably poor western diet. I suspect heroin or alcohol abuse, suicides, smoking rates, and social and family supports may weigh the scale one way or another, but may be just as relevant as health care. So it may be correlation or it may be coincidence. What's the old saying, correlation does not imply causation.
I'll admit that I had a knee jerk reaction to a compelling correlation, so, like LDAHL, I looked around a little and found this analysis by the NHI https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4112220/
Although the analysis concludes that there are multiple reasons for the the disparity, I agree with Medical Daily that "A higher life expectancy is associated with higher quality of life and better healthcare."
So whether it's the healthcare system, severe comorbidities, high rates of gun violence because we have do darn many of them, the fact is that we have to wonder why our quality of life, as measured by a low life expectancy compared with other developed nations, could stand some improvement.
It's enough for me that a country with as much wealth as the U.S. should be able to afford health care for the people who can't afford it otherwise and may even fall under the category of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. But I can understand the reasons behind the more conservative approach of individual responsibility for health and health care. The obesity rate here as example of something up to the person and not the government.
I see the reality of Paul Ryan leaving as no big change as longer as the conservatives are driving. It's likely there will come a time when the tax cuts and generous military budget without the anticipated economic growth to pay for things will put future spending at risk. The low hanging fruit of big money are S.S., Medicare and Medicaid entitlements. If the coin flips and politics change before that happens I'd suspect more taxes might be the alternate choice.
You're right. I should have asked more politely.
You may not share my wise and enlightened opinions, but you do have class.
Teacher Terry
4-14-18, 6:05pm
I read that many politicians would like to see the tax cuts repealed which would be a good start in the right direction. Then corporations, etc can follow the law and pay their share of taxes. Alan, will say I am lusting after other's $ but that is so ridiculous I laughed out loud when I read it.
I read that many politicians would like to see the tax cuts repealed which would be a good start in the right direction.
Alan, will say I am lusting after other's $ but that is so ridiculous I laughed out loud when I read it.
Yeah, I don't know where I could have gotten that idea. Silly me ;)
Thank goodness Ryan threw in the towel. Now that he admits that the republicans are no longer the party of accountability or believe in the checks and balances of our constitution it's probably good that he's decided to shuffle off to harmless irrelevancy.
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/paul-ryan-warns-if-dems-win-theyll-hold-trump-accountable?cid=sm_fb_maddow
flowerseverywhere
5-5-18, 11:15pm
Don’t you think Ryan will be back for a presidential run n 2024?
i was very saddened today to read there is more chaos than ever at the VA. Both articles I could find required registering or paying for non subscribers, but this one might work.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-politics/highest-levels-of-chaos-impair-dc-veterans-hospital-inspector-general-finds/2017/04/13/777bc786-203d-11e7-ad74-3a742a6e93a7_story.html?utm_term=.88bdff1fa11d
physicians are leaving, patients are not getting adequate care. I am ashamed that our country does not make this a priority instead of focusing on president bone spurs and who he is having affairs with.
Don’t you think Ryan will be back for a presidential run n 2024?
That would be wonderful, but it's probably too much to hope for.
flowerseverywhere
5-6-18, 12:08pm
That would be wonderful, but it's probably too much to hope for.
well I doubt any self respecting republican will run against Trump in 2020. Who wants to be dragged through the mud by his lies, bullying and name calling. McCain is being dragged through the mud right now on his deathbed. You don’t have to like McCain, or his politics, but if you can’t respect someone who served their country along with his predecessors and spent seven years being tortured as a POW you are the lowest of the low.
I think Ryan’s decision will be partially based on what turn our political climate takes. I am hoping someone more moderate (Republican or Democrat) wins the next election and restores some sanity because the divisiveness and hate of recent is serving no one. But he may be in that group of wealthy that the recent tax reform may have benefitted handsomely so maybe he no longer has to be in the public eye.
well I doubt any self respecting republican will run against Trump in 2020. Who wants to be dragged through the mud by his lies, bullying and name calling. McCain is being dragged through the mud right now on his deathbed. You don’t have to like McCain, or his politics, but if you can’t respect someone who served their country along with his predecessors and spent seven years being tortured as a POW you are the lowest of the low.
I think some will, acting either from patriotism or ambition. Romney appears to be considering it, and he has a goodly amount of experience with being smeared. I'm sure there will be others. It would do my heart good to see Trump taken down in the Republican primaries by Republicans.
Judging from the people trying for attention on the other side, it looks like we may see a lurch to the left.
Judging from the people trying for attention on the other side, it looks like we may see a lurch to the left.
My DH voted for Trump because he wanted a president who would "drain the swamp." Clearly, as Fox commentator Neil Caputo said, "How can you [Trump] drain the swamp if you’re the one that keeps muddying the water?”
It seems Bernie is not completely out of the question for a 2020 run, especially since his nemesis Hillary is out of the picture. I think that there's a lot of crossover between people inclined to vote for Bernie vs Trump, despite the huge ideology gap. People are sick of business-as-usual in Washington, and they thought Trump would deliver. If people could understand that Bernie is not a Communist, but a man of the people who can lead in innovative ways (the growth of Burlington VT attests to that), he could actually do pretty well in 2020, in spite of his age.
flowerseverywhere
5-6-18, 1:45pm
I think some will, acting either from patriotism or ambition. Romney appears to be considering it, and he has a goodly amount of experience with being smeared. I'm sure there will be others. It would do my heart good to see Trump taken down in the Republican primaries by Republicans.
Judging from the people trying for attention on the other side, it looks like we may see a lurch to the left.
i would register as a Republican just to vote in that primary. And I have always been an independent, voting for Dems and republican as I saw fit. But unless some crazy candidate like Moore or Arpai ran against him I would consider doing that
have you seen some of the candidates who have thrown their hats in the ring? Arpaio? Surely there are many many fine republicans who are not white supremacists or conspiracy theorists.
Teacher Terry
5-6-18, 6:44pm
Romney would be a great alternative to Trump at this point. I don't think Ryan will run when he can make a small fortunate on the consulting gig or sitting on boards. I would love to see a democrat win of course.
flowerseverywhere
5-6-18, 7:45pm
Romney would be a great alternative to Trump at this point. I don't think Ryan will run when he can make a small fortunate on the consulting gig or sitting on boards. I would love to see a democrat win of course.
“Fortunate”. Was that a Freudian slip? He was indeed fortunate that he was able to benefit when his father sadly and tragically died when he was young and received social security survivor benefits. That same program he wants to “reform”. But that fact hasn’t hurt him up until now.
Teacher Terry
5-6-18, 8:23pm
Flowers: too funny. I didn't know he benefited from the program he wants to destroy.
Flowers: too funny. I didn't know he benefited from the program he wants to destroy.
Does he want to destroy it or does he want to ensure it's preserved for future generations? There's only one correct answer and it's probably not the one most folks here would choose.
flowerseverywhere
5-7-18, 7:57am
Does he want to destroy it or does he want to ensure it's preserved for future generations? There's only one correct answer and it's probably not the one most folks here would choose.
well if you depend on it to help you in old age, or need disability benefits and are truly disabled, then it may be destroyed in your mind. What changes would you like to see that will ensure solvency? Especially for the middle class who may work hard their whole lives and very few will have pensions? Saving a million in an IRA or 401k may be impossible no matter how hard you try if you are making say $75,000 a year, A good income.
well if you depend on it to help you in old age, or need disability benefits and are truly disabled, then it may be destroyed in your mind. What changes would you like to see that will ensure solvency? Especially for the middle class who may work hard their whole lives and very few will have pensions? Saving a million in an IRA or 401k may be impossible no matter how hard you try if you are making say $75,000 a year, A good income.
I believe latest calculations show SS will be insolvent in about 15 years, so something has to give. The two obvious answers are to raise the minimum age to collect benefits to something closer to the average life span and to increase the earnings cap, which currently captures about 85% of all income in the United States, to one that captures 90% or more of all income. Those two actions would probably put off SS's eventual collapse for another generation or so, especially if we could somehow influence more Americans in the belief that it is their responsibility, not the governments, to finance their long term care and well being.
The people I know without pensions, which is essentially everyone not a government worker, have not found it impossible to amass significant retirement savings over their working lives, many of them have simply chosen not to prioritize long term security over immediate gratification believing that it's government/society's responsibility to care for them. This is also the reason I could never be a liberal, an ideology which these days promotes dependence on others as a moral imperative, which I think is evil.
My understanding was that Medicare will be a much harder fix than Social Security.
flowerseverywhere
5-7-18, 11:14am
I believe latest calculations show SS will be insolvent in about 15 years, so something has to give. The two obvious answers are to raise the minimum age to collect benefits to something closer to the average life span and to increase the earnings cap, which currently captures about 85% of all income in the United States, to one that captures 90% or more of all income. Those two actions would probably put off SS's eventual collapse for another generation or so, especially if we could somehow influence more Americans in the belief that it is their responsibility, not the governments, to finance their long term care and well being.
The people I know without pensions, which is essentially everyone not a government worker, have not found it impossible to amass significant retirement savings over their working lives, many of them have simply chosen not to prioritize long term security over immediate gratification believing that it's government/society's responsibility to care for them. This is also the reason I could never be a liberal, an ideology which these days promotes dependence on others as a moral imperative, which I think is evil.
all is well and good with your ideas, until a factory closes down and people can’t find jobs, or a company downsizes and a majority of the layoffs seem to be those pesky 50+ agers. Or doing many grueling factory, medical or law enforcement jobs over the age of sixty five.
but that is why I could never be a conservative. Assuming everyone that needs help is a leech and has made poor choices is evil. Just ask many single women (and some men) who were left with little support from their ex wives or husbands, make less than their peers in the case of women and are trying to juggle kids and jobs alone. There are a lot of those hard workers out there who have gotten the short end of the stick.
My understanding was that Medicare will be a much harder fix than Social Security.
Yeah, thanks to the profit-motive.
Did you see 60 minutes last night? I hate to bite the hand that feeds me, but well before I saw 60 minutes I saw first hand how everyone with their hands in the action has an incentive to keep the price of drugs high--except the people who need them.. and they're the ones who are paying for them--through their taxes and through high out-of-pocket copays, coinsurances, and deductibles.
but that is why I could never be a conservative. Assuming everyone that needs help is a leech and has made poor choices is evil. You're putting words in my mouth that I haven't said. Many people fail to adequately plan for their own needs because they have been promised safety nets that over the course of time become unsustainable. That doesn't make them leeches, I'd prefer to think they're just gullible. And to frame this discussion as an either/or, either we care for everyone's needs or everyone suffers is disingenuous. There is a middle ground where appropriate reforms can ensure that the truly needy are assisted without placing the programs available to them in jeopardy. That's the sort of solution Paul Ryan has always envisioned while taking undue heat from the opposition.
ApatheticNoMore
5-7-18, 12:12pm
You're putting words in my mouth that I haven't said. Many people fail to adequately plan for their own needs because they have been promised safety nets that over the course of time become unsustainable.
noone thinks like that, like real people don't think like that ok. They do realize what an incredible strain it is to plan in a world that makes very little sense. That has always seemed very near insane. I have always all my life been trying to plan for worst case scenarios, but I still suck at it. The things I do to avoid worst case scenarios sometimes land me in them! That other kind of Oedipus complex where you try to avoid a bad fate and run right into it anyway. Basically over a lifetime it's all: we plan, goddess laughs!
Again and again and again, long past the point where you have learned humility, where you have tried to learn from your mistakes (the thing is the amount of mistakes in the world is infinite so if we don't make the same ones, we make new ones), where ..
And the people goddess may not laugh at seems to have very little to do with such perfect use of the intelligence to foresee the future perfectly, half the time it comes down to a bunch of crap like their parents gave them a lot of help in life or something. Often it's luck. I've been lucky at times too, sometimes even the most destitute have had their day in the sun once (even if only when they were kids), but it can't always be held on to even despite trying.
noone thinks like that, like real people don't think like that ok.
Two of my four brothers, my brother in law, my wife's aunt and all her children (just to name a few of my extended family) think that way. But to be fair, I never considered the possibility they may not be real people. that would actually explain a lot.
Teacher Terry
5-7-18, 12:29pm
WE would have the $ to pay for our needed programs if we were not giving huge tax breaks to the rich. I knew the second they passed it that then they would be crying that we can't afford to help seniors so let them starve or die because they can't afford their medications. No one can afford to self-pay their medical bills except for the very wealthy. My DIL just had a million dollar brain surgery that without insurance she would have died. They would not even see her until she could prove she had insurance.
WE would have the $ to pay for our needed programs if we were not giving huge tax breaks to the rich.
So this has only been a problem since January? I could have sworn it was much longer.
Teacher Terry
5-7-18, 1:00pm
The government keeps robbing SS to pay for other things and has done this for years.
The government keeps robbing SS to pay for other things and has done this for years.I believe they're now operating off the interest their surplus generates in Treasury Bills, the problem is that they'll soon need more and will need to sell of the notes. Taxing those with more money than you won't help that problem.
WE would have the $ to pay for our needed programs if we were not giving huge tax breaks to the rich.
I hear that a lot, but is it really true? Are there truly enough of the rich available to provide us with all our “needed programs”?
Even the vaunted welfare states of Europe need to tax the small fry at a pretty good clip to make it work.
Even the vaunted welfare states of Europe need to tax the small fry at a pretty good clip to make it work.I understand that Finland has elected not to proceed with their pilot Universal Income scheme, something about not being able to afford it even with their average personal tax rate of just over 50%, which makes me wonder if the former would not be necessary without the latter.
ApatheticNoMore
5-7-18, 2:45pm
I understand that Finland has elected not to proceed with their pilot Universal Income scheme, something about not being able to afford it even with their average personal tax rate of just over 50%, which makes me wonder if the former would not be necessary without the latter.
no you are simply misinformed:
https://metropolitan.fi/entry/false-reports-in-international-media-on-finland-aborting-basic-income-trial
http://www.kela.fi/web/en/news-archive/-/asset_publisher/lN08GY2nIrZo/content/contrary-to-reports-the-basic-income-experiment-in-finland-will-continue-until-the-end-of-2018
I don't think it was ever intended to last indefinitely but just was a pilot.
As for the rest, there aren't many countries that couldn't in some sense benefit from a basic income at least in some ways, only countries with actual full employment as well as no serious poverty wouldn't and those are few indeed. Basic income is experimental for sure, hard to say how it would work on a society wide basis, lots of unknowns, but it isn't abandoned because it has failed or anything, that's simply not true. It has usually had some positive effects where it is tried but it's usually a limited trial. It isn't something proven time after time to work well like single payer healthcare or something, it's still in beta.
I understand that Finland has elected not to proceed with their pilot Universal Income scheme
no you are simply misinformed:
I suppose I stand corrected, I should have said "Finland has elected not to proceed past the end of the year, with no plans to continue beyond that point."
Teacher Terry
5-7-18, 2:59pm
What about the people that save and do everything right and yet even with insurance get wiped out by medical bills? I have posted about my friends before. She had 8 bouts of cancer and him 4. SS was all they had by the last few years when he was too sick to work . She reached that point years before due to having no memory because of all the chemo and then Alzheimers. So should people like this just starve once they lower SS? Quit assuming all that wind up penniless never saved for retirement.
Two of my four brothers, my brother in law, my wife's aunt and all her children (just to name a few of my extended family) think that way. But to be fair, I never considered the possibility they may not be real people. that would actually explain a lot.
So maybe you are biased in your thinking.
I agree that perhaps fairly minor adjustments can be made to SS to make it more solvent. I agree that some people are greedy and feel entitled to whatever they can get, but IMHO greed is not the confined to the lower and middle classes--quite the contrary.
I disagree that social programs foster a culture of dependence on the government. Yet, I'll go so far as to agree with you that some people do become dependent on the government because of the safety nets.
In a perfect world, people would care about each other--children would take responsibility for their parents; parents would take responsibility for their adult children; neighbors would look out for each other. But they don't. So what do you do with the people who are too sick to care for themselves?
There was an answer in my great-grandfather's day. He was sent to, and died, in an asylum (Willard Asylum in upstate NY) where all those people who simply couldn't get along in this culture were dumped. The people who couldn't make ends meet because of mental, emotional or physical deficiencies. Maybe we should return to "adult orphanages." These were cruel places where people died and were buried in unmarked graves. Do poor people deserve less dignity than the guy who steals money from his shareholders? Do they deserve less dignity than the business owner who squeezes out every last drop of blood from his workers? Was my great-grandfather "evil"?
I'm willing to live with the fact that some people are always going to take advantage. I would rather live with that reality if I can ensure that people who really need public services get them.
So should people like this just starve once they lower SS? Quit assuming all that wind up penniless never saved for retirement.You guys keep accusing me of things that exist solely in your minds. When I say that some people choose to not plan ahead due to their belief in a government safety net does not equate to my assuming that every penniless pensioner was too lazy to save. When I say that common sense reforms to the myriad social welfare systems in place in hopes of keeping them solvent would be a good thing should not be taken as a belief that people should just starve, and yet, here we are.
If I didn't know better I'd think some of you took that Democratic Party produced video of Paul Ryan throwing Grandma off the cliff in her wheelchair as gospel, or maybe you did.
You guys keep accusing me of things that exist solely in your minds. When I say that some people choose to not plan ahead due to their belief in a government safety net does not equate to my assuming that every penniless pensioner was too lazy to save. When I say that common sense reforms to the myriad social welfare systems in place in hopes of keeping them solvent would be a good thing should not be taken as a belief that people should just starve, and yet, here we are.
If I didn't know better I'd think some of you took that Democratic Party produced video of Paul Ryan throwing Grandma off the cliff in her wheelchair as gospel, or maybe you did.
They seem to be making assumptions about your assumptions.
At what point, after machine-gunning the poor were you planning on releasing the vultures?
Teacher Terry
5-7-18, 5:33pm
Alan, I am sure you are a nice person in real life but that doesn't always come across. I think we should cut $ from other parts of the budgets and leave the social programs alone. Cut defense, don't spend $ on a wall, etc.. Many wasteful areas to cut without cutting programs for the seniors. Ldahl: you made me laugh outloud which is a good thing:~)
flowerseverywhere
5-7-18, 5:43pm
This is also the reason I could never be a liberal, an ideology which these days promotes dependence on others as a moral imperative, which I think is evil.
and speaking of putting words in others mouths, are are you sure every liberal wants to promote dependence on the government? Because I think that is untrue. Most do not want to take law abiding citizens guns away. Most do not want to throw the borders wide open. Many do not agree with sanctuary cities. And so on. It works both ways.
and speaking of putting words in others mouths, are are you sure every liberal wants to promote dependence on the government? Because I think that is untrue. Of course it's untrue, but odds are....;)
Alan, I am sure you are a nice person in real life ....Yes I am, but my most impressive traits are being lovable, cuddly and shy.
....but that doesn't always come across.I'm like a songwriter who can't sing, you can love me for my words and hate me for my presentation or vice versa, but in the end, it's your choice.
Since when is "nice person" determined by political litmus tests? I think Bernie Sanders is a nice person, but many of his ideas would be horribly destructive if put into practice. Questioning the sustainability and cultural impact of a given social program does not necessarily put you in league with with catherine's capitalist villains.
Since when is "nice person" determined by political litmus tests? I think Bernie Sanders is a nice person, but many of his ideas would be horribly destructive if put into practice. Questioning the sustainability and cultural impact of a given social program does not necessarily put you in league with with catherine's capitalist villains.
Some of my best friends are capitalists... :)
Perhaps we should pass a law allowing anyone to opt out of social security and medicare at anytime up until their 25th birthday. Anyone who opts out gets a check for every penny that's been paid in so far and they can then live their Ayn Randian self-sufficiency dream. Those who choose that route, however, would than have to prepare on their own for any of the benefits that would have been available to them and any other government benefits they might qualify for would be reduced according to what they would have been able to get had they been getting a benefit from social security.
Perhaps we should pass a law allowing anyone to opt out of social security and medicare at anytime up until their 25th birthday.
Unfortunately, like Obamacare, these semi-Ponzi schemes depend upon everyone contributing to the "greater good", otherwise they don't work.
I think a better approach is cultural. If we promote the idea of self-sufficiency as a goal and maintain the programs as a limited lifeline response to unfortunate conditions rather than an abdication of our personal sovereignty to a fickle government, our families and culture would be stronger.
Perhaps we should pass a law allowing anyone to opt out of social security and medicare at anytime up until their 25th birthday. Anyone who opts out gets a check for every penny that's been paid in so far and they can then live their Ayn Randian self-sufficiency dream. Those who choose that route, however, would than have to prepare on their own for any of the benefits that would have been available to them and any other government benefits they might qualify for would be reduced according to what they would have been able to get had they been getting a benefit from social security.
That kind of opt-out clause could well doom Soc Sec. Given the progressive nature of the benefit calculation and tax treatment, and assuming higher-paid individuals would be the most likely to leave, the march toward insolvency would probably accelerate.
Teacher Terry
5-8-18, 12:21pm
I couldn't disagree more Alan. People's earning potential and other factors make this not a feasible solution. When people want to cut our safety nets yet give a bunch of tax breaks etc to the super rich our values are very wrong. Obamacare was not a ponzi scheme and would have worked fine if the stupid Repubs had not taken away the individual mandate. They don't want poor people to have health insurance. They would prefer they die because it will be cheaper and their lives aren't as valuable. We used to have a strong middle class but not anymore.
They don't want poor people to have health insurance. They would prefer they die because it will be cheaper and their lives aren't as valuable. That's why we can't have meaningful dialog about social issues. The constant slander against anyone not toeing a specific ideological line, not just here, but everywhere, is disappointing.:(
Disagree all you want, point out the fallacy of your opponents argument and engage in give and take, but don't shut down all communication with stupid accusations and slanderous statements. Nobody's interested in that.
iris lilies
5-8-18, 12:50pm
We had an odd situation a few years ago at my workplace where all employees voted on whether to join the Social Secuirty system or not. The reason for the vote was a technicality, an error in history.
but anyway, it was interesting to see the earnest,furrowed brows of Administrative staff when they discussed the younguns’ resistence. “Dont they realize this is GOOD for them?” and “I wonder WHY they are opposed?”
I wont say there were many opposed as revealed in discussions leading up to the vote, but I will characterize those as opposed as being thoughtful, independent thinkers, a lot of the tech department seemed to not adopt the group think.
this passed and my Social Security benefits were not threatened, but it was an interesting time.
Teacher Terry
5-8-18, 1:09pm
I am disappointed that when Obama was elected the Repub's said that they would not work with him at all and would obstruct everything. They were not going to work with a black man. Then Hillary lost to a liar, cheat, swindler, racist, person that makes fun of disabled people. She lost because she was a strong smart woman. In the past I was fine with a Republican winning because they did not set out policies to actually hurt people like this administration is doing. I am totally disgusted with their behavior. They are now letting it be known that they will separate migrants from their kids, etc. These kids will most likely be traumatized for years to come. They are separating very small children from their moms. Everything they do is calculated and evil. They want to convince people that social programs are stealing their money when actually they are spending like drunken sailors on helping the rich (their friends) get even richer. Look at how many Repubs are not seeking reelection. I think they are disgusted with Trump and the party. I spent my career and now volunteer work helping people and I see first hand what cuts to programs do and it is devastating. Yes I am passionate and no I don't think anyone in this forum would prefer that poor people die but I truly believe that many wealthy people including Trump and his buddies would be very happy to see that happen.
ApatheticNoMore
5-8-18, 1:33pm
I think young people will make dumb decisions because they are young and dumb and lack life experience pretty much. So of course they don't think about social security (ha I bet half of them aren't even contributing to 401ks either - but that's a long way off right?). It's why it's not very wise for them to be making huge financial decisions at that age, like the future of their social security, or like massive student loans for that matter, because they really lack the experience to make fully wise decisions there. Who of us afterall aren't still regretted some dumb shit we did in our 20s that somehow (sometimes for really unfathomable reasons in retrospect) seemed like a good idea the time ...
Is it inconceivable that many opposed Obama not out of racism but that they simply disagreed with his policy goals?
Is it inconceivable that Clinton lost to the worst GOP candidate in the party's history not because she was a strong smart woman but because she was a dreadful, dreadful campaigner carrying her own heavy load of ethical baggage?
Does every criticism of the structure, goals and impact of social spending programs indicate an avaricious desire to immiserate the poor?
Is it possible to debate ideas without impugning motives?
Teacher Terry
5-8-18, 1:39pm
If you don't think people in this administration or the Koch brothers etc don't have motives for what they do then you are very naive.
If you don't think people in this administration or the Koch brothers etc don't have motives for what they do then you are very naive.
Even if that’s true, simply attacking their character doesn’t refute their ideas.
flowerseverywhere
5-8-18, 2:46pm
There is so much fear mongering and insults dividing our country.
Social security will be insolvent, All those rapists and murders from south of the border, all the Muslim terrorists, we all need more guns. We need walls. We need to open our borders and have sanctuary cities. We need to drug test welfare recipients. Lazy cheats steal welfare and food stamps from taxpayers. Democrats just want to murder babies. Republicans just want to kill poor people from starvation and lack of medical care. We need more guns, we need more gun control. Oh those liberals, conservatives, capitalists, greedy rich people. And so on.
Maybe our whole country will break out of this gridlock and realize the answer is compromise and laws like the system is supposed to work instead of executive orders Putting bandaids on our borders instead of comprehensive immigration reform is not helpful. Partially repealing the affordable care act with no replacement is not helpful. We needed both which Republicans all the way to the top promised. Closing birth control clinics will not help the abortion situation. Poor women need health care and prenatal care. Passing more laws instead of enforcing our current gun and immigration laws is crazy.
Half of what we are doing is just not making sense.
That kind of opt-out clause could well doom Soc Sec. Given the progressive nature of the benefit calculation and tax treatment, and assuming higher-paid individuals would be the most likely to leave, the march toward insolvency would probably accelerate.
It would be interesting to see how the higher paid individuals who opted out pay for their old age healthcare. I can only guess how expensive a healthcare insurance policy would be for the 65 and over crowd.
It would be interesting to see how the higher paid individuals who opted out pay for their old age healthcare. I can only guess how expensive a healthcare insurance policy would be for the 65 and over crowd.
That would in part depend on the degree to which the government left private providers and insurers unmolested. And their departure would also create adverse selection issues for a Medicare program that is already unsustainable in its current design.
I think where we are likely to end up, sooner or later, with some sort of universal coverage plus a private market for those seeking shorter waits or superior care. I would think the timing on that might depend on whether we see a big blue wave in 2018 and 2020.
I think where we are likely to end up, sooner or later, with some sort of universal coverage plus a private market for those seeking shorter waits or superior care. I would think the timing on that might depend on whether we see a big blue wave in 2018 and 2020.
I agree with you. I called a cardiologist I have been to before to make an appointment for a general cardiac check-up. He now operates a concierge service for $1650 a year. You have to be a "member" in order to take advantages of his top tier service.
That would in part depend on the degree to which the government left private providers and insurers unmolested. And their departure would also create adverse selection issues for a Medicare program that is already unsustainable in its current design.
It couldn't really create adverse selection since people would have made the decision back when they were young. Someone who opted out when they were young couldn't then reverse the decision later in life. If they developed an expensive health condition sometime in their 40s/50s and had to purchase health insurance on the open market in old age they'd either need to buy hideously expensive market priced insurance, pay out of pocket, or acknowledge that they had made a life shortening decision back in their early 20's.
It couldn't really create adverse selection since people would have made the decision back when they were young. Someone who opted out when they were young couldn't then reverse the decision later in life. If they developed an expensive health condition sometime in their 40s/50s and had to purchase health insurance on the open market in old age they'd either need to buy hideously expensive market priced insurance, pay out of pocket, or acknowledge that they had made a life shortening decision back in their early 20's.
I think the result of younger healthier people leaving would have the immediate impact of the systems current revenue declining with little immediate impact on claims. As satisfying as it might be to imagine casting dissenters into the outer darkness, none of this stuff can happen in a vacuum.
I think the result of younger healthier people leaving would have the immediate impact of the systems current revenue declining with little immediate impact on claims. As satisfying as it might be to imagine casting dissenters into the outer darkness, none of this stuff can happen in a vacuum.
I suppose you're probably right. Although for most people opting out of SS/Medicare at a young age and forgoing the benefits later would probably be a terrible decision, undoubtedly there would be plenty of people who would make it anyway. Heck, back when I was 24 if the option had been available I might have made that decision too. It's only been the experience of watching several old people go through long, expensive end of life illnesses that has made me realize how foolish and risky of a decision that would have been.
I suppose you're probably right. Although for most people opting out of SS/Medicare at a young age and forgoing the benefits later would probably be a terrible decision, undoubtedly there would be plenty of people who would make it anyway. Heck, back when I was 24 if the option had been available I might have made that decision too. It's only been the experience of watching several old people go through long, expensive end of life illnesses that has made me realize how foolish and risky of a decision that would have been.
Whether with pensions or insurance, any risk pooling situation is a sort of exchange of hostages. I think asking to what extent we should force people into such an exchange is legitimate. Sometimes it may be necessary. Other times not; or perhaps addressable through compromise measures like government-funded catastrophic insurance as a sort of stop-loss strategy for the worst cases, allowing risk populations to cross state lines, etc.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.