Senators Mark Warner and Saxby Chambliss have re-animated the Catfood Commission, and plan to introduce a bill based on its recommendations in the next Congress.
Two senators pledged on Monday to offer bipartisan legislation next year that reflected proposals to slash the federal budget deficit submitted this month by a presidential commission.
“Taking the commission’s report … we’ll be introducing that as legislation, a legislative vehicle, next year, recognizing in the process that a lot of that would be subject to change,” Democratic Senator Mark Warner said.
He was joined on a conference call with reporters by Republican Senator Saxby Chambliss, who said the two are working together on the project. It would face an uphill political climb next year, despite wide agreement in Congress the yawning deficit must be dealt with soon.
Uphill battle, ay? Chambliss and Warner have a gang of apparently 20 Senators committed to this. You’ll remember that even Tom Coburn voted for the Catfood Commission recommendations, so I’d expect unanimity on the right, at least in the Senate. The House Republicans may be so far gone that they won’t accept much of anything that doesn’t abolish everything in the federal government except their expense accounts and free health care, but that would be essentially the major chance that something similar to this doesn’t get through.
Hilariously, Warner and Chambliss, who want to bring forward a plan that cuts the budget deficit by $4 trillion over the next ten years, just both voted for a tax cut bill that, if the Bush tax rates are continued into perpetuity… add $4 trillion to the budget over the next ten years. This is why I thought that the tax cut deal had to be looked at as a whole. You could have basically eliminated the need for this Warner-Chambliss clown show simply by doing nothing.
Chambliss raised the spectre of taking the debt limit hostage in a call with reporters:
Chambliss said on the call that an impending vote in Congress to raise the government’s debt ceiling — expected to be needed in the first or second quarter of 2011 — will be an important turning point.
“It gives us a deadline to look to from the standpoint of getting some meaningful decisions made … If we can use that as leverage that’s an ideal scenario,” Chambliss said.
“Ideal” is one way of putting it. Another is “will make “The Perils Of Pauline” look like a romantic comedy.” You’re basically going to see a concurrent fight over the debt ceiling AND the funding of the federal government (which will run out March 4), and while it would be logical for Democrats to combine the two, it’s almost certain that Republicans will make different demands on each, leading to separate hostage incidents.
There’s some credible discussion that the debt limit increase really hurts Wall Street more than anyone, and so the Republicans should go ahead and try to slay that beast, with the assumption that they will be miserably unsuccessful. But with government funding set for March, and money for health care and financial reform implementation still lacking, there are simply too many hostage situations to dodge.
Warner, at least, said that the economy would have to recover before moving to austerity, which is a nice view, but almost certainly not one Republicans share. So the more likely outcome here is major budget cutting in the 2011 calendar year, canceling out a lot of whatever stimulative effects come from the tax cut deal. Warner and Chambliss are showing the way.
UPDATE: The Hill has ferreted out the Gang of Catfood.
In Dec. 14 floor speeches, 16 members of the Warner-Chambliss group spoke in praise of the debt commission plan. Speaking were Sens. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), Jon Tester (D-Mont.), Mike Johanns (R-Neb.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), Kay Hagan (D-N.C.), Jim Risch (R-Idaho), Mark Udall (D-Colo.), Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), Jean Shaheen (D-N.H.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Mark Begich (D-Alaska).




159 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
It would be irresponsible not to point out how many of the senators marked with a D on the list
were once darlings of the online left. Mea culpa.
I just like it whenever I get to say the name Saxby Chambliss.
And the idea that this “gang” of millionaires is going to make us eat catfood – priceless.
Your observation is only accurate and just. In future, we will have to pick our darlings more carefully.
If the omnibus and the tax cuts had been packaged together, would that have stopped it? If it has already been appropriated, is it immune from cuts?
Bipartisan is the new term for piece of shit……..
Sounds like population control. Starve the elderly…die quickly.
Fuck You Mark Warner.
Never. Another. Vote. Or. Dollar.
Asshole.
“Catfood Commission” Sounds like fear-mongering from the left.
From NPR last Friday.
The median income of US House members is $986,000 per year.
The median income of US Senate members is $2.5 million per year.
Appreciate their efforts to reign in government spending. Hopefully there is some steak to match the sizzle.
What happened to that ‘share the sacrifice’ meme?
We must remind them.
Huh, just got off the phone with a staffer (quick phone conversaion)
Me: Just read Senator Warner is working with Senator Chambliss to introduce the catfood recommendations as legislation next year, is that true?
Staffer: Ah, Senator Warner is working with a bi-partisan group of Senators to reduce the deficit.
Me: Didn’t the Senator just vote last week to increase the deficit with vote on the tax cuts?
Staffer: He did.
Me: Do you not see the irony in that?
Staffer: …silence…
Me: Well he’s lost one vote in Virginia he got last time. Thank you. Goodbye.
LOL, staffer didn’t even know how to respond.
You showed her!
Queen Elizabeth delivered her May austerity message wearing a crown containing 22,000 diamonds. Our politicians are not so ostentatious but they are just as avaricious and clueless.
I managed to get my hands on a photo of incoming congress as they prepare to get serious about the nation’s fiscal problems.
Look at ‘em, being all deliberative, an’ shit…
Yeah, I’ll just bet you’re really interested in reducing the deficit too since I’ll just bet you supported the huge increase in the deficit in last week’s vote.
There are many ways to skin a cat
Brutal. Funny!!
Starve it so it can be drowned in the bathtub doncha know
It was him, but don’t recall his name already.
Snark On//”This might be one of their big opportunities to turn the US into a large dinosaur park after they are done using it as a post service economy cemetery.”//Snark Off.
That photo is such an accurate depiction of Washington DC.
Thanks for sharing it.
replying to TomThumb@ 21.
Seriously (snark well-taken)
what do they plan to do re: the civil unrest
that will no doubt follow? alot of angry people
with time on their hands.
How could the U.S. Congress overlook the “do nothing” option for eliminating the Bush tax cuts? I thought doing nothing was their core competency.
Does that “Snark On / Snark Off” thing work sorta like The Clapper(tm)?
I need to get me one of them contraptions..
Uh-Huh. I just wish we could starve the congresscritters. Somehow the corporate giveaway has to stop. I don’t know what they are thinking, but if government is drowned in the tub as Norquist and his crew want, there will be no need for congress.
Turns out the “doing nothing” specialty is reserved for us, the people.
The “damn the torpedoes” fun is reserved for the rich.
What is even more shocking is that much of that income is derived from interests in defense-related industries — industries that they are enriching by voting for funding of warz and expensive weapons systems.
Actually, cat food is kind of spendy.
Cheaper to eat chicken or ground beef.
Hey! Who could have ever guessed?
This is Exactly How They Are Going to Cut Social Security
Yep.
Yep. They are the original “inside traders”. Most all of congress holds large quantities of MIC stock.
Argh!
We need to get the word out to the low-info crowd.
Well… George Orwell said:
Not saying the future looks exactly like that, but if people get hungry (etc), it’s not inconceivable that the domestic military machine just might start playing rough. Not an enchanting proposition…
Last Wednesday, $100m went up in smoke with not a word mentioned in the US press.
I suspect the Catfood Commission would, if they could, institute the policy from the movie “Logan’s Run”….you die once you hit 30…no pesky aging problems, Medicare, etc.
I think they will have to show how SS causes US Debt. It doesn’t and they need to get their facts straight! Now, medicare on the otherhand may contribute but it is their own fault for not cracking down on the fraud by big Pharma and Big Med.
Underneath every snarky comment is that serious question which you have just repeated. I don’t know the answer to that one.
Actually the person we have to thank for this is Barack Obama. If he didn’t appoint the catfood commission to begin with, this would just be another whack-a-doodle idea by Republicans who want to grab that third rail.
Not when it’s actually their money involved. Priorities.
What I love is they pretend these are the Commissions’ recs. They aren’t. Two people put out a report and blew off the process, no vote, no nothing.
But there were objections.
It’s important to point out how long it takes them to set up these tests and they are simulated over and over and painstakingly synchronized and coordinated and it still doesn’t work. One might as well throw money into a land war in Asia that can’t be won. Oh, wait…..
True. I have reached the point where I loathe him
so much I decided he is unworthy of any more of my emotions.
Moving forward, we need to marry him to every morsel of catfood-related
pain he has triggered.
The faster they do away with the program the better. With a little luck we can ween the American people off of SS within a generation.
If blurry pictures of a truck are all it takes to go to war…
No cuts in spending without a Rich Man Tax added on. If the Democrats use this argument and don’t fold like a lawn chair then we will have check mate in spending cuts.
Or the middle class tax payer…
This country is going to hell in a hand basket on a rocket ship full of jet fuel. The Dems are behind the wheel while the Repubs navigate. That’s great bipartisanship for ya right there
What do you mean “we”? Do you have a mouse in your pocket?
And by accepting the commissions recommendations which only received 11 votes instead of the required 14/18, he created an atmosphere of inevitability that this deficit cutting crew would receive a hearing in Congress.
Yep. Insider traders/traitors, and owners. You know, when Palin responded to Barbara Bush her words were true. Poor thing, she only slips up and tells the truth when she gets angry. {Bless her little heart!)
I’m sorry, but it’s very hard for me not to laugh at this. Since when did facts have anything to do with the prevailing narrative that Washington puts out there, the media amplifies, and the public adopts as conventional wisdom?
I’m surprised Durbin isn’t involved. He was all on board with the Simpson-Bowles recommendations.
Or one could throw the money at the 100 US cities that are facing financial crisis.
THAT brought a big ‘ole full belly laugh out loud!!!
Thanks!
Laugh all you want. I think America has watched the leadership show reruns all they can stand.
New Year, New Rules. America will get uppity about SS being dismanteled.
The scary thought is how much worse it’s going to be now that net neutrality is dead.
What alternatives for keeping informed will there be?
They appear to drag him out when they need this shitpile to have a bipartisan odor or to beat some DFHs.
That’s another old but useful regional colloquialism. You’re welcome!
The Republicans just increased the deficit on an order of 1 trillion dollars. Who are the retards with this lorry full of bullshit?
Which is why any bill implementing its recommendation will also include a mandatory name change to “Caviar Commission.”
The ones that want to pull the plug on Grandma and Grandpa!
You should run in younger circles. Almost everybody I encounter who’s my age already dismisses Social Security as a doomed failure that they’ll never see the benefit of, if they think about it at all. For people 35 and under, the narrative of the “deficit-hawks” is already the accepted truth.
The Obama is in the background promoting this “compromise,” and they seem dedicated to cutting the deficit by $400 billion per year.
Deficits could by that much reduced by either:
* letting the Bush tax cuts expire, which cuts the GDP by $120 bilion, a multiplier of .30.
* cutting social services per the Catfood Commission, which cuts the GDP by $600 billion (6.5 million $1000,000 salaries), a multiplier of 1.50.
The difference is $530 billion, the equivalent of ten million $53,000 salaries, the price we pay for Obama’s adherence to Reaganomics.
By the way, those multipliers are gleaned from Mark Zandi’s 2008 written testimony to Congress — see the chart on page 10 of this pdf.
and combine it with the idea from Soylent Green.
Or really anybody (not rich) who is sick. Like Jan Brewer.
“Then they should die and decrease the surplus population”.
Indeed!
To punctuate my point about the uselessness of facts in our political culture… the Tea Party exists.
No doubt. Won’t see a dime and planning accordingly.
LMAO! Or the Caviar for All Commission.
I run around with some younger people. Here is the fact of the matter. I have worked and paid into that insurance pool for 42 years! It is insurance, I paid for it, and I WANT MY MONEY!
Sounds like the Tea Party.
LOL.
Me need one, too.
And you’ll likely get most of yours.
They’re likely going to destroy social security slowly, otherwised peeps would be in streets. Now I agree we should probably be in the streets anyway, but I’m just saying most folks will never get there due to the slow nature they’re going to use to kill it.
Folks like you and others over a certain age will likely get most if not all of their benefits. Folks under 40 will likely see very real and painful cuts, and folks under 25….. I dunno.
We’ve got to stop this from occurring in the first place, but it appears quite impossible to me.
That’s it in a nutshell. People like HeadedWest seem to think this is the government’s money and resent having to pay anything in. Good. End the program. By all means but trust me in that I am going to demand back every single cent I’ve paid in plus the average APR accumulated between the time I began paying in in 1975 and now. Every. Single. Cent. That money doesn’t belong to the government anymore than my cat does. It’s my 401k that I’ve been paying for.
eesh. true!
Cracking down on fraud perpetrated by “Big Pharma” and Big Med” is a good start, but the crack downs can’t stop there. The fraud against Medicare in the Home Health Care and medical device industries (including those wonderful little scooters)is draining the system of needed funds. Then there are the many medical practices (often nothing more than mail drops)pulling medicare card holders off the street with small cash payments so that their medicare card number can be used for billing the government for unnecessary and undelivered services. I would love to see medicare for all in this country, but the swamp must be drained and the scammers must be seriously sanctioned if “single payer” is to have any chance of success.
This isn’t true at all. Myself and many people believe we can find better ways to invest our future retirement than the U.S. government can. Therefore we shouldn’t be forced to blindly pay any of our money into a system when it is uncertain what the return on our investment will be or if there will be any return at all.
Margaret and Oldfatguy, I am sick to death of the word salad people throw at us “of a certain age”.
Who in their right minds wants to give the government more money than just the standard payroll tax and then walk away from it? NOBODY! Let’s give one recent HUGE example of tax cuts! If the government can afford to give tax cuts to any single entity, it can DAMN sure afford to PAY BACK it’s obligations for SS and Medicare.
I ain’t buying no other bullshit. PERIOD!
It is a big document, almost two years old. Where’s the data you are referencing? Could you please be more specific with a page number or a section heading? And, thanks for sending the pdf our way!
And you should get it. That has nothing to do with my point.
The fact of the matter is that people think the debt ceiling itself is somehow an interesting and necessary edifice, and that goes effectively completely unchallenged. Hence the leverage it holds as a hostage.
The overwhelming majority of people think of government deficits like they do their own debts, hence the leverage deficit-hawkishness holds on policy, and peoples’ acceptance of it.
Huge numbers of people appear to hold the belief that for them Social Security is nothing but a catchphrase, and as such will see its dismantling as matching with the inevitability they already internalized.
There’s enough force of fallacy and apathy there to make sure this happens, and that’s precisely why the debt ceiling issue is what they’re going to use make it happen.
Are you and your mouse telling me that’s not my money?
DiFi on the list is no surprise. Ron Wyden is. Perhaps his turn as one of Glennzilla’s Rotating Villains?
Simple rule of thumb: if Feinstein’s for it, I’m against it.
I hope you can. I hope you can invest your money and get a fantastic return on it with no fees or penalities. However, you had better watch it like a hawk because the stock market is not for individual people. If it were, nobody would need a real job.
If you think the market is not manipulated and tilted against individual investors you had better check again.
not at all. But you’re money shouldn’t be coming out of my pocket.
Hear! Hear! Give me my money back if you gut or end the system or expect me in your face about it.
My money isn’t coming out of your pocket genius. It’s already come out of my own. Money is fungible. You should look that word up.
Wyden seems to have found lots of room on the right to maneuver now that he doesn’t have a GOP Senator from Oregon on that flank. Merkley is light-years better on all issues, and Wyden seems to have found comfort moving “bi-partisanly” embracing some of the crazy right ideas. See also, health insurance ‘reform.’
Technically, nobody’s money is coming out of your pay. The reason that is being said is to make people that don’t know any better get all up in arms about somebody living off of you. It’s just not true.
You’re welcome to believe that. However, the likelihood is that you can’t. Social Security is a sensible default condition, because research shows overwhelmingly that people will not make a proactive choice to invest even when provided with easy opt-in choices (like company 401k’s), and further that you’re exceptionally unlikely to work the market to consistently surpass SS payout value over your lifetime.
I understand that and you should get every dime of it.
I’m only saying that just because you have made this contract with the federal government and paid into the system others shouldn’t be forced to do the same.
If they didn’t have a “safety net” those attitudes would change. Otherwise let them rot. Besides social security pays an inflation adjusted rate of 1.23% a year. Most people would do better in an FDIC insured account.
Why not?
That is the whole concept of insurance.
Wigwam. I think you made a leap I could not follow, sorry. It is the application of a multiplier in reverse to the option of implementing the B-S cuts, times 1.50 and coming up with 600 billion removed from the GDP. Are you sure you can work that equation in reverse like that?
This.
Wyden only ever appeared liberal compared to Gordon Smith. He’s long been a champion of a lot of DLC’er Third Way policies.
Facebook ‘em. Include links. Constantly volunteer it, as if it’s inside information, to your co-workers and friends and family. Rev up some outrage. That’s what I’ve been doing. Do what ACT UP would do. I’ve also been mobilizing my nutbag rightwing bible-totin’ family, some of whom are currently receiving SS checks. As far as I see it, this is no time to be too picky about recruits. I am not a believer in the “enemy of my enemy” crap, but I am a believer that people can come together for a common purpose.
To the right-wingers, frame the looming SS cuts as Obama’s big government takeover of your rights, frame it as a corporate republican betrayal of the conservative principles of family, hearth, and home, frame it as evil liberals trying to kill us.
To the left-wingers, frame it as Obama’s big corporate sellout of SS, frame it as a betrayal of everything that allows America to thrive, frame it as evil republicans trying to kill us.
Frame it in whatever terms will rev up outrage in the person you are talking to.
We have to mobilize ourselves to act. We have to speak out, and not just on friendly blogs. We must speak out TO EVERYBODY WE KNOW, regardless of their political affiliations. After all, conservatives want to retire someday too, and they are not all rich. Everyone who is not independently wealthy has a everything to lose if Social Security cuts begin.
Then stop setting up straw men like how “you’re paying for my money” and so forth as if we’re a bunch of 8th graders who will be doing remedial math next summer. That whole bit about how my money shouldn’t be coming out of your pocket is just insulting.
And more “I’ve got mine, fuck everybody else” brought to you by HW.
If you haven’t left yet, how can you be headed anywhere?
Owls and Scarecrow flying overhead.
Anyway, I’m not backing down on the save SS mantle. It is all people have left since the stock market and big insurance, along with retirement acounts that have nobody watching over them have occured. It is a way for biz to steal legally.
Some of us don’t need a babaysitter
I too came to this conclusion many years ago.
Unfortunately there’s no research about choice and preference that indicates this to be true at all. People overwhelmingly have a temporal bias toward the immediate, because we’re very very bad at both predicting and controlling long-term outcomes.
In the case of 401k’s the rate of participation in automatic enrollment schemes that required an opt-out consistently significantly eclipsed the rate of participation in deliberate opt-in schemes. From memory it was nearly a 5:1 margin. This transcended all manner of matching incentives, etc. If what you claim were true, then the rates of participation should have been on par with one another. Because people would think the 401k a waste of money since they can just rely on the “safety net.”
It’s nice that you think things, and you’re entitled to your opinion and penchant for self-destruction, but I tend to stick with the science and data.
“Otherwise let them rot” Spoken like a true carnivore (or Republican).
What line of work are you in? Do you have the ability to put back 35 percent of your income on a monthly basis? If so, then you will be just fine withou SS. Just don’t gamble it in the stock market.
If they are to die, then they best be about it and decrease the surplus population.
HeadedWest = Ebenezer Scrooge.
As it is your contributions have gone to pay the benefits for someone else and others contributions will go to pay your benefits and so on. So we are in agreement that there should be privatized accounts?
Minnesotans please note that Amy Klobuchar is on board with this. How she expects to get reelected running on cutting Social Security is a mystery to me.
The central tennet of conservatism is to be fundamentally in denial about one’s own frailties.
You may think you’re so smart and make so much money in your working years that you can provide for your own retirement, but not everyone is in your boat.
Now you have to ask yourself, do you want urchins on every corner selling pencils and apples and old people under news papers littering the sidewalk on your way to work?
I’ve known some elderly (in-laws) who lived very modestly but independently on SS. They would never have been able to save enough over their working days to live into their 80′s. They would have been devastated to become a burden on your family.
SS allowed them to maintain their dignity. Yes, they paid in for others, and then received SS when they needed it.
It’s not all about how good the best can do. Sometimes you have to think about the society you want to live in. It would be nice if everyone was above average, but that can’t happen.
She doesn’t have to get re-elected, she just has to successfully cut Social Security. That will be her measure of accomplishment.
BINGO!! and seasonal, as well.
IT IS INSURANCE! Why can’t you understand that? Oh and I can go further than that. How about taking a person’s yearly SS contributions and giving that a 6% interst rate, compounded annually, for 55 years.
Then add on top of that more of the windfalls of a government doing well.
I believe we have paid our dues.
You must not be aware that we have all been paying in pretty much double the needed amount for Social Security since 1983 in order to accommodate the needs of the current recipients as well as for the coming bulge of Boomers.
So yes, it is her money
And no privatized accounts.
You may not like the idea but you are still smart enough to realize how incredibly stupid that idea is after the example of ’07/’08. Unless you really do prefer to see old people living on the street? Or do you just want them all to disappear and die so that you can’t bother your little head about them?
Could you please be a little more heartless, you haven’t quite matched the tin man yet.
Saying folks that can’t make it in a capitalist system (a system based on winners AND LOSERS) requires a baby sitter is just plain mean.
What about folks that aren’t very smart? Let them rot.
Folks that are disabled in some way? Let them rot.
Folks that through no fault of their own need a temporary helping hand? let them rot.
FWIW, if you’re ever in need, and I can in anyway help, I’ll be glad to, even with your disgusting attitude. No man is an island, and in a civilized society folks look after one another.
Think of what they would have had if they never gave a dime to social security. They would have been better off with their money returning multiples of what SS provided to them by investing in FDIC insured accounts.
Try to follow me now:
Money. Is. Fungible.
fungible
adj
Definition of FUNGIBLE
1
: being of such a nature that one part or quantity may be replaced by another equal part or quantity in the satisfaction of an obligation
2
: interchangeable
Your argument is specious.
Definition of SPECIOUS
1
obsolete : showy
2
: having deceptive attraction or allure
3
: having a false look of truth or genuineness : sophistic
I never claimed she didn’t have a right to or deserve what she has invested in the system.
Fuck no. Want a private account? Set one up. You’re perfectly free to do so.
BOOM! You are blinded by the wrong light and trying to lead those that see.
You surely didn’t have anything invested the past 5 years. If you did, you weren’t paying attention!
That’s all. I’m done and will go visit with Scarecrow.
Family, friends, charitable organizations, churches etc etc etc
Do you really think people making $10K, $15K, $20K, $25K, or even up to $50K per year would have taken that amount and invested it instead of using it to live on over their lives? What are you breathing in that fantasyland?
instead of 5 years why not look at the past 30 years?
whose fault is that?
But you were the one that said let them rot.
It’s your attitude that is in fact rotten.
“I’ve got mine and fuck everybody else” isn’t going to play well if there is in fact a judgement day too. Good luck with that.
Wish FDL policy would let me say what I really think, but I think it’s safe to say that your attitude is disgusting, selfish, and so inhumane as to question whether you are, in fact, human.
If you’re really headed west, now would be a good time to leave.
Oh obviously the fault of the people who could only find a minimum wage job working as a janitor or whatever. After all, if they were smart like you they would have been born into a family that encouraged education and gave them a good foundation, college education and a step up in life.
I’d hate to see what your karmic balance is going to look like.
If people are unwilling to take care of themselves, their family or friends that what do you expect to happen? I’m sorry there are not enough unicorns and rainbows to go around.
Are you saying that the deficit commission cuts take much more out of the economy than the letting the Bush Tax cuts expire would have? I agree with you completely!!!!!!!!!
And please feel free to keep going until you reach the far east or middle east.
Unfortunately there’s no research about choice and preference that indicates this to be true at all. People overwhelmingly have a temporal bias toward the immediate, because we’re very very bad at both predicting and controlling long-term outcomes.
In the case of 401k’s the rate of participation in automatic enrollment schemes that required an opt-out consistently significantly eclipsed the rate of participation in deliberate opt-in schemes. From memory it was nearly a 5:1 margin. This transcended all manner of matching incentives, etc. If what you claim were true, then the rates of participation should have been on par with one another. Because people would think the 401k a waste of money since they can just rely on the “safety net.”
It’s nice that you think things, and you’re entitled to your opinion and penchant for self-destruction, but I tend to stick with the science and data.
Ironically, the overwhelming likelihood is that you drastically overestimate your own accumen relative to the people you’re claiming aren’t “capable” of taking care of themselves.
Where the hell are you coming from anyhow. You would rather invest your money in lets say the stock market? Are you crazy?? you might as well go to the nearest casino and drop your money there.
I know hard core conservatives who caucus with the Republican Party , work on elections and give lots of money to the party. They are pissed about the possible reduction or reform of Social Security. They know very well that if you do not take money from people and put it away for there “old age” we will have to create another Welfare Program to take care of those who have no money by time they are elderly. This is what they do not want to pay for. Unless you are worth millions the average Joe has too many things that come up during their lifetime that prohibt from saving. Therefore taking money from payroll tax is the best solution for the future. It was reported recently that because of the economy people are tapping into there 401k’s at an alarming rate. But they can’t get to there SS money. Get It !!!
Have you seen what banks pay on savings accounts? People who aren’t as fortunate as you apparently have been aren’t able to invest in the market. You expect people making $20-40K per annum to be able to invest for their retirement, a totally unrealistic scenario. You may have enough that you don’t need SS but I’d be willing to bet you’re going to apply for it when you’re eligible and say that you’re entitled to it, as you are.
Hopefully no one in your family will have catastrophic medical expenses because if they do and you’re not very wealthy SS may be all you’ve got left after bankruptcy.
That said I’ll leave Mr Compassionate Troll to continue to hijack the thread.
Headed West, you can do anything you want to do with your own money. STOP thinking you have the knowledge to overpower the country and tell the rest of us what we should do.
I’m not depending on anybody and I have done my own investments to make sure. You need to live a little before thinking you have all the answers.
HeadUpHisWest is engaging in THE fundamental conservative game; pissing off liberals.
Ignore it.
WYDEN?!?
Ron Wyden’s on the list!?!
*smoke rises*
Let’s find out….
…I just got off the phone with a Wyden staffer in Portland. She didn’t know anything. I read off parts of the Hill and Post articles. There’s no previously prepared statement. She would have to look at the Congressional Record for Dec. 14th for what Wyden said.
I know Wyden just had surgery for early stage prostate cancer. I’m sure his staff is in a fair bit of disarray due to that, and probably won’t be able back up to normal function level until after the 1st.
I will find out more after New Years.
Are Bernie Madoff & Kay Lay on your speed dial?
You might give Strunk & White a call too.
Hi Tom. Sorry for the late reply—I was multitasking.
I”m basing those numbers on the chart on page 10 of Zandi’s 2008 written testimony to Congress. The stimulative effects of spending increases involve mostly social services and average roughly 1.5. The stimulative effect of making the Bush tax cuts permanent, which is what’s going on here, has a line of its own and is rated .31. These are based on sensitivity analyses and the destimulative effects of doing the opposite is the same but with the opposite sign.
ohh look another unemployed English major……
It is called being able to communicate effectively
Or are you someone who thinks proper English should not be taught, spoken, and written because it might make you seem elitist?
Well said Margret, well said.
HeadedWest you seem to be somewhat intelligent.
Why are you not telling everybody how the RUSSIANS, CHINESE, JAPANESE, FRENCH, are plotting to end the DOLLAR as the reserve currency of the world, which would kill american business and wipe out those private accounts you like
You do know about this?
MOODY’s use to give 61 USA companies a triple AAA credit rating, now the USA only has 4 companies receiving a triple AAA credit rating
You do know about this?
All that private account crap, is probably not a great idea, when the USA is going in the tank.
HeadedWest are you David Axelrod? Gibbs? etc… please tell OBAMA to promote your ideas :)
I can attest to that from my own personal experience.
I was a minister. I opted out of Social Security. I opened an I.R.A. I put in each month the amount that I would have sent to Social Security.
Then I went from having a position to having none. I ended up cashing out the I.R.A. because it was all I had. My next position didn’t pay enough to make ends meet and I had to work at a convenience store. I never was able to put another penny aside from my ministerial income. Thank Goddess that after I left the ministry and became a counselor I was able to pay into Social Security again.
Those of us at the bottom end of the pay scale would never be able to do all that right wing compound interest savings garbage. Plus when they switched the fairy tale from an I.R.A. to a 401(K) it assured us that we’d lose it all anyway when the market crashed after one of the bubbles whose crashings never seem to hurt the plutocrats.
It took me awhile to get it but what you are saying would definitely make a dynamite post. I like Moody’s use of the word “scattershot” because it describes the Obama economic interventions accurately. Stimulus was tepid and small. The extension of the tax cuts and the payroll tax cut is too small as a stimulus, yet represents more to add to the deficit, and the Catfood Commission cuts would be a GDP crusher as well as social genocide. InTheseTimes has an article you might like today, about 3-steps to this madness: the giveaway tax cuts, the cuts to social spending, and then the reduction in taxes for the affluent and rich and increase in taxes for the poor and middle class. Thanks for getting back to me with your responses.
Mark Warner is such a perfectly concise symbol of the average 2010 Democratic politician, and why everyone immediately started hating the Democrats again right after O’s inauguration. There is no limit to what he will do to flout his establishment-revered “centrist” corporatism, always dressed up as “fiscal conservatism,” always by those who wallow most greedily in the decadent Washington slop. THIS is what the Democrats are, as most everyone here already knows. “Deficit reduction!” they squeal with girlish delight. It’s bad enough that deficit reduction is just a meaningless truism covering up typical Washington oligarch-coddling; why does deficit reduction also have to be some sort of sexual fetish to these mutant centrist drones?
Who wrote you a check 3 days ago to start posting here.
Slithered in at 12:30am on the 17th. Imagine that.
His/her second comment at the Lake was a reply to my comment “You need a front loader to carry that load of horseshit, troll.”
My dad had a PhD in Engineering and an MBA from a Big 10 school. He took his retirement money early. He was certain with PhD level math skills and his MBA training he could manage his retirement money better than money managers.
He was not buying stocks. Mutual funds only. Nothing considered risky. Just spread his risk out.
My dad didn’t even make it to this bubble. He lost everything by the last bubble. Wall Street is a big con. It’s no safer to invest on Wall Street than it is to “invest” in a casino. The press only covers the winners. There’s just not much coverage of all the losers.
People have the same chance of getting rich playing craps as they do getting rich investing on Wall Street. Same chance of losing everything as well.
It’s Grover Norquist’s wet dream come true: starve the beast and drown it in the bathtub.
Yes indeed -
It is about time the work house, the poor house, and teaching folks without funds that there is pride in dying quietly out of sight (as a Tory letter suggested in a 1896 Times of London letter to the editor -) so that our betters are not disturbed) were all brought back.
We can zoom past FDR right to the 1890′s – and heck blaming immigration stories will be in style again as the rich hide from us their desire to not pay taxes because it is good for our character to not have a social safety net provided by the government, and it is good that more starve to fund the military that the rich want to protect their corporations.
That America ” Love It Or Leave IT”
Anybody who seriously thinks the financial markets are fair should read Matt Taibbi’s Griftopia. (That doesn’t include the troll you’re responding to; it just enjoys yanking your chain, and has no intention of thinking seriously about anything.)
While a right to a limited amount of personal and real property (personal effects, reasonable personal savings, a house or two, as in the middle-class stereotype) makes sense from a moral standpoint, it should be obvious to anyone familiar with how fortunes are made that private ownership of property in the capitalist sense – vast corporate and individual fortunes – has absolutely no moral legitimacy whatsoever. All large fortunes are the direct or indirect result of extreme forms of violence and fraud, including (if one looks back far enough, and it doesn’t have to be very far) slavery and genocide. The government doesn’t need to justify taking back everything they stole and putting it at the disposal of the common good. It needs to justify not doing so.
Please stop feeding the trolls.
Right now, progressives are pissed and are ripe for goading.
Please stop taking the bait.
Please, do not feed the goaders.
I saw a couple goading comments, and then countless people fell for it and replied. The replies only allowed the goader to get in some more goading.
It has made this thread nearly unreadable, and that was what the troll wanted to accomplish all along.
Genuine people with different points of view post all the time, and they are easy to tell apart from the goaders. I know that we all welcome people who are interested in genuine conversation and hashing out all the angles and what-ifs of a variety of topics. Goaders don’t do that. They are hit-and-run until they get a reply, and then they continue to goad.
I have a question, what should the percent of the national GDP should the federal budget be?
Should there be a cap on federal spending?
What percent of the federal budget should the top 10% of the income earners pay?
Take the money you put in and add to it the APR dividends (4.9% in the latest report this September) and then remember to double it for your employer’s contribution. People in high cost of living states may have accumulated $400,000 or more. At a payout to you of $20,000 a year the SSA still doen’t lose any money.
I have gotten the same sense, unfortunately.
I guess, if they (the under-35s) are content to let it happen, it will be a self-fulfilling prophecy, although it doesn’t have to be that way. I hope they’ve all started saving their pennies.
I’ve been wondering how difficult it would be to figure out how much of a lump sum would be owed to each of us, on an individual basis, who has paid in for 30-40 years.
Any suggestions from the math wizards among us?
I would be a good figure to be able to cite when calling/writing congress critters and the Prez.
[Therefore we shouldn’t be forced to blindly pay any of our money into a system] “when it is uncertain what the return on our investment will be or if there will be any return at all.”
You could pretty much say the same thing about the stock market into which, I assume, you would be sending at least some of your hard-earned cash, once SS is gone and everyone is on his/her own. And what if the Mother of All Crashes occurs just as you retire, and there is no SS safety net to break your fall?
Oh, and, what are you gonna do–in this best-of-all-possible-worlds sans Social Security–about the multitudes of people who, for whatever reason, aren’t so blessed that they can and will pay into and invest in just the right portfolio during their working lives? It will be very messy when all those old, broke people start dying in the streets and cluttering up your view.
Maybe each of you schmarties could be required to “adopt” or “foster” one of the less-schmart. You know, sort of a Social Security revisited scenario with a slightly different take.
Nathan – Others have observed it before: Your comments are very insightful and valuable. Thank you.
Right, it was one bunch of Democratic prima donnas handling taxes and a whole other bunch of prima donna handling Omnbus, each doing their own thing. The Republicans stayed disciplined and could take them out one at a time.
Omnnibus, taxes and the debt limit should have been deal with at the same time. James Baker used to say at the beginning of negotiations, nothing is agreed to untill everything is agreed to. Any concession he offered you was contingent on the whole deal being worked out.
In contrast, the President keeps getting nickel and dimed, the Republican can’t do anything else but keep taking what he’s giving away, they have their own base to worry about.