I wasn't speaking for him nor attempting to Crabby Greenspan.
uh...sure you weren't.
I was, however, addressing what he said.When you address that, you are answering for him regardless of your claim you aren't.
Guess what Crabs, you can have a stable economy without growthbecause it's based on averages. Â Â
averages that INCLUDE GROWTH
Yea if there was no growth for 20 years it would be a problem. But you might have 3 years of zero or negative growth and then 7 years of positive growth
What you basically said here was you can have it without growth, but only if you have greater growth to balance a smaller lack of growth.
Wrong, Crabs. The economy grows by production and capital. It doesn't require an ever-increasing population to grow. Social Security depends on people entering the workforce so they can be taxed to pay current retirees.
uh...those already in retirement had previously been those working.
No they didn't. Not when SS started. And the monies collected aren't great enough to pay for itself. That's why they had to extend out the retirement age.
Therefore the first ones in do get more than others.
actually, since life-expectancy is an increasing number, it's just the opposite. The last one's in are statisically going to live longer and therefore get more.
actually, since life-expectancy is an increasing number, it's just the opposite. The last one's in are statisically going to live longer and therefore get more.
And the ones who die get nothing. Oh wait, sorry, they get a burial check for 260 dollars. Ponzi would be proud.
It's not about "getting something", it's about everyone being about to retire without starving to death.
You were the one just saying that due to life expectancy that those last in will get more. I merely pointed out that the ones who die prior to retirement get nothing.
The people who first received benefits had contributed nothing. ALL SS benefits currently being paid have first been taxed from current workers. The "surplus" is only on paper. There are only IOUs in the system because Congress spends it. There may be a paper "surplus" in there right now, but by 2018 it will owe more than it takes in.
Here's the thing Crabs will never get. It's not all about just me. It's about everyone, it's about everyone suceeding. The better my fellow citizens do the better it is for me, them and everyone as a country.
I can't speak for JT but I think he was talking about a one year picture.
not for lack of trying, obviously.
I wasn't speaking for him nor attempting to Crabby Greenspan.
uh...sure you weren't.
I was, however, addressing what he said.When you address that, you are answering for him regardless of your claim you aren't.
averages that INCLUDE GROWTH
What you basically said here was you can have it without growth, but only if you have greater growth to balance a smaller lack of growth.
The fact is, our economy requires growth.
[Edited by molegrass on Jan 14, 2005 at 10:06am.]
The fact is, our economy requires growth.
so, you think we have SS to grow the economy?
SS: Pyramid Scheme, plain and simple
no more than the economy itself.
You're a liar.
Wrong, Crabs. The economy grows by production and capital. It doesn't require an ever-increasing population to grow. Social Security depends on people entering the workforce so they can be taxed to pay current retirees.
the ecomony requires growth.
so, the economy doesn't require people entering the workforce?
Actually I'm not.
But even if I was, this still wouldn't be anything remotely resembling an argument.
I do however, recognise that saying that SS doesn't have a surplus is a bald-faced lie.
[Edited by molegrass on Jan 14, 2005 at 10:59am.]
When you can admit the truth about SS, maybe then we can have a discussion about how to fix it.
You're a pathetic debater on this subject, JT.
"When you can admit the truth about SS..."
Why don't you say: When you can't agree with me, you're a liar.
how about we start with SS having a surplus, not a deficit?
can you admit to that much?
You know why we have a surplus in SS.
It's called a pyramid.
Invest in my company. I ten years I'll give you back a dollar for every dollar you invest.
They'll be lining up around the block.
Really? I would want more than just the amount of money I put in. That is why they call it an investment.
When you can admit the truth about SS..."
So Rick what is your view of the "truth" about SS. Most people agree with JT. Only lunatics like crabs can't see it for what it is.
pyramid plans don't have surpluses.
It's a great set up for those already in retirement. It royaly screws those currently working.
pyramid plans don't have surpluses.
Yes they do. When you're only paying out to a select few you're going to have a surplus.
Now, I get to wait until I'm 72 to collect SS.
Yeah, that's working real well.
that's why I was being sarcastic. zero growth don't make the economy strong for the very reason you have supplied. You want more.
Most people think SS is a pyramid scheme?
what nonsense.
uh...those already in retirement had previously been those working.
How did it go from being royally screwed to a great set up?
Do you think everyone is just gonna stop working?
"Most people agree with JT "
Got something to back that up?
uh...those already in retirement had previously been those working.
No they didn't. Not when SS started. And the monies collected aren't great enough to pay for itself. That's why they had to extend out the retirement age.
The challenge of SS is indeed that a large GROWTH in population is beginning to enter retirement.
Of course, that same GROWTH in population created a large SURPLUS in the plan. It is this surplus that is needed to keep SS a solvent program
[Edited by molegrass on Jan 14, 2005 at 11:17am.]
Got something to back that up?
The only reason you would need growth to sustain it is because it's set up like a ponzi scheme.
So, you aren't even going to admit that there is a surplus?
So, the original retirees at the top of this so-called pryamid are still getting thier own benefits and a cut of everyone else's benefits?
nonsense.
a pyramid scheme is designed so the first one's in get more than the others. SS isn't designed that way.
a pyramid scheme is designed so the first one's in get more than the others. SS isn't designed that way.
actually, since life-expectancy is an increasing number, it's just the opposite. The last one's in are statisically going to live longer and therefore get more.
actually, since life-expectancy is an increasing number, it's just the opposite. The last one's in are statisically going to live longer and therefore get more.
And the ones who die get nothing. Oh wait, sorry, they get a burial check for 260 dollars. Ponzi would be proud.
I think the problem is what you think it's for.
It's not about "getting something", it's about everyone being about to retire without starving to death.
It's not all about you, it's about the entire society's health.
uh...which ones don't die?
I got news for you, everyone dies.
"Sorry, you lived too long. We are giving your check to the guy who died last year"
I really don't think you even understand what SS is for.
 think the problem is what you think it's for.
It's not about "getting something", it's about everyone being about to retire without starving to death.
You were the one just saying that due to life expectancy that those last in will get more. I merely pointed out that the ones who die prior to retirement get nothing.
So, you aren't even going to admit that there is a surplus?
No, because there's not a true surplus.
There's only a surplus in regards to current benefits.
The people who first received benefits had contributed nothing. ALL SS benefits currently being paid have first been taxed from current workers. The "surplus" is only on paper. There are only IOUs in the system because Congress spends it. There may be a paper "surplus" in there right now, but by 2018 it will owe more than it takes in.
Kinda like the current administration's budget... only with them, the deficit is now.
60 years of everyone getting a check each month when they retire... what an abject failure that was!
and you gotta love the alternative... get bad investment advice and eat cat food when you are old. Some plan.
If you don't want to privately invest your SS monies, then don't, but give the rest of us that option.
get bad investment advice and eat cat food when you are old. Some plan.
Die early and your kids can eat cat food while some politician spends their inheritance. Some plan.
don't abandon SS and no one eats cat food.
again... it's all about you, isn't it?
SS isn't about you, it's about our entire society.
If the stock market were a sure thing everyone could be rich.
I have no doubt that "good investment advice" awhile back was to invest in Enron... oh well, back to the cat food for those people.
I'm all for preventing politicians from spending SS on anything other than SS.
It was really, really pleasant while you were gone.
"Quit talking to me crabgrass" - Torpedo-8
Here's the thing Crabs will never get. It's not all about just me. It's about everyone, it's about everyone suceeding. The better my fellow citizens do the better it is for me, them and everyone as a country.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/ALLPOLITICS/01/14/inauguration.prayer.ap/index.html
::sigh::
So that's not good news to you?
Based on this, and the sentencing of the Abu Ghraib abuser, I don't think conservatives know good news to them when they see it.
[Edited 2 times. Most recently by on Jan 15, 2005 at 07:31pm.]