Liberals can't blame Bush for this

A forum not related to waterfowl for discussing the more controversial and hot topic issues in our world from immigration, politics, the war, etc..

Moderators: Smackaduck, MM

Liberals can't blame Bush for this

Postby cartervj » Fri May 09, 2014 9:03 am

Obama owns this
check out how MUCH debt the public will owe in the coming years :censored:

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/fed-chair-deficits-will-rise-unsustainable-levels

In the 10-year budget projections it released in April, the CBO estimated that the federal government will run $7.618 trillion in deficits from 2015 through 2024. At the same time, the CBO projected that the federal government’s debt held by the public would rise from $11.983 trillion at the end of fiscal 2013 to $20.947 trillion by the end of 2024.



The debt held by the public is the part of the U.S. government debt that is not held by the federal government itself. It primarily consists of marketable Treasury securities, including bills, notes and bonds. It does not include what the government calls “intragovernmental debt," which is the money the Treasury has borrowed out of the Social Security Trust Fund and other government trust funds to pay current expenses.

The total debt of the federal government at the end of fiscal 2013--including both the debt held by the public and the intragovernmental debt--was $16.719 trillion. The CBO estimates that by 2024, the total debt of the federal government will be $27.159 trillion—of which $20.947 trillion will be debt held by the public.

If that projection holds up, the federal debt held by the public in 2024 would be more than four times the $5.035 trillion federal debt held by the public at the end of 2007.
“Nothing makes me more certain of the victory of our ideas than our success in the universities” – Adolf H, 1930
User avatar
cartervj
hunter
 
Posts: 7359
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 3:01 pm
Location: NW AL


Re: Liberals can't blame Bush for this

Postby SpinnerMan » Fri May 09, 2014 10:57 am

Not at all. It the Republicans fault because they won't allow the Democrats to raise taxes by $20 million million dollars.

If they simply increase the tax burden of the average American by over $60,000 for every single one of the roughly 320 million men, women, AND CHILDREN living in the country legally and illegal, no debt.

If the Republicans simply allowed the tax burden on the roughly 120 million people in the civilian labor force by more than $160,000 each, no debt.

And only if the Republicans simply allowed the tax burden on the roughly 1.2 million people in the top 1% of incomes by more than $16,000,000 each, no debt.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/03/1-percent-taxes-2013_n_2802243.html
Given that the top 1% only net an average less than $900,000 per year after federal taxes and BEFORE state and local taxes. It's only about every penny they make for the next 20 years. I'm sure they wouldn't change their behavior and just fork it over without passing the cost on to anyone else.

So yes Carter, it is the Republicans fault. They would tax their way out of their spending hole just like the Democrats are doing in Illinois. Oh wait, we are still broke after a 67% increase in the personal income tax rate. :huh:
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16325
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: Liberals can't blame Bush for this

Postby Rat Creek » Fri May 09, 2014 11:03 am

This ^^^^^

Everything is and will continue to be Bush's fault. Let me see, Bush tax cuts and two wars will be the two knee jerk statements by the useful idiots. :no:
Rat Creek
Rat Creek
hunter
 
Posts: 4535
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 4:11 pm
Location: Overland Park, KS

Re: Liberals can't blame Bush for this

Postby Indaswamp » Fri May 09, 2014 6:51 pm

FWIW-the national debt will never be paid off at par value. the dollar will be devalued significantly, a haircut will be mandated on the debt, or a combination of the two. Mark my words...
The Cajun 7 Course Meal; 1 lb. of boudin and a six pack of Abita beer.

Save the Marsh, Eat a Nutria!

Never fart in your waders, it'll give you WORTS.
User avatar
Indaswamp
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 58155
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 8:40 pm
Location: South Louisiana

Re: Liberals can't blame Bush for this

Postby Indaswamp » Fri May 09, 2014 6:53 pm

Of course, they could confiscate retirement accounts holding significant sums of cash to pay it down and force everyone into MyRA accounts invested in treasuries (for your security of course)...

bet that gets floated after the next big crash, which is coming BTW....
The Cajun 7 Course Meal; 1 lb. of boudin and a six pack of Abita beer.

Save the Marsh, Eat a Nutria!

Never fart in your waders, it'll give you WORTS.
User avatar
Indaswamp
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 58155
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 8:40 pm
Location: South Louisiana

Re: Liberals can't blame Bush for this

Postby cartervj » Fri May 09, 2014 7:31 pm

Indaswamp wrote:Of course, they could confiscate retirement accounts holding significant sums of cash to pay it down and force everyone into MyRA accounts invested in treasuries (for your security of course)...

bet that gets floated after the next big crash, which is coming BTW....



I was just reading up on the State's retirement system, one statement that bugged me was that 33% of the population has NO form of retirement. Might be an incentive to help push what you just mentioned.
“Nothing makes me more certain of the victory of our ideas than our success in the universities” – Adolf H, 1930
User avatar
cartervj
hunter
 
Posts: 7359
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 3:01 pm
Location: NW AL

Re: Liberals can't blame Bush for this

Postby Indaswamp » Fri May 09, 2014 7:33 pm

cartervj wrote:
Indaswamp wrote:Of course, they could confiscate retirement accounts holding significant sums of cash to pay it down and force everyone into MyRA accounts invested in treasuries (for your security of course)...

bet that gets floated after the next big crash, which is coming BTW....



I was just reading up on the State's retirement system, one statement that bugged me was that 33% of the population has NO form of retirement. Might be an incentive to help push what you just mentioned.

people will be "nudged"....
The Cajun 7 Course Meal; 1 lb. of boudin and a six pack of Abita beer.

Save the Marsh, Eat a Nutria!

Never fart in your waders, it'll give you WORTS.
User avatar
Indaswamp
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 58155
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 8:40 pm
Location: South Louisiana

Re: Liberals can't blame Bush for this

Postby Rat Creek » Mon May 12, 2014 2:14 pm

cartervj wrote:I was just reading up on the State's retirement system, one statement that bugged me was that 33% of the population has NO form of retirement.


To rephrase that, 33% of the population has not saved anything for retirement. The majority have the same retirement system. It is called IRAs and 401Ks which are basically "whatever you can save." Very few have pensions and the vast majority of those are insolvent and dependent upon continued borrowing. I saw where the five largest states have over $100 Billion (with a B) in unfunded pension obligations.
Rat Creek
Rat Creek
hunter
 
Posts: 4535
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 4:11 pm
Location: Overland Park, KS

Re: Liberals can't blame Bush for this

Postby Indaswamp » Mon May 12, 2014 2:16 pm

Rat Creek wrote:
cartervj wrote:I was just reading up on the State's retirement system, one statement that bugged me was that 33% of the population has NO form of retirement.


To rephrase that, 33% of the population has not saved anything for retirement. The majority have the same retirement system. It is called IRAs and 401Ks which are basically "whatever you can save." Very few have pensions and the vast majority of those are insolvent and dependent upon continued borrowing. I saw where the five largest states have over $100 Billion (with a B) in unfunded pension obligations.

ticking time bomb Rat... but it's one of those taboo topics that politicians will not touch, they hide from the truth and try to just kick the can down the road. It's actually worse than most people realize because of compounding.
The Cajun 7 Course Meal; 1 lb. of boudin and a six pack of Abita beer.

Save the Marsh, Eat a Nutria!

Never fart in your waders, it'll give you WORTS.
User avatar
Indaswamp
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 58155
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 8:40 pm
Location: South Louisiana

Re: Liberals can't blame Bush for this

Postby SpinnerMan » Mon May 12, 2014 2:24 pm

Indaswamp wrote:
Rat Creek wrote:
cartervj wrote:I was just reading up on the State's retirement system, one statement that bugged me was that 33% of the population has NO form of retirement.


To rephrase that, 33% of the population has not saved anything for retirement. The majority have the same retirement system. It is called IRAs and 401Ks which are basically "whatever you can save." Very few have pensions and the vast majority of those are insolvent and dependent upon continued borrowing. I saw where the five largest states have over $100 Billion (with a B) in unfunded pension obligations.

ticking time bomb Rat... but it's one of those taboo topics that politicians will not touch, they hide from the truth and try to just kick the can down the road. It's actually worse than most people realize because of compounding.

They believed the lies politicians told them.



It's not just Obama voters that are delusion. If you help them, they are going to help themselves. They aren't going to help you. They are politicians.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16325
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: Liberals can't blame Bush for this

Postby cartervj » Mon May 12, 2014 8:50 pm

Indaswamp wrote:
Rat Creek wrote:
cartervj wrote:I was just reading up on the State's retirement system, one statement that bugged me was that 33% of the population has NO form of retirement.


To rephrase that, 33% of the population has not saved anything for retirement. The majority have the same retirement system. It is called IRAs and 401Ks which are basically "whatever you can save." Very few have pensions and the vast majority of those are insolvent and dependent upon continued borrowing. I saw where the five largest states have over $100 Billion (with a B) in unfunded pension obligations.

ticking time bomb Rat... but it's one of those taboo topics that politicians will not touch, they hide from the truth and try to just kick the can down the road. It's actually worse than most people realize because of compounding.



That's true, just look at the new contracts for new employees. They keep cutting benefits as your pay in keeps going up.
“Nothing makes me more certain of the victory of our ideas than our success in the universities” – Adolf H, 1930
User avatar
cartervj
hunter
 
Posts: 7359
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 3:01 pm
Location: NW AL

Re: Liberals can't blame Bush for this

Postby SpinnerMan » Tue May 13, 2014 4:33 am

Rat Creek wrote:Very few have pensions and the vast majority of those are insolvent and dependent upon continued borrowing.

Most were Ponzi schemes just like Social Security. The problem unlike the Madoff fund is that they have the power to simply take from innocent people.


This should be 100% illegal. The first real step is to make it 100% illegal for all new employees.
Image
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16325
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: Liberals can't blame Bush for this

Postby ScaupHunter » Tue May 13, 2014 8:58 am

The real issue here is not that it was a Ponzi scheme. The issue is that corrupt politicians endlessly spend the money that was supposed to be invested in the funds. Toss in ridiculous predictions for growth and you have the situation they face now. Which is a Ponzi Scheme.
Last edited by ScaupHunter on Tue May 13, 2014 10:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
Bella's
Decoy Setting Pro Staff
Boat Operator Pro Staff
Duck Shooting Pro Staff
Warm Towel Pro Staff
Snack Supply Pro Staff

He works for free! Who's the B now?
User avatar
ScaupHunter
hunter
 
Posts: 6704
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 5:57 am

Re: Liberals can't blame Bush for this

Postby SpinnerMan » Tue May 13, 2014 9:31 am

ScaupHunter wrote:The real issue here is not that it was a Ponzi scheme. The issue is that the corrupt politician endlessly spend the money that was supposed to be invested in the funds. Toss in ridiculous predictions for growth and you have the situation they face now.

We are saying the same thing. Setting it up as a Ponzi scheme allowed the corrupt and/or incompetent politicians to spend the money today making it unavailable for tomorrow.

If not a Ponzi scheme, the money is there and they cannot spend it. They may be off on some projections, but the fund is never that far off from where it needs to be and is as likely to be overfunded (more money to the pensioners than expected) than underfunded (risk of less money to the pensioners). A lot of well run pensions hand out bonuses for a lack of a better word when they are overfunded. This should be common because this is the way the fund should error.

If the law required, and I think we need a Constitutional Amendment, that prohibits anything but fully funded pensions, this would not happen.

However, personally I would like to outlaw defined benefits pensions all together and move to defined contributions because I don't want my retirement under the control of other people. These cannot be underfunded and it forces people to take responsibility for their life and gives them the freedom to live it as they see fit. I don't want to lose everything if I tell the employer to go to hell I quit just because I haven't worked some random amount of time. I don't want to have to follow their rules to access my money. If I want to retire young or old, or spend more now or more later or ... I want control.

It is this control that will NEVER be given up by politicians. It is what they and union leaders crave the most. It is why they do what they do because it is clearly not for the benefit and security of the working man. If it were for that the union leaders and the politicians would be outraged, not faux outrage, but real outrage that the working man's money is put in such a precarious position. No sane person would risk their entire retirement in one basket like this, but if you desire control, then you went everything in one basket that is under your control.

And yes, I know liberals will say adults are like children and we must protect them from themselves.

We already do that via the rules for getting preferential tax treatment. I'd be fine with tightening up those rules a bit and force diversification and limits on trading frequency.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16325
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: Liberals can't blame Bush for this

Postby ScaupHunter » Tue May 13, 2014 10:03 am

SpinnerMan wrote:
ScaupHunter wrote:The real issue here is not that it was a Ponzi scheme. The issue is that the corrupt politician endlessly spend the money that was supposed to be invested in the funds. Toss in ridiculous predictions for growth and you have the situation they face now.

We are saying the same thing. Setting it up as a Ponzi scheme allowed the corrupt and/or incompetent politicians to spend the money today making it unavailable for tomorrow.

If not a Ponzi scheme, the money is there and they cannot spend it. They may be off on some projections, but the fund is never that far off from where it needs to be and is as likely to be overfunded (more money to the pensioners than expected) than underfunded (risk of less money to the pensioners). A lot of well run pensions hand out bonuses for a lack of a better word when they are overfunded. This should be common because this is the way the fund should error.

If the law required, and I think we need a Constitutional Amendment, that prohibits anything but fully funded pensions, this would not happen.

However, personally I would like to outlaw defined benefits pensions all together and move to defined contributions because I don't want my retirement under the control of other people. These cannot be underfunded and it forces people to take responsibility for their life and gives them the freedom to live it as they see fit. I don't want to lose everything if I tell the employer to go to hell I quit just because I haven't worked some random amount of time. I don't want to have to follow their rules to access my money. If I want to retire young or old, or spend more now or more later or ... I want control.

It is this control that will NEVER be given up by politicians. It is what they and union leaders crave the most. It is why they do what they do because it is clearly not for the benefit and security of the working man. If it were for that the union leaders and the politicians would be outraged, not faux outrage, but real outrage that the working man's money is put in such a precarious position. No sane person would risk their entire retirement in one basket like this, but if you desire control, then you went everything in one basket that is under your control.

And yes, I know liberals will say adults are like children and we must protect them from themselves.

We already do that via the rules for getting preferential tax treatment. I'd be fine with tightening up those rules a bit and force diversification and limits on trading frequency.



I would love to have had control of the various retirement funds I have work through over the years. I would be retired right now instead of knowing that when I finally retire there will be nothing in any of those funds to draw against. Allowing elected thieves to screw with peoples futures and their retirement funds is nothing short of full blown criminal activity.
Bella's
Decoy Setting Pro Staff
Boat Operator Pro Staff
Duck Shooting Pro Staff
Warm Towel Pro Staff
Snack Supply Pro Staff

He works for free! Who's the B now?
User avatar
ScaupHunter
hunter
 
Posts: 6704
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 5:57 am

Re: Liberals can't blame Bush for this

Postby SpinnerMan » Tue May 13, 2014 10:14 am

ScaupHunter wrote:Allowing elected thieves to screw with peoples futures and their retirement funds is nothing short of full blown criminal activity.
Absolutely.

We hear libs whine about the most vulnerable. Who is more vulnerable than someone that must rely upon their retirement? The pension and retirement accounts should be treated as nearly sacred and guarded viciously by government. Yet they treat them as their slush fund to "invest" in whatever will get them reelected if the are "honest" politicians and as personal profit and patronage centers if they are all too typical corrupt politicians.

My one hunting buddy has had his union pension wiped out twice. Yet he still thinks his union is looking out for him :fingerhead:

Of course big promises that will never be met always sell better than what can be assured. It is the greed of the workers that allowed them to accept such insanely risky pensions. The greedy never think their failure is their fault.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16325
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: Liberals can't blame Bush for this

Postby nitram » Tue May 13, 2014 9:01 pm

SpinnerMan wrote:
So yes Carter, it is the Republicans fault. They would tax their way out of their spending hole just like the Democrats are doing in Illinois. Oh wait, we are still broke after a 67% increase in the personal income tax rate. :huh:


So what do the good citizens in "The Land of Lincoln" now have for a State Income Tax Rate?
Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair or f-ing beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back.- Al Swearengen
User avatar
nitram
hunter
 
Posts: 539
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2013 5:54 pm
Location: West OK on the South Canadian Riviera

Re: Liberals can't blame Bush for this

Postby SpinnerMan » Wed May 14, 2014 7:31 am

nitram wrote:
SpinnerMan wrote:
So yes Carter, it is the Republicans fault. They would tax their way out of their spending hole just like the Democrats are doing in Illinois. Oh wait, we are still broke after a 67% increase in the personal income tax rate. :huh:


So what do the good citizens in "The Land of Lincoln" now have for a State Income Tax Rate?

A flat income tax rate is 5%, which I think is around 6th highest in the nation. This 2% increase was supposed to be temporary and went into effect at the exact same time as the 2% reduction in social security taxes without commensurate reduction in social security benefits (I'd love to know the Obamanomics theory on how that works :huh: I guess like all the underfunded Illinois pensions). So we never saw that tax cut the rest of the nation did which provided cover for this tax increase. I suspect that there was collusion between Obama and the Illinois Democrats. Although it could have simply be opportunism on the cash hungry Illinois Democrats. They are now proposing to make it permanent :eek: or institute a progress tax rate.
http://www.tax-rates.org/taxtables/income-tax-by-state

That's on top of a minimum of 6.25% sales tax, which is also one of the top sales tax rates in the nation. And that is before many local governments add to that making it as high as 10% in some locations. Chicago is 9.25%.
http://www.tax-rates.org/taxtables/sales-tax-by-state

And that is also in addition to one of the highest corporate tax rates in the country. Of course, nearly everybody with a pension or retirement accounts pays that and not just the people of Illinois. We just pay the burden of businesses choosing to not locate here, not expand here, or to outright leave the state.
http://www.tax-rates.org/taxtables/corporate-income-tax-by-state

And that is on top of nearly the highest property tax rates in the country.
http://www.tax-rates.org/taxtables/property-tax-by-state

And despite all these rates near the highest in the country, we have some of the worst, if not the worst government finances in the country. Coincidence? No freaking way. Government feels unconstrained on the spending side and can never raise taxes fast enough or high enough to keep pace.

http://www.illinoispolicy.org/stunning-50-percent-of-illinoisans-want-to-leave/
Gallup released a stunning poll that shows 50 percent of Illinoisans want to leave the state, the highest percentage of any state nationally. This comes a week after Illinois’ worst-in-the nation performance in a Gallup poll that showed one in four Illinoisans consider Illinois to be the worst possible place to live. - See more at: http://www.illinoispolicy.org/stunning- ... pHcao.dpuf
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16325
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: Liberals can't blame Bush for this

Postby nitram » Wed May 14, 2014 9:01 pm

I've hunted, worked, and played in Illinois. While I like most of the folks I've encountered, I never thought it'd be possible for me to live there. Too many bureaucratic bastardos with both hands out. Although I don't put much faith in them, I'd have to agree with the Gallup Pole you posted.
Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair or f-ing beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back.- Al Swearengen
User avatar
nitram
hunter
 
Posts: 539
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2013 5:54 pm
Location: West OK on the South Canadian Riviera

Re: Liberals can't blame Bush for this

Postby SpinnerMan » Thu May 15, 2014 8:11 am

I've never had a better situation in my life. I've lived all over the place, and I got a great situation here. I hunt more than I ever have. I have an incredible diversity of opportunities to fish. I have access to all the good that comes with a big city and can live far enough away to avoid most of the negative that comes with it. However, this place is so damned corrupt. The culture of corruption runs very deep and it's not just the politicians. I don't want to leave, but I honestly don't know if I'll be able to stay. I like my life here, but there's a lot of reason for concern and things are definitely getting worse and not better.

I implore everyone do not vote for Illinois politicians. Any of them. It's just not worth the risk. They will lie about anything to get what they want.

The Dems in the legislature just submitted a budget with a $4B deficit and saying, see we have to make that tax increase we told you was temporary permanent. :mad: And most of the people are too freaking stupid to see the scam or see why our state is so screwed up.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16325
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL


Return to Controversial Issues Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests