IN LAST WEEK’S COLUMN, I mentioned the dire situation faced by a significant fraction of older Americans, and quoted a speech made by Elizabeth Warren on the Senate floor:
“There is a $6.6 trillion gap between what Americans under 65 are currently saving and what they will need to maintain their current standard of living when they hit retirement. $6.6 trillion — and that assumes Social Security benefits aren’t cut. Make no mistake: This is a crisis.”
Private, individual tax-deferred retirement savings are a failure — a noble one, perhaps, but they were sold as a replacement for defined-benefit pensions that brought a dignified retirement to an entire generation of American workers from the 1940s all the way up to and into the 1980s.
Let me show you something. This is a graph of the Dow Jones Industrial Average from the late 19th century until 2009. Focus particularly on that big dip after October 1929:
Notice that the Dow Jones does not again reach its 1929 peak for about 25 years.
Now, imagine that you are 64 years old on Oct. 1, 1929, and had just about reached the point where your investments would provide you with a comfortable retirement. Four years later, your stocks are worth 1/10th of what they were in 1929, you are three years into retirement and those savings are dwindling away to nothing. You just have to wait another 22 years or so (when you’re 89) to get the retirement you were counting on.
That’s one reason 401(k)s are not an adequate substitute for a defined benefit pension. Leaving retirees at the mercy of Wall Street seems the height of cruelty.
There needs to be a new deal (as it were) between capital and labor: We workers will give you our best efforts and the best years of our lives, and capital will use part of the profits we provide them through our labor to provide us with an adequate retirement in return.
That seems a fair deal: both parties have rights, and both parties have responsibilities. This used to be seen as one of those “of course” things that barely merited discussion.
Putting more spending power into the hands of retirees would be a good thing for capital as well — more spending power equals more sales for American companies. And it would be good for the workers who would produce the things those retirees would buy.
It is ludicrous that in a country as wealthy as the United States, the possibility of cutting Social Security benefits comes up so regularly. We should be talking about making Social Security more generous, not less. Expanded benefits could be financed by eliminating the cap on the amount of income subject to the Social Security tax, perhaps supplemented with a Financial Transaction Tax, as has been proposed by former Labor Secretary Robert Reich and others.
I mentioned in my last column that our country’s military retirees could expect to receive 50 percent of their last active-duty paycheck if they retire after 20 years, and the amount escalates to 100 percent for retirees with 40 years of active service.
It is time we recognize that ordinary, non-military American workers also serve our country — sometimes in a very literal way, as in the case of wait staff. But what about the nurses who deliver our babies and care for us when we get sick, the people who stock the shelves in our supermarkets, the mechanics who fix our cars, the carpenters who build our homes and schools, the iron workers who construct safe bridges for us to cross? Is it too much to ask that they, too, should have the kind of retirement we give our military? Large American corporations have the means to provide this to their workers; they do not yet have a mandate to do so.
I believe providing a guaranteed income upon retirement is a responsibility of, and should be a legal requirement for, every sizeable corporation in America, and there should be government support to smaller companies so that they can do the same with their employees.
Since today is Thanksgiving, it is appropriate that we reflect on the many blessings we have in our lives, and turn our thoughts to providence. It is good that we do so — but I invite you also to give a thought today to how we might work together to thank one another for giving the best years of our lives serving one another in our economic needs.
Matt Talbot is a writer and poet, as well as an old Benicia hand. He works for a tech start-up in San Francisco.
Sharing is caring!
Well stared, Matt. I was dumped every 10 years in Corporate America as I reached the top of my salary curve and there was nowhere else to grow. Add two severely ill adult children, who have now passed away at ages 40 and 44, and we are dependent on our SS for approximately 1/2 our income and we earn the rest at ages 67 and 70. Were we not entrepreneurs and hard workers in relatively good health, we’d be up La Creek. Are we counting on any kind of innovative leadership from Congress? Absolutely NOT! Those are shallow-minded obstructionists receiving great benefits from taxpayers, woven into the fabric of lobbyist-supported, Do Nothing Fanny Sitters. We were further gouged to death by a leading HMO, until our Medicare kicked in.
I have no solutions, America, except find a service that everyone needs to survive and adapt until it’s time to adapt again. Edward R. Murrow said it best, “Good Night and Good Luck.” – Peter Bray, Benicia, CA
First line above, “stated” not “stared”—sorry—Peter Bray
401k plans were a giveaway to the banksters. So would privatization of Social Security, should it ever occur.
Enforcing corporate taxation — No more giveaways!
From the above article:
“It is ludicrous that in a country as wealthy as the United States, the possibility of cutting Social Security benefits comes up so regularly. We should be talking about making Social Security more generous, not less. Expanded benefits could be financed by eliminating the cap on the amount of income subject to the Social Security tax, perhaps supplemented with a Financial Transaction Tax, as has been proposed by former Labor Secretary Robert Reich and others”
From the article below:
Solutions to the Corporate Tax ‘Race to the Bottom’
Solutions to the ‘Great Corporate Tax Shift’ are not economic rocket science. To address the ways in which US corporations today avoid paying taxes—state to state, country to country, and US federal—the following short list of measures should be legislated.
And;
“Collectively, these various measures would raise approximately $1 trillion a year, every year, eliminating all US federal deficits, as well as deficits for most US states. Their secondary effects would include re-directing the decades-long outflow of US corporate investment abroad and creating millions of jobs again in the US.”
http://www.zcommunications.org/the-great-corporate-tax-shift-part-3-by-jack-rasmus.html
Enforcing corporate taxation — No more giveaways!
From the above article:
“It is ludicrous that in a country as wealthy as the United States, the possibility of cutting Social Security benefits comes up so regularly. We should be talking about making Social Security more generous, not less. Expanded benefits could be financed by eliminating the cap on the amount of
income subject to the Social Security tax, perhaps supplemented with a Financial Transaction Tax, as has been proposed by former Labor Secretary Robert Reich and others”
More “giveaways” from the article below for the community to consider…
“The fast food industry is notorious for handing out lean paychecks to their burger flippers and fat ones to their CEOs. What’s less well-known is that taxpayers are actually subsidizing fast food incomes at both the bottom — and top — of the industry.”
“What makes all this even more galling is that these fast food giants are pocketing massive taxpayer subsidies for their CEO pay while fighting to keep their workers’ wages at rock bottom. All of the big fast food corporations are members of the National Restaurant Association, which is aggressively working to block a raise in the federal minimum wage to a level that would let millions of fast food workers to make ends meet without public support.”
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/12/02-8
These CEO’s may not have been paid enough. The lower wage jobs are entree level jobs and most are in many cases first time employmemt. Skill level in the long run will determine income. As far as taxes go it was a drop in the bucket in reduced taxes. We should be more concerned about spending at the federal level than complaining about CEO’s pay. We are not a socialist country. Plenty of opportunity. Does that sound selfish? No just a believer in opportunity.
Working men and women need to organize unions, strike if necessary. You need to fight, that is all big business understands. I will never cross a picket line.
It’s a jungle out here, the big toads eat the little toads, the Nightly News only reports the driveby shooters, DUI’s, sports scores and weather reports…you’d think the rest of us were sitting on our hands like the members of Congress and getting paid with great benefits too…watch TV and it’s all crime shows and young women swooning over The latest Bozo who’s a Bachelor…reminds me of a species of babboons in a Walmart with cellphones, looking to buy bananas, not knowing or caring if they come from Brazil or the North Pole…Global warming? They can’t even spell “science” or “weather.” Edward R. Murrow said it best: “Good night and Good Luck.”…pb
Enforcing corporate taxation — No more giveaways!
From the above article:
“It is ludicrous that in a country as wealthy as the United States, the possibility of cutting Social Security benefits comes up so regularly. We should be talking about making Social Security more
generous, not less. Expanded benefits could be financed by eliminating the cap on the amount of
income subject to the Social Security tax, perhaps supplemented with a Financial Transaction Tax, as has been proposed by former Labor Secretary Robert Reich and others”
More “giveaways” from the article below for the community to consider…
” You can also look to top establishment politicians for insight into just how much elites are willing to do to solve the inequality problem.”
“For instance, there’s the little matter of a giant loophole in the tax code that favors the rich. The “carried interest” loophole allows financiers like hedge fund managers, venture capitalists and partners in real estate investment trusts to pay a lower tax rate on their profits than working people pay on their earnings. It’s an unjust handout to the wealthy, and again, the American people are clear on how they feel about the tax code: the rich don’t pay their fair share. ”
“The GOP is vehemently against closing the loophole. But despite the fact that Democrats raged against it last year to defeat Mitt Romney, it is Dems themselves who are standing in the way of getting anything done. As the Boston Globe noted in a recent article, Democrats are worried that “crusading against the ‘carried interest’ loophole at this stage would inflame an important source of campaign contributions for Democrats.”
“Back when he was in the Senate, John Kerry did an elaborate dance around the issue, using his influential post on the Senate Finance Committee to seed skepticism and parrot industry warnings of dire “unintended consequences’’ and unnamed risks to the economy if the loophole were closed, even while voting in favor of the change. With Kerry now at the helm of the State Department, a host of other prominent Democrats, including President Obama and Senator Chuck Schumer, have been quietly working to see that nothing much will be done.”
Conclusion: Filling campaign coffers is more important than dealing with grossly unfair policies that contribute to dangerous inequality.”
http://www.zcommunications.org/global-elites-getting-nervous-about-skyrocketing-inequality-but-wont-spare-a-nickel-to-fix-it-by-lynn-stuart-parramore.html
Matt, while I agree with some of your points, I would also like to point out some other things. First of all, having a retirement package provided by a company that you work for is not a right. I agree that you didn’t say that directly but it was alluded to. What ever happened to people saving for retirement. That is what they did before SS came around. Why have we lost sight of that as a nation?
I am not for government mandating that companies provide for such benefits. I am for letting market forces dictate those conditions. If people are not willing to work for a company that doesn’t provide such benefits, workers will go to other companies and that company will die a speedy death or be forced to change their position to be competitive.
I dont think there should ever be cuts to SS. It’s our money, we invested it and the government should keep their lousy hands off of it. But we all know that is too much to ask.
It saddens me that I hear so many people calling for more and more government control of our lives. Government doesn’t know what is best for me or best for you either. Yet these elitists seem to think they do and they work hard to impose their believes on us. I want no part of it. I want MUCH less government and would like to pay for A LOT LESS government. Everything comes at a price and a trade-off. I don’t like one bit of the price or the trade-offs of government control on our society. It is not working. Nothing the government does is done, well, efficiently or cost effectively.
Take for example healthcare.gov. They had three years and over $600 million dollars to build a fairly straight forward web site and they failed way beyond what any reasonable person would call a total disaster. Compare that to say Walmart. I would bet you a nice clean fresh Ben Franklin that Walmart didn’t take three years to build their web site. And I bet it didn’t even cost $1million dollars. If Walmart had put out to bid a contract for their online business with a web site and the contractor came back with a three year build time and a cost of $634 million dollars, they would have been laughed out of the room. No one seems to be shocked about these numbers but they are so out of the stratosphere it is un believable and unbearable.
With that kind of ineptitude, people still want more government control over their lives? What that tells me that maybe they are confessing that they really don’t know what’s best for them, they don’t know how to care for themselves and they really do need the government to run their lives. It sure would appear that way when you look at what these politicians (both parties) say and do and they keep getting voted in.
The government doesn’t do anything well, they have a lousy track record and they need to be put aside and made much much smaller and given way less power and control.
Government does lots of things well, though having one branch controlled by a cabal of extremists with no interest in governing does make things more challenging. But don’t worry about that website, it’s up and running just fine. And it’s not even December!
How about sharing with us something the government does well, efficiently and cost effectively. I would love to hear about.
Nice way to move the goal posts. First it was “well,” now it’s “well, efficiently and cost effectively.” I’ll stick with well since the other two are much more subjective and arguing with a conservative about what’s cost effective is like arguing with the dog.
1. National defense. Since electing a Democrat we haven’t even been attacked on US soil!
2. Roads. Like em? Thanks gubmint!
3. Parks. You get what you pay for, and some of our best dollars are spent on parks. We should spend more.
4. The FAA. Plane crashes suck. Good thing there aren’t many of them, amirite?
5. The CDC. I just hate pandemics, but maybe it’s just me.
6. Medicaid.
7. Social Security. Those checks miraculously arrive on time every month. Must be magic.
8. The FDA. Especially in drug company oversight, where we lead the world in safety.
9. The FDIC. Seen any run on banks lately?
10. Police and fire protection. Call 911 and you get help. Must be a dastardly big government plot.
I could go on. And on and on. But I’d hate to further shatter your shopworn truisms about “less gubmint” etc etc. Might get you a-thinkin too hard, pop a blood vessel (have your wife call 911)
Thank you, Hank! I enjoyed that one! Well done!–Peter Bray, Benicia, CA
. National defense.
What do you think Peter, is the Defense Department one of the well run government agencies?
DDL: Attack someone else, I never said I was an active endorser of the US government…I just appreciate others who can stand up for it more knowledgeably than myself. Your attack on others ought to be a little more focused. But, choose your own adversaries, there are so many in a liberal state. pb
If you ACTUALLY read my post you would see in paragraph four that I did specify all three elements. I abbreviated for you the second time thinking that you actually read it but it is clear now that you did not.
1) True. Maybe that has something to do with Barry bowing to the muslims.
2) Roads, paid for by the failed bailout. On top of that here in California we pay 39.5 cents per gallon for roads. The highest in the nation. Yes the roads have improved of late and the price is laid on the backs of our children and those not yet born because of government always operating on a deficit and can’t live on a budget. That’s just no fun for the spendaholics.
3) Parks. Low cost overall in comparison
4) FAA. I am a pilot and yes I will attest to the fact that it is a well run organization. All of the different instructors I have flown with are excellent and there is a very high rate of consistency in what they teach.
5) CDC, good. Could it be run better by private industry? Absolutely
6) Medicaid – FAIL
7) SS – FAIL
8) FDA – FAIL
9) FDIC – good. Could it be run better by private industry? Absolutely
10) Police and Fire – local government not Federal. Definitely not run efficiently. Case in point; Vallejo – FAIL. San Carlos – FAIL. Huge amounts of fraud, cronyism, salary over inflation through union contracts. They have a great little scam going on right here in our own fire department.
The point is yes they provide a lot of services. But we all pay too much for them through taxes. But many or all use the services, while not everyone is paying for them. In our household, we get to start keeping the money we earn in June. The whole first half of the year goes to (as you put it) “gubmint” before I get to keep my first dime. That alone is evidence that things are not run well or efficiently or cost effectively. Do you remember reading reports that the Pentagon can’t account for $8.5 trillion dollars? Our budget deficit for 2012 was $1.1 trillion dollars. If that is not bad enough, the pentagon tells the American people they can’t account for $8.1 trillion. Well run – FAIL! Efficient – FAIL! Cost effective – FAIL!
Keep trying!
JLB — Happy Thanksgiving!
It is difficult to win when the opposition talks out of both sides of their mouth.
It’s even more difficult when one side just makes shit up.
http://iacknowledge.net/study-conservatives-more-likely-to-make-up-facts-in-order-to-justify-their-beliefs/
That article is laughable!
How about this one. “If you like your health plan you can keep your health plan; period!” “Well what I really meant to say was …..
Talk about making stuff up. How about this one. “We have to pass Obamacare to find out what’s in it.” Talk about making stuff up. The left has a monopoly on that I’m afraid!
That’s good science. Study after study proves the phenomenon of the conservative reptile brain.
And your repetition of the tired “you can keep it” attack, echoing the know-nothings in your party, shows a deep misunderstanding of the culpability of insurance companies — and the reality about junk insurance.
Here, learn something before you embarrass yourself at dinner today:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/21/obamacare-facts_n_4303837.html
Funny article. All garbage except the part about the guy who was the putz of the article. Interestingly enough, his name is Hank. Is that you?
No, it’s you. Putz.
Same to you Dennis. Hope you have a great day and are able to be with family and friends!
Don’t need to keep trying. By your own admission I just named several things government does well, if not very well. I might add that it’s irrelevant if police and fire is local — you said government. That’s government.
You lose. Again.
SS – Fail? Really? Half of the elderly lived in poverty prior to SS. Now it’s 10%. Sounds like a winner to me. Ask the public if we should do away with SS. Any thoughts as to what the response would be?
You mean like Al Gore talking about putting it in a lock box bot to be touched? You mean like that. FAIL!
‘Lock box bot to be touched’? The only fail here is your inability to put together a meaningful sentence.
You knew very well what he meant. Talk about a local Liberals when the only thing they have to do is correct spelling etc. Very silly and telling about the Liberals frustration with their beloved President and also mine I just do not like his policy and politics.
Small minds concentrate on small things. They can’t help it. When there is no other fight left in them, complain about spelling and call names. Yes that was spelled incorrectly for you on purpose there Benician. It was a freebie from me to you. Enjoy!
Sorry, JLB. You didn’t just misspell. Your sentence made no sense. But, I get it…you think SS is a failure which, of course, puts you in the extreme minority. Poverty amongst the elderly was 50% when SS was introduced. It’s now 10%. Sounds like a pretty successful program to me.
Do us a favor…implore your candidates of choice to run on dismantling SS. Please.
So did the sentence makes sense or not. You sound very confused. In one sentence you say it makes no sense and then you say you get it. So which is it?
The idea of SS, in my opinion is good. I pay into it. It is what the government is doing to it that is the fail, which was the point to begin with. Sorry you missed that. You really do need to pay more attention to the concepts being discussed and focus less on the spelling errors. Are you by chance an OCD english teacher? Just wondering …
“7) SS – FAIL”
Yep…a very nuanced argument. How could I POSSIBLY have concluded you considered SS a failure?
Bottom line: if the government disappeared tomorrow you’d be dead by next week. So be thankful it won’t!
Well, you know nothing about my or my survival skills. More likely you would be looking to me for help if that were to occur.
Since electing a Democrat we haven’t even been attacked on US soil!
More correct would be: Since George Bush started the war on terror we haven’t even been attacked on US soil!
THANK YOU GEORGE!!
More correct would be: no attacks since George allowed that one big one. But who’s counting amirite?
During the presidential transition, the Clinton admin told the Bush admin that Al-Qaeda should be their #1 priority. They completely ignored it. A month before 9/11, W received an intelligence briefing titled ‘Obama determined to strike in the US’ and completely ignored it. Now, you want to make it sound like W is some kind of anti-terror hero? And you wonder why you get mocked so often here?
And, W never did find bin Laden, did he? And, why would he…he admitted getting bin Laden was not a priority. But, Obama did get him, just like he said he would. How ’bout that?
Well stated, Benician. Everyone knows W. Bush was not presidential material. He should have stayed on the ranch chopping wood and rolling armadillos. When 911 is fully examined, the opportunities to fully “control demolish” three NYC buildings to dust and rubble from 2 jet planes and fires hundreds of floors up will be easily traced back to their “complacent and complicit” sources. The truth outs always. pb
Dream omn Peter
Peter is always there to provide a good laugh!
Wait ’til fall guys like Scooter Libby get tired of doing time for others…Nixon will look like a saint by comparison…the Freedom of Information Act starts to unravel the best of buried covert plans, even by hacks…pb
🙂
That one branch that you are referring to is the one that is barely able to keep things from running absolutely out of control. You certainly wouldn’t like it if we had POTUS, Senate and the House all run by republicans now would you? It’s called division of power and it was done for the very reason we are seeing being played out right now.
http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/11/26/21578861-do-nothing-congress-on-track-for-one-of-the-least-productive-years-ever?lite
They were elected to govern. They have opted to obstruct. They do not compromise for fear of being primaried for working with the dreaded Kenyan socialist, therefore nothing gets done. An all-Democrat government would end our economic doldrums (for starters) easily and quickly. Doubt it? See: California.
Yes they have done horrible things like to to force the rest of the government to live by the law with such things as having a budget, and trying to curb out of control spending, and trying to slow down or thwart horrible policies (Obamacare) that will be catastrophic for our country. Policies that we were not allowed to vote on, that we were lied to about, that they used unconstitutional measure to put in place and that no one wants and then we have to pay for it. Its called check and balances and if you assert that they are less than productive, it is only in reflection of what is being done on the other side of the isle with the failed leadership from the left. I could post links to countless articles citing Barry as the least effective president “EVER” on a stack of different things. You would consider them to be about as meaningful as I do your link to NBC news, which no news at all. It is merely one of Barry’s propaganda machines.
“One of Barry’s propaganda machines.” You are a stranger to reason. Have a happy Thanksgiving in la la land.
It appears Benician and Hank are very disturbed about all the recent polls that now have President Obama at his all time lows in all category’s . Even those evil Whigs now look very good compared to the Liberal Socialist. Oh how things have changed. So everything the local Liberals say is meaningless and of no use in determining any issues.
You are again mistaken. But nice try.
Yeah, the Whigs are really concerned about keeping spending within budget. Must be why they voted for two unpaid for tax cuts for the wealthy and two unfunded wars. Dick Cheney: ‘Deficits don’t matter’. Please refer me to the Whig outrage after that comment.
Oh, and btw, after W exploded the deficit (just as Reagan did), Obama has cut it in half. Just saying…
Delisional!
Delusional!
Right the first time.
If you’re unable to understand facts, you should find another hobby.
Are you saying our yearly deficit is now at 300bil? Better look again. It is not.
OK Benician, how about some facts, as in numbers to support your argument that Barry has cut the deficit in half. We had a 1.1 trillion dollar deficit in 2012. So compare that to 2008 and let me know how you are doing with those numbers. It’s basic math you know!
Just to give you a little help. The Federal deficit in 2008 at the end of Bush’s term was $458 billion. So let me know when Obama gets the deficit down to around $230 billion so your comment can become true.
Of course, as we all know, Bush didn’t include the unpaid for wars in his budget. Typical Whig dishonesty. Nor was 2008 his last budget. 2009 was. And, again, Dick Cheney said deficits don’t matter. Please remind us of your outrage in response to that remark.
Dick Cheney’s only heart problem is that he doesn’t have one. He’s from deep space where robots normally eat their young, but nobody wanted him. No one will miss him when he’s gone, except perhaps his grandchildren who don’t know him. Prisoners at Guantanamo will urinate in corners of their jail cells in jubilation. Lying about WMD to get us into Iraq by war was of no moral consequence to him. He lives by wires and glue. He is the most heartless bastard imaginable. The only man to ever act like a President though he was not elected to the office.
Benician JLB is correct his last budget was the 2008/2009 not the 2009/2010 which you seem to think was former President Bush’s budget. Just look at the calendar year spending for 2009 it will tell you the whole story Who was president in 2009? Not Bush.
Benician, the facts are the facts and the numbers are the numbers. The fact is that W started the whole stimulus package thing before the election and I was totally against it then just as much as I was when Obama closed the deal. But the budget was the budget and the redirection around the facts doesn’t change them. The deficit for 2008 was as stated and it hasn’t been anywhere near that amount since. In fact they are saying now that it is the lowest is has been since then bit it is still way more which is nowhere near half. You can argue all you want but all that does is just confirm some things about, that we may already suspect.
The 2009 budget was Bush’s. That’s a fact. Sorry. And, we know when Bush calc’d the budget, he excluded the wars. That’s a fact. We know facts have a liberal bias, but so be it.
It is ok to say just saying but youhould be correct when saying “just Saying”? Just saying.
And you should read your posts before you post them. Just saying.
Just a post not a test.
I am for letting market forces dictate those conditions.
I’m for more of a hybrid – markets can do their work, but (sufficient) government regulation keeps everyone honest, and restrains capitalism’s tendency to destroy itself.
Unregulated capitalism leads, everywhere it’s been tried, to a few people at the top doing great, and a Dickensian nightmare for everyone else – eventually followed by collapse and widespread misery as capital aggrandizes to itself so much of the economy’s gains that there is not enough purchasing power left in the hand of everyone else to keep the whole corrupt machine running.
Unregulated capitalism leads…
Where is it or who is advocating “unregulated capitalism”?
Sorry, all, I have a Thanksgiving event to attend, always a joy to spar with you guys and ladies, enjoy your day. DDL, watch for the December Taproot & Aniseweed coming your way. SORRY OTHERS, I don’t have your e-addresses…bummer, it’s a great, 7-page, in color, free pdf…Cheers to all!…pb
I find it strange that many have achieved financial security over their working years and others have not. Why is that? Were the opportunities only for a select few? No. Were uncontrolled issues only for a select few? No. There were and are many opportunities to select from. Some choose to do that others had s/s and if they were working for a company with a retirement system they were in much better shape as long as they continued to work for that company. Many others used real estate, bonds, savings and many other ways to secure financial security for their retirement. Riding the wave of ups and downs. Why is it s/s keeps raising the amounts over the years for employers and employees? Because s/s needed more money to secure your payout. We could say the folks now are paying to keep our s/s stable. It is the job of the individual to prepare for retirement. Even if it is just a few dollars every week. It does add up and you will be able to get over those unexpected events. It is not the job of the governmemnt to make you whole 100% of the time. We all know how important s/s is and we do appreciate the forced savings we put in that program over the years. But the final answer is yourself. Even folks that started at age forty preparing are much better off than folks that did not prepare. We are respnsible not the government.
“Were the opportunities only for a select few?”
Yes.
“Were uncontrolled issues only for a select few?”
Yes.
You are out of touch and are now showing very strong Socialist leanings just I am showing strong Conservative leanigs. I will take mine any day Hank.
You can take them and keep them. The country and I reject them.
Not true the country voted for Republicans in office 55/45%. That is the number of elected offices they hold. Just saying. By the way Benician do you mean the 2009 budget was all Bush’s or just half of it. Remenber the 2009/10 budget got started under President Obama in 2009. So if we want to use your 2009 budget suggestion it appears President Obama is in for at least half of it. Just saying.
The federal government’s budgets cover a fiscal year. The 2009 budget was the budget from Oct 1, 2008, to Sep 30, 2009. Bush presented that budget to Congress shortly after his State of the Union address in early 2008.
Again bad news for you. Under President Obama the debt is at about 17 tril. Bush has nothing to do with that increase. Even if we use your 2008/2009 budget. Prersident Obama is responsible gor over 6tril increase in national debt.
Yeah and who bailed out the economy from devouring itself? Government was lax and stupid just like its mediocre “leaders” in 2000-2008…and so we are where we are…Occasionally, Livesay you oughta step to the plate and tell the world how dysfunctional the Repubs really are..Like we don’t know already?–pb
http://www.businessinsider.com/study-economy-democratic-presidents-republican-2013-12
And:
http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2013/12/02/blinder_and_watson_on_partisan_election_performance.html
Bush presented that budget to Congress shortly after his State of the Union address in early 2008
Added comments on the “Bush budget” refered to: it was presented to Congress with a projected deficit of $407 Billion. Decreased revenue, Tarp and then the ARRA pushed those numbers up to over 1.4 trillion. Obama added 230 billion to the “Bush budget” and signed it into law in March of 2009.
It may be true that Republicans hold 55% of elected offices. But that does not mean that 55% of the electorate voted Republican.
In the 2012 House of Representative elections, totaling the votes of all 435 districts, Democrats received 1.2% more votes than Republicans. According to Wikipedia, this has happened only 4 times in the previous 100 years.
To clarify my “this has happened” sentence:
What has happened only 4 times in the previous 100 years is that the party who received the plurality in the House of Representative elections did not win the majority of the House seats.
You are correct except for one thing California swayed the vote in favor of Democrats. As you can see that did not help win the house for Dems. Even if they had taken all of Ca. House seats they still wound not have won the House of Reps. Sorry to bring you the bad news.
Just in time for the holidays.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/11/28/the-gop-s-hunger-games-more-food-stamp-cuts-for-the-holidays.html
I wrote a piece some time ago on the mistakes made by George Bush.
One of them was not firing George Tenent as CIA Director on whom he relied for many things, including the existence of mass quantities of WMD’s.
Tenent, of course was appointed by……………….. Bill Clinton.
That is what happens when you believe a Democrat appointee.
No, I do not wonder why I get mocked here, as I simply consider the source: uninformed democrat bootlickers.
IF Al Qaeda was such a threat, why did Bill Clinton pass on OBL?
And do not give us the standard “fact check” BS about ‘not enough evidence to indict him’.
That is laughable.
Bin Laden Lived To Fight Another Day–Thanks To Bill Clinton
Now go ahead, get your last word in.
Oh, DDL:
George Tenet? Now we’ll blame George W. Bush’s incompetence on Tenet’s incompetence? How about Condoleeza Rice and her “not knowing about any warning reports” of aircraft as suspected terrorist vehicles of opportunity? And Colin Powell at the UN and his “renderings” of mobile WMD labs? “Renderings,” Colin? My cat can do renderings. Contrast that to JFK having aerial photos of Russian missiles in Cuba…Bush’s band was incompetent and complicit from the get-go…and we’re all still paying for it. A mule is a mule is a mule even if it maintains other mules in its own stables…W. Bush is proof that enough money can always accelerate stupidity into power…twice! Add Rumsfeld and “trillions’ unaccounted for at the Pentagon…Losers all…pb
You beat me to the response, Peter. Tenet, of course, was the guy who was ‘running around with his hair on fire’ in re the imminent attack, yet was ignored by the Bushies. And, if Tenet was so horrible, what does DDL make of W awarding him with the Presidential Medal of Freedom? Also, was Tenet responsible for W’s Al Qaeda task force NEVER meeting before 9/11? W let 9/11 happen…is responsible for the 3000 deaths that occurred that day, the thousands who have died in war since, the 10’s of thousands wounded and still suffering, and the $2 TRILLION wasted attempting to turn 9/11 into a Halliburton gold mine.
Have a Happy Thanksgiving Peter!
The same Tenet who W ignored when he was ‘running around with his hair on fire’ over the imminent AQ attack? The same Tenet who W awarded with the Presidential Medal of Freedom?
Although, many of us disagree on different topics, I believe we all have quite a bit to be thankful for. I know I sure do. I am thankful for the opportunity to speak my mind freely in a free country. My wish is that you all have a wonderful day and DO take the time to ponder all of the things you have to be thankful for and DO give thanks.
Cheers!
I agree
Hope you all had a truly blessed day yesterday and were able to avoid the mobs of today!