Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: 240 is Back on June 29, 2010, 03:51:43 PM
-
Good/bad economic idea?
Good/bad politics idea?
If you're an older voter and this guy wants you to work 5 more years to get YOUR money, how do you feel?
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20009192-503544.html
-
Good/bad economic idea?
Good/bad politics idea?
If you're an older voter and this guy wants you to work 5 more years to get YOUR money, how do you feel?
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20009192-503544.html
Its a necessesity.
www.usdebtclock.org
-
Good/bad economic idea?
Good/bad politics idea?
If you're an older voter and this guy wants you to work 5 more years to get YOUR money, how do you feel?
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20009192-503544.html
THe increase in social security and pension age is happening around the world. France just damn near had a RIOT over the fact that they want to raise the retirement age two additional years. The whole goal of these increases is the HOPE that the person DIES before collecting a dime. Maybe they should raise the age to 100 and thereby guarantee everyone will contribute and no one will collect. Meantime monet is wasted left an right on foolishness and war making.
3 the national debt has nothing to do with the citizens. Your american government is spending that money on war making and military arms primarily. Borrowing billions daily to keep this madness of killing and occupying nations going. America for the most part is raggedy as hell and just like a person who is compulsive in their spending ... really has nothing to show for the money spent other than an extreme excess of worthless military arms. I don't think a single sane person wants their taxes spent on war making when schools, roadways, infrastructure of all type, manufacturing, etc etc IS IN COMPLETE FAILURE. America needs a serious reorganizing of its priorities...even though it is far too late for that now.
-
3 the national debt has nothing to do with the citizens
wow you must be on some good shit if you think that
-
wow you must be on some good shit if you think that
No Berzerk it is just that I know more about what is going on in america than you d even though you live there...
-
yes you keep telling yourself that samsonjag, take another puff off your happy glass tube
-
yes you keep telling yourself that samsonjag, take another puff off your happy glass tube
I will leave the puffing to Phelps... You need to educate yourself on the difference between national debt, consumer debt, taxes, IRS, to have a discussion on this board. Clearly you are clueless Berzerk.. no surprise there. Maybe you can contact Sacha Faal to help you with the particulars...
-
Actually the debt has plenty to do with it's citizens. The debt influences plenty of things from monetary policy, creation of further debt, credit ratings, strength of currency etc etc.
Then you take a look at the fact that the debt and currency is backed by the "Full faith and credit..." of said citizens. Extrapolate from there and you get the point.
Or not.
-
The problems with SS are purely demographic. When this madoff scheme was created there were 16 workers for every retiree, now there are only 4 to 1.
Additionally, life expectancy much much less.
Everyone needs to watch IOUSA to get a clue about this.
-
THe increase in social security and pension age is happening around the world. France just damn near had a RIOT over the fact that they want to raise the retirement age two additional years. The whole goal of these increases is the HOPE that the person DIES before collecting a dime. Maybe they should raise the age to 100 and thereby guarantee everyone will contribute and no one will collect. Meantime monet is wasted left an right on foolishness and war making.
3 the national debt has nothing to do with the citizens. Your american government is spending that money on war making and military arms primarily. Borrowing billions daily to keep this madness of killing and occupying nations going. America for the most part is raggedy as hell and just like a person who is compulsive in their spending ... really has nothing to show for the money spent other than an extreme excess of worthless military arms. I don't think a single sane person wants their taxes spent on war making when schools, roadways, infrastructure of all type, manufacturing, etc etc IS IN COMPLETE FAILURE. America needs a serious reorganizing of its priorities...even though it is far too late for that now.
LMAO youre an idiot...raggedy as hell huh? compared to what canada?
the national debt does have a great deal to do with the citizens...
It is a necissity like 3 said given the failure of our govt to forsee this and move to stop it and I agree that it makes the citizen more likely to die off and not collect a dime which is shit...
-
SS is not meant to be a retirement.
-
Watch this. This is done by the former comptroller of the USA David Walker.
-
since SS went into effect, the elderly suicide rate has been reduced by 50%.
-
since SS went into effect, the elderly suicide rate has been reduced by 50%.
They stole the $.
-
since SS went into effect, the elderly suicide rate has been reduced by 50%.
That's while it still pays out. Once it is bankrupted expect that rate to climb again. This is money every legal working person with a social has been paying into. It was never meant as an ATM card for the moronic government!
-
That's while it still pays out. Once it is bankrupted expect that rate to climb again. This is money every legal working person with a social has been paying into. It was never meant as an ATM card for the moronic government!
And thats all it is. SS is a madoff scheme like no other than the govt has already spent the surpluses.
Watch the movie I posted, its really good and explains this situation without the cry baby bs.
-
And thats all it is. SS is a madoff scheme like no other than the govt has already spent the surpluses.
Watch the movie I posted, its really good and explains this situation without the cry baby bs.
I saw that movie over a year ago. Thanks for posting again.
-
Its one of the necessary, common sense, and NON RADICAL ways of making social security solvent.
-
someone has to pay for the yachts and supercars of the elites (not to mention two wars) - let it be you
-
someone has to pay for the yachts and supercars of the elites (not to mention two wars) - let it be you
::) ::)
Social Security has been a ponzi scheme from day 1.
You libs are in for such a rude awakening when TSHFT on all these stupid programs that are all broke and about to go away.
www.usdebtclock.org
________________________ ________________________ ______________
Retirement
What do Social Security and Madoff have in common?
Email|Link Posted by Jamie Downey December 30, 2008 09:20 AM
www.boston.com
It's difficult to comprehend how Bernie Madoff could have executed a $50 billion pyramid scheme that lasted over 30 years. However, like all pyramid schemes, it had to come to an end because there were not enough new investors to fund redemptions.
If it is true that all pyramid schemes are terminal, can we honestly expect Social Security to last indefinitely? It's not likely, especially considering that the Social Security Administration (SSA) itself has called the system unsustainable in the long run. One can expect significant changes to the system in coming years. By the time Generation X and Y reach retirement age, the system will be considerably different.
To support the notion that Social Security resembles a pyramid scheme, I compared the SSA and the Madoff fraud case. Here's where they share common ground:
1. Legitimate investment vehicles take investor funds and invest them in businesses, real estate, and other assets. These investments are intend to generate returns for shareholders. Madoff didn't do this. He paid off early investors with cash from subsequent investors. Investment assets were never purchased.
Similarly, Social Security has no investments. It pays retirees benefits with cash deposited by younger workers. What’s worse is that Social Security has taken in a surplus of funds over the years. Instead of investing the extra funds legitimately, the government spent it on other programs. Now Social Security is completely unfunded -- something that's illegal for companies to do but not the government.
2. Madoff's early investors received excellent returns, which averaged 12 percent to 14 percent a year. Similarly, Social Security provided excellent returns to its early participants. The first person to receive monthly Social Security benefits was a woman named Ida May Fuller. She paid $24.75 total into the Social Security system over a three year period, and received $22,889 during her lifetime. Even Madoff was not so egregious to provide such a large return to his early investors.
3. Each quarter, Madoff sent fraudulent monthly statements to his investors. These statements were works of fiction -- there were no assets backing these investments. Similarly, each year all Americans get a statement from the SSA. This statement too is a work of fiction. There are no real assets backing the annuity that's promised to us. Furthermore, Congress and the President can merely change the law and that promised annuity will vanish. The SSA's statement should include the same disclaimer that's required to be on all investment prospectus statements: “Actual results may vary.”
In the final months of Madoff’s fraud, there were some $7 billion in investor redemptions. Madoff frantically tried to raise enough money to fund these redemptions, but to no avail. Finally, he confessed to authorities and the fraud was revealed. In the not too distant future, redemptions from Social Security will start to exceed the cash inflows from taxpayers. At that point, the US government may need to raise taxes and cut benefits to head off this cash drain from their coffers.
My friends from Generation X and Y, be prepared: Those monthly checks from the US Treasury won't be what you expect.
-
Cramer: On Golden Ponzi: Madoff Scheme Akin to Social Security
By Jim Cramer
________________________ ________________________ ________
I’ve received a lot of feedback—maybe “blowback” is a better term—from comments I made on the Dec. 17, 2008 edition of Mad Money. On the show I compared the Bernie Madoff scam to another Ponzi scheme taking place on a much larger stage—Social Security.
It was a pretty controversial statement and it deserves some context. Before I get into all of that, let’s define a Ponzi scheme. According to the Securities and Exchange Commission, it goes something like this:
'Ponzi schemes are a type of illegal pyramid scheme named for Charles Ponzi, who duped thousands of New England residents into investing in a postage stamp speculation scheme back in the 1920s. Ponzi thought he could take advantage of differences between U.S. and foreign currencies used to buy and sell international mail coupons.
' Ponzi told investors that he could provide a 40% return in just 90 days compared with 5% for bank savings accounts. Ponzi was deluged with funds from investors, taking in $1 million during one three—hour period—and this was 1921! Though a few early investors were paid off to make the scheme look legitimate, an investigation found that Ponzi had only purchased about $30 worth of the international mail coupons.
'Decades later, the Ponzi scheme continues to work on the "rob-Peter-to-pay-Paul" principle, as money from new investors is used to pay off earlier investors until the whole scheme collapses.'
Remind you of anyone? Like Madoff’s investors, Social Security’s balance sheet is basically off the books, and Congress, playing the Madoff role, is using the Social Security fund as an ATM to fund pet projects, pay for earmarks, and cash in on boondoggles. And like Madoff, the last in will be among the first out of luck with Social Security. With more recipients and fewer contributors, Social Security is a Ponzi scheme that is headed for the same fate that has leveled Madoff investors. The Social Security’s own 2007 trustee’s report says that the fund could run out of money by 2042, and maybe sooner.
Here’s what I said in the show: “We know the truth about Ponzi schemes. We all know the name of the biggest Ponzi scheme in history and it’s not even illegal. In fact, it is run by the U.S. government. And the name of it – well, they call it Social Security.
“In a Ponzi scheme, investors get the returns from the money paid in by subsequent investors and eventually the whole thing falls apart. The last people to invest get hosed. In Social Security, a program I love, workers pay for the benefits of current retirees and hope someday future workers will pay for their benefits – it’s all a Ponzi scheme.”
These were not hasty comments. I’ve been doing a lot of reading up on Social Security lately, especially after the Madoff scandal hit the street, and I’m more convinced than ever that the two funds have more in common than not.
Particularly useful is Cliff Mason’s Millennial blog on CNBC.com. Full disclosure, Cliff is my nephew, but we disagree on a lot of things, just not this one. Like Cliff, I am not in favor of privatizing Social Security, nor do I think that Social Security will “go bust,” as he puts it.
But the similarities between what Madoff and Social Security have done are substantial. As pointed out by Cliff Mason, like Madoff, Social Security:
•Depends on new investors to pay the investment returns of older investors.
•Led investors to believe the system was working perfectly, when the opposite was true.
•Installed a system where investment returns are, by and large, off the books.
•Saw its foundation begin to crumble when the amount of old investors vastly exceeded the number of new investors.
I don’t think that the government intentionally set out to exploit Americans through Social Security. A lot has changed since it was enacted under Franklin Delano Roosevelt back in 1935 as part of his “New Deal”. Back then, the average life span was only 67 years-old, so when contributors reached 65-years-old, the age when they could begin receiving benefits, most only cashed government checks for a few years.
That’s not so today, as Americans are living longer and are cashing Social Security checks more often and in greater numbers than FDR might have imagined. We could fix Social Security by implementing a “means-testing” policy where people, mostly rich people, who didn’t need the money would leave it in the Social Security fund for the less affluent. And we could delay the age at which Americans can collect Social Security – perhaps to age 70 or so. Sure, these moves wouldn’t eliminate the Ponzi aspect to Social Security, but they’d do a world of good.
Even so, an investment “fund” like Social Security that cannot survive if investors want their money back is a foreign and dangerous concept to a traditional Wall Street guy like me. In my experience, if an investor wanted out of my fund, he could sell and get out.
Ponzi schemes aren’t built to accommodate people who want their money back – they’re built to take advantage of people who want their money back.
Way back when, Ponzi’s investors learned that lesson. Only time will tell what kind of lesson Social Security contributors will learn.
At the rate we’re going, it could be a painful one.
-
they have retirement benefits in other countries that aren't going broke, so what gives? Maybe some of the money you put in taxes should be put aside for you when you retire - if you need it - I mean that is normally the way it works.
-
they have retirement benefits in other countries that aren't going broke, so what gives? Maybe some of the money you put in taxes should be put aside for you when you retire - if you need it - I mean that is normally the way it works.
Tell me what country you are referring to that is not also on the verge of collapse because of these stupid programs?
S.S. is fundamentally unsound due to demographic realities. the money was not put away as you would like to believe. Watch the movie I posted IOUSA. Its not some partisan thing, but a fact based movie from the comptroller of the USA David Walker.
Unless we raise the retirement age, these programs are going away.
www.usdebtclock.org
-
Well I'm living in Australia and here we have superannuation - that means your employer has to pay a certain amount into a superannuation scheme (investment scheme) every month. It's basically a tax on the employer if he hires you - all companies have to pay it except if you are a contractor. You can access the funds once you retire - so if you've worked most your life there is going to be some money there for you at the end - when that runs out there is also the government pension - but alas our taxes are pretty high. And our retirement age is 65. I don't know all the rules but super funds get exempt on certain taxes - I have also not heard of us running out of money for paying pensioners/retirees, but then I don't watch the news much. Someone talked about raising the retirement age - I think he got booted out of office pretty quick.
-
Well I'm living in Australia and here we have superannuation - that means your employer has to pay a certain amount into a superannuation scheme (investment scheme) every month. It's basically a tax on the employer if he hires you - all companies have to pay it except if you are a contractor. You can access the funds once you retire - so if you've worked most your life there is going to be some money there for you at the end - when that runs out there is also the government pension - but alas our taxes are pretty high. And our retirement age is 65. I don't know all the rules but super funds get exempt on certain taxes - I have also not heard of us running out of money for paying pensioners/retirees, but then I don't watch the news much. Someone talked about raising the retirement age - I think he got booted out of office pretty quick.
The sad reality is that most people are brainwashed and clueless in this country. SS was never meant to be a pension system and the money is not put away, its specnt on current retirees. The system only works so long as there are enough workers paying in to cover those taking out. Due to demographic issues, we are heading into the baby boomers collecting and there not being enough people paying in. During the surplus years, they did not put the money away, used it to mask other deficits, and now we are about to face the music.
Both parties do it and its wrong. This was one area where Al Gore was right about the lock box. also, someone can work from 20-65 y/o die at 63 and his family not get a damn thing since the money is not earmarked for the individual payer.
-
Yeah well we're forced to invest so we have something - but the markets behaving badly means that we're not saving as much as we should. :-\ Personally I'm not that worried, I'm a man of small needs - I don't spend when I don't have.
-
Yeah well we're forced to invest so we have something - but the markets behaving badly means that we're not saving as much as we should. :-\ Personally I'm not that worried, I'm a man of small needs - I don't spend when I don't have.
Of course that is the way to be, the problem is that through inflation, most of the people reling on SS in this country are going to get clobbered regardless.
-
Hmmm...I was under the impression that SS actually works. Even in the movie that you posted, which I have seen several times, it is mentioned that the reason that SS is going broke is because politicians from both parties steal from it(that is what they do because they aren't supposed to touch it) to either pay for a program or to shore up the budget deficit. It has nothing to do with it being a ponzi scheme. Now that the baby boomers are retiring there aren't enough workers to create another surplus like there have been in the past.
My conclusion, while I don't agree with SS, I think we should blame politicians that have literally stolen our money and wasted it. If SS was left alone and left to grow then it would be a government program that actually works. If you can change my mind with facts please do so, I still don't think that SS was sent up this way intentionally though...once again, the battle should be waged at the ballot box with BOTH parties that are responsible for this atrocity.
-
Hmmm...I was under the impression that SS actually works. Even in the movie that you posted, which I have seen several times, it is mentioned that the reason that SS is going broke is because politicians from both parties steal from it(that is what they do because they aren't supposed to touch it) to either pay for a program or to shore up the budget deficit. It has nothing to do with it being a ponzi scheme. Now that the baby boomers are retiring there aren't enough workers to create another surplus like there have been in the past.
My conclusion, while I don't agree with SS, I think we should blame politicians that have literally stolen our money and wasted it. If SS was left alone and left to grow then it would be a government program that actually works. If you can change my mind with facts please do so, I still don't think that SS was sent up this way intentionally though...once again, the battle should be waged at the ballot box with BOTH parties that are responsible for this atrocity.
Its too late for that. We are too far gone already.
tell me how we deal with this: www.usdebtclock.org
BTW - I ordered a Benelli Supernova 28" yesterday. Camo finish.
-
Good/bad economic idea?
Good/bad politics idea?
If you're an older voter and this guy wants you to work 5 more years to get YOUR money, how do you feel?
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20009192-503544.html
It has to be done.But they should grandfather it so those getting ready to collect in lets say 8 years can still collect.Then move it to 70.
-
Its too late for that. We are too far gone already.
tell me how we deal with this: www.usdebtclock.org
BTW - I ordered a Benelli Supernova 28" yesterday. Camo finish.
I know...but I'm not going to blame the LBJ for creating a ponzi scheme when that isn't the cause of the demise of SS...it is the fault of stupid politicians from both parties being typical crooks with Americans' money.
How do you like it? Have you broken it down and cleaned it yet? That gun should last you a lifetime so you can pass it on to your grandkids.
-
SS should have been switched to an individualized account long ago...
-
I know...but I'm not going to blame the LBJ for creating a ponzi scheme when that isn't the cause of the demise of SS...it is the fault of stupid politicians from both parties being typical crooks with Americans' money.
How do you like it? Have you broken it down and cleaned it yet? That gun should last you a lifetime so you can pass it on to your grandkids.
1. FDR created SS and its actually not in as bad a shape as Medicaire, which LBJ did set up.
2. I have not gotten it yet. I had to find a dealer in Long Island since they told me Benelli will only do busainess with dealers who do a huge volume of shotguns every year.
-
I was talking to an older man around a month ago, he's probably sixty something. It was his opinion that the age 65 was appropriate years ago when people weren't living such long healthy lives, but we should kick it back to around 70 now.
:P
-
if youre over 50, it doesnt affect you. You get yours at 65 or whatever.
If you're under 50, you don't get it til 70.
Boehnner pandering to older voters ;)
-
never liked boehnner, what scares me is I could see this guy running for pres or vp and oh the nick names we would hear
-
if youre over 50, it doesnt affect you. You get yours at 65 or whatever.
If you're under 50, you don't get it til 70.
Boehnner pandering to older voters ;)
At least he is trying.NBetter then hearing Obama scream "republicans want old people to eat dog food".
-
Hmmm...I was under the impression that SS actually works. Even in the movie that you posted, which I have seen several times, it is mentioned that the reason that SS is going broke is because politicians from both parties steal from it(that is what they do because they aren't supposed to touch it) to either pay for a program or to shore up the budget deficit. It has nothing to do with it being a ponzi scheme. Now that the baby boomers are retiring there aren't enough workers to create another surplus like there have been in the past.
My conclusion, while I don't agree with SS, I think we should blame politicians that have literally stolen our money and wasted it. If SS was left alone and left to grow then it would be a government program that actually works. If you can change my mind with facts please do so, I still don't think that SS was sent up this way intentionally though...once again, the battle should be waged at the ballot box with BOTH parties that are responsible for this atrocity.
I agree with you. SS would have worked were it not for the politicians dipping into it. It does not help that the USA is fighting these wars abroad - wars that are driven by the military industrial complex to enrich a few elites. It really does not have any benefits for main street. In fact look at all these jobs lost through outsourcing and globalization. This is a mess guys. The jobs have not returned and now millions of people are out of work and can't find a decent job.
On CNN's front page they had an article on a cancer survivor that is unemployed and unable to find a job. Some of the comments on the article were very revealing. One asshole suggested they legalize prostitution so she can go work as a whore. He said though he would not want to "hit it" somebody out there would. What a fucking disgrace that piece of shit is. Really main street should not be turning on each other. Perhaps this fucktard has a cozy gubment job??
-
We should begin the process of ending SS immediately. There could be a prorated system to make it fair, using a formula of [(Your Age-18)/47] as a percentage of what you pay in and receive at age 65. If you're currently 18, you pay in nothing and receive nothing. If you're 50, you begin paying in 68% and receive 68% at 65 years old.
-
I blame women. They marry guys 5-10 years older, drive the poor bastard into the ground, then collect his SS for 25 years.
-
1. FDR created SS and its actually not in as bad a shape as Medicaire, which LBJ did set up.
2. I have not gotten it yet. I had to find a dealer in Long Island since they told me Benelli will only do busainess with dealers who do a huge volume of shotguns every year.
1. My bad, wrong prez. I knew it was one of the two. ;D
2. That's Benelli for you. The more expensive companies are like that in this industry. When will you get it? You will have to give me an update when you do. I'm saving up for my first 1911 now.
-
1. My bad, wrong prez. I knew it was one of the two. ;D
2. That's Benelli for you. The more expensive companies are like that in this industry. When will you get it? You will have to give me an update when you do. I'm saving up for my first 1911 now.
Hopefully soon. They had a black composite model in stock bit I want the camo version as I have a black 870, AR, Saiga 12, two glocks, 10/22, .22 marlin, GSG 5, Beretta 92B, Walther PPK, Beretta Bobcat, etc.
So they said it will be either a week or a month if the thing has to come from the factory in Italy.
I paid a little more for the camo finish, but thats fine, its a local place and I dont mind paying a little more.
As for the 1911 - i am still trying to get a SA Operator Olive Drab color. The place I got the Benelli has an SA .308 M1 in olive drab, but I like the Socom 2 16" better.