A scandal-scarred Republican party asks, 'What next?'

Discussion in 'Free Speech Alley' started by red55, Aug 29, 2007.

Page 7 of 9
  1. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    You can't possibly be this thick, martin. Money saved elsewhere in his budgets enabled the increased benefits. Increased SS benefits, good or bad, were important to the electorate. Clinton spent FAR less than Bush on government projects. He produced surpluses, while Bush produces deficits. It's very simple math.

    You continue to ignore the FACT that Bush spent money in huge amounts upon new beaurecracies like "No-child" and DOHS. Clinton didn't do that. And you ignore that Bush's plan did NOT reduce SS spending--it would have increased it and created yet another giant government beaurecracy to manage the hundreds of millions of personal accounts.

    You have a poor grasp of economics. Governments must somehow operate on zero income in your little tax-free world. And individuals can somehow enjoy the blessings and rewards of that government without having to contribute anything. Amazing.
     
    red55, Sep 2, 2007
    #61
  2. martin

    martin Banned Forever

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,026
    Likes Received:
    934
    i am not talking about any part of the budget except social security. increased benefits means we paid more into the system, and more was spent. there is no other way to see it. tax and spend.

    i do not ignore that. i obviously do not like it, i am not in favor of big government and spending, no matter who does it. you are in favor of it if clinton is the one doing the spending.

    we already established that this is a good thing. clinton increased SS spending and you love him for it.

    less, but not zero.

    you seem to think that services we pay the government to provide are free, or we couldnt have just bought those services ourselves with the money we paid in taxes.

    if you want insurance against getting old and poor, then buy it. yunno there are sources other than the government that provide insurance. collectivizing inst the answer.

    there is no reason to fret about the government not being able to afford something if the reason they cannot afford it is that you still have your money in your pocket.
     
    martin, Sep 2, 2007
    #62
  3. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    Pay as you go is a better way of expressing it. Your hero Bush's style was to spend extravangantly while cutting income at the same time, the height of irresponsibility. He's leaving the 9 Trillion dollar debt for future presidents and citizens to deal with.

    Don't put words into my mouth. I'm in favor of a proper balance between spending and income. Clinton managed to achieved this.


    Is there a private Congress to make laws? Is there a private military to protect us? Is there a private police force to keep order? Is there a private entity to fund the building of roads, dams, bridges, airports? Your argument makes little sense.

    I have, most people do. Social Security isn't a retirement plan or an insurance policy for individuals. It is a system for the nation to provide certain subsistence funding for our old people who can no longer work and for the disabled so that we don't have a huge underclass of homeless and poverty-stricken elderly. This is America and most of us are not as selfish as you.

    Incidentally, I am not entitled to any Social Security benefits. Zero.

    You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile.
     
    red55, Sep 2, 2007
    #63
  4. martin

    martin Banned Forever

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,026
    Likes Received:
    934
     
    martin, Sep 2, 2007
    #64
  5. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    Invalid logic. A government has to take in money in order to pay for its expenses. If they do not then they have to borrow it. The $104 Billion dollars a year we spend on interest payments on the debt is a collossal waste of OUR money.

    Of course, both in proper measure. You and Dubya have a policy of spend and spend, with no thought at all of paying for it. The nation doesn't have a trust fund and a rich daddy to cover its debts.

    I can tell a balanced viewpoint from an abstract and fanciful one, amigo. If you are not an anarchist, then surely a malcontented iconoclastic nihilist.
     
    red55, Sep 3, 2007
    #65
  6. martin

    martin Banned Forever

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,026
    Likes Received:
    934
    i favor neither spending nor taxing. that is why i favor of reducing the amount spent on social security rather than clinton's policy of increasing spending on social security benefits, then overtaxing us to create a surplus.
     
    martin, Sep 3, 2007
    #66
  7. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    A surplus that was paying DOWN our huge national debt.
     
    red55, Sep 3, 2007
    #67
  8. ROY_LA_CA

    ROY_LA_CA Founding Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2003
    Messages:
    1,488
    Likes Received:
    980
    Red, How can any one working in the US not be entitled to SS benefits?
     
    ROY_LA_CA, Sep 3, 2007
    #68
  9. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    Because I don't pay social security taxes, it's not allowed. I must pay into an government pension plan instead. I did pay a lot of SS tax when I was younger, but not the 40 quarters needed to entitle me to benefits.

    Now, I just have to hope that the state of Louisiana doesn't go broke. Technically, when I retire from LSU in a few years, I can work somewhere else and I'll have to pay SS tax again and perhaps even qualify for benefits in a few more years. But my total contributions will have been so small that the benefit would also be small AND it would be reduced further because of the pension benefits.

    Life's a beach.
     
    red55, Sep 3, 2007
    #69
  10. PURPLE TIGER

    PURPLE TIGER HOPE is not a strategy!

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2006
    Messages:
    7,186
    Likes Received:
    395
    I have little time to argue over national politics but I will discuss some of our Louisiana politicians who have maintained our position at the bottom of most quality of life rankings.

    Two Republicans come to mind...1) Bob Livingston and 2) David Vitter...both got caught in extra-marital affairs which severely hurt their reputation. Livingston resigned...something today's politician (e.g. Clinton) wouldn't do.

    Many Democrats come to mind...1) Gov. Edwin Edwards-in prison for extortion, 2) Cleo Fields-caught taking a wad of cash, 3) William Jefferson-$100,000 in bribes, 4) Oliver Thomas-bribes, 4) Gov. Earl Long-committed to an insane asylum, 5) Gov. Richard Leche-corruption, 6) Numerous colleagues of Marc Morial have been indicted and he's next, 7) Kimberly Williamson Butler-skipped town after warrart was issued for her arrest, 8) Insuarnce Commissioner Jim Brown-false statements to FBI as a cover-up.

    I'm sure there are many more but the point is both sides have their faults. Poor, uneducated people are easily swayed to Democrats because they are convinced that the left will help them out of their situation. Unfortunately this has never happened in this state and hasn't happened when the Democrats have held the oval office or majority in Congress.

    When looking at Louisiana, consider St. Tammany Parish. Over the last 30 years the parish has consistently ranked at the top of the state in education, crime stats, median income, health care, and many other quality of life categories. Do people sit around blaming the government?...No, they stay engaged in politics and help steer the leaders. Oh, by the way...the parish votes primarily Republican.

    Maybe the rest of the state should take lessons. Guess what other two parishes rank very highly...Livingston and Ascension. Any guess on how their residents vote?

    I believe it was Giuliani that said something to the effect..."If you're not a liberal at 20, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative at 40, you have no brain." Enough said! :usaflagwa :911: :laflagwav
     
    PURPLE TIGER, Sep 4, 2007
    #70
    1 person likes this.
Page 7 of 9

Share This Page