There are two problems here - #1 the fund balance is not anywhere near the size required to support the effective amount of interest granted to "customers" and #2 by forcing SS to invest heavier in Treasuries (rather than a reasonably conservative portfolio) it artificially increases demand, which increases prices, which lowers the amount of interest the govt has to offer the world at large on their debt.Ed in Tampa wrote:Frankly if they turned the Social Security money over to an insurance broker that got paid by how much they made their customers happy while retaining adequate supply of funds for the future I can't think of anything the Federal Government does by law that I would miss.
How many are able to work in your shop this month?
Moderator: admin
- Ed in Tampa
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 5834
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 12:45 am
- Location: North Tampa Bay area Florida
frank81 wrote:There are two problems here - #1 the fund balance is not anywhere near the size required to support the effective amount of interest granted to "customers" and #2 by forcing SS to invest heavier in Treasuries (rather than a reasonably conservative portfolio) it artificially increases demand, which increases prices, which lowers the amount of interest the govt has to offer the world at large on their debt.
Wait Wait Wait you forget all the money that congress siphoned off the SS to fund other projects. If that the money was returned there would be MORE THAN ENOUGH to pay every SS claim well into the future and give all those presently on SS big raises.
No one ever wants to talk about the money congress stole from the Social Security fund.
Just like no one hesitates to call the payment of Social Security to a receiptant as an entitlement.
It isn't an entitlement it was insurance we who worked were forced to pay for and was promised to receive back.
When this money was taken Congress said it would return the money or meet the need out of the budget.
I don't want them to go to treasury and do anything. I want Congress to start paying back all the money they said they would when they first took it. If they can't then shut them down and find some people of integrity that will.
Ed in Tampa
Stay out of trouble!
Stay out of trouble!
Pardon me while I post about a completely different subject.
Since the weather in Phoenix is FINALLY cooling down, and I've got a LARGE project to do, along with lengthening my FrankenSmith, I'll be able to get some work done, on my apartment patio/shop.
Now, back to the sidetrack at hand. "Fearless Leader" has decreed that all "non-essential" personnel would be furloughed.
This begs a "stupid" question. WHY do we have (why are we paying for) "non-essential" government employees? Does your boss have non essential workers? Why? Is he (or she) just as dumb as a box-o-rox?
Ed, in Tampa, do you agree? Sounds like you just might.
If, you are employed by the Federal Government, and your job (or organization) isn't mentioned in the Constitution, "buh-bye!"
See the 10th amendment. Get your state to do it, or your community, or even a group of like-minded citizens.
National Park Service. Arizona, you just got the Grand Canyon. California, you just inherited Yosemite...
Boeing, Lockheed, (used to be) McDonnell-Douglas, you just got NASA (Sell Moffett field to Google, since they want it, or rent them Hangar One. Make them restore it.) Oh, all you companies, you "ain't" gettin' it for free!
Since I'm on a soap-box, and it's an old fashioned wooden one, here are some more.
Congress, ANY law you pass, applies to you, as well as the rest of us. Your salaries will reflect your state's or district's average salary, as will your "leave" status. (If the average person in your district, gets 3 days off, paid, a year, so do you.) Air flight will be at YOUR expense, and commercial. Like I said above, you WILL be entered in Obamacare, at YOUR expense, until YOU repeal it!
I'll climb down now. Glad it was a wooden soap-box!
Was this over the limit? Have I ruffled too many feathers?
steve
Since the weather in Phoenix is FINALLY cooling down, and I've got a LARGE project to do, along with lengthening my FrankenSmith, I'll be able to get some work done, on my apartment patio/shop.
Now, back to the sidetrack at hand. "Fearless Leader" has decreed that all "non-essential" personnel would be furloughed.
This begs a "stupid" question. WHY do we have (why are we paying for) "non-essential" government employees? Does your boss have non essential workers? Why? Is he (or she) just as dumb as a box-o-rox?
Ed, in Tampa, do you agree? Sounds like you just might.
If, you are employed by the Federal Government, and your job (or organization) isn't mentioned in the Constitution, "buh-bye!"
See the 10th amendment. Get your state to do it, or your community, or even a group of like-minded citizens.
National Park Service. Arizona, you just got the Grand Canyon. California, you just inherited Yosemite...
Boeing, Lockheed, (used to be) McDonnell-Douglas, you just got NASA (Sell Moffett field to Google, since they want it, or rent them Hangar One. Make them restore it.) Oh, all you companies, you "ain't" gettin' it for free!
Since I'm on a soap-box, and it's an old fashioned wooden one, here are some more.
Congress, ANY law you pass, applies to you, as well as the rest of us. Your salaries will reflect your state's or district's average salary, as will your "leave" status. (If the average person in your district, gets 3 days off, paid, a year, so do you.) Air flight will be at YOUR expense, and commercial. Like I said above, you WILL be entered in Obamacare, at YOUR expense, until YOU repeal it!
I'll climb down now. Glad it was a wooden soap-box!
Was this over the limit? Have I ruffled too many feathers?
steve
Ed, we agree on a LOT of stuff.Ed in Tampa wrote:Wait Wait Wait you forget all the money that congress siphoned off the SS to fund other projects. If that the money was returned there would be MORE THAN ENOUGH to pay every SS claim well into the future and give all those presently on SS big raises.
No one ever wants to talk about the money congress stole from the Social Security fund.
Just like no one hesitates to call the payment of Social Security to a receiptant as an entitlement.
It isn't an entitlement it was insurance we who worked were forced to pay for and was promised to receive back.
When this money was taken Congress said it would return the money or meet the need out of the budget.
I don't want them to go to treasury and do anything. I want Congress to start paying back all the money they said they would when they first took it. If they can't then shut them down and find some people of integrity that will.
My opinion, Social Security is a Ponzi scheme, that would make Bernie Madoff blush.
And, the "Fed" is an ILLEGAL, non-Constitutional organization, that is NOT even part of the government.
steve
Wait until Congress starts to siphon off money from obamacare to fund other projects. In a few years there won't be enough to fund health care.
All unessential employees are to be furloughed, but they forgot the 535 most unessential employees. MEMBERS OF CONGRESS.
Are the furloughed workers going to collect unemployment? If they do, are those 80,000 going to be counted in the weekly report of new unemployment claims? Don't count on it!!! (pun intended)
The most popular oxymoron of the day should be "Congressional Leadership".
Air Force one and two should be grounded except for very clear national emergencies.
Sorry for the vent but I needed it!
Bill V
All unessential employees are to be furloughed, but they forgot the 535 most unessential employees. MEMBERS OF CONGRESS.
Are the furloughed workers going to collect unemployment? If they do, are those 80,000 going to be counted in the weekly report of new unemployment claims? Don't count on it!!! (pun intended)
The most popular oxymoron of the day should be "Congressional Leadership".
Air Force one and two should be grounded except for very clear national emergencies.
Sorry for the vent but I needed it!
Bill V
Come on, Bill, don't hold it in. Say what you REALLY mean!
Seriously, I think it should be 546 people. The ones you mentioned, plus Barry&Joe, and the supremes.
The supremes? There's NOTHING in the Constitution about health care, and their ONLY job is to determine the consitutionality of any bill or law.
In 1982, I raised my right hand, and swore to (along with other stuff) defend the CONSTITUTION against all enemies, foreign AND DOMESTIC. When I got out, no one told me my oath had served it's purpose, and to disregard it now.
"I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."
OK,there is the oath, in it's entirety. Seems to be a conflict in it, currently. But, it does say "Constitution" before "President." He, (along with the other 545) are NOT defending the Constitution, and their oath is about the same.
steve
Seriously, I think it should be 546 people. The ones you mentioned, plus Barry&Joe, and the supremes.
The supremes? There's NOTHING in the Constitution about health care, and their ONLY job is to determine the consitutionality of any bill or law.
In 1982, I raised my right hand, and swore to (along with other stuff) defend the CONSTITUTION against all enemies, foreign AND DOMESTIC. When I got out, no one told me my oath had served it's purpose, and to disregard it now.
"I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."
OK,there is the oath, in it's entirety. Seems to be a conflict in it, currently. But, it does say "Constitution" before "President." He, (along with the other 545) are NOT defending the Constitution, and their oath is about the same.
steve
- dusty
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 21530
- Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 6:52 am
- Location: Tucson (Wildcat Country), Arizona
I think I understand exactly where you are coming from Bill.
For nearly twenty five years, I had no problem at all abiding by that oath. Right now, today, it would be a bit more difficult.
Respect for the "Office of the Presidency" is what would make it possible.
For nearly twenty five years, I had no problem at all abiding by that oath. Right now, today, it would be a bit more difficult.
Respect for the "Office of the Presidency" is what would make it possible.
"Making Sawdust Safely"
Dusty
Sent from my Dell XPS using Firefox.
Dusty
Sent from my Dell XPS using Firefox.
- Ed in Tampa
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 5834
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 12:45 am
- Location: North Tampa Bay area Florida
Actually it is a Ponzi scheme with one exception at its conception no one was empowered to siphon off profit from it.skou wrote:Ed, we agree on a LOT of stuff.
My opinion, Social Security is a Ponzi scheme, that would make Bernie Madoff blush.
And, the "Fed" is an ILLEGAL, non-Constitutional organization, that is NOT even part of the government.
steve
And while that was in place the plan was solvent.
In fact before Congress got its hooks into it Social Security was building huge reserves of funds. Had those funds gone untouched and with normal compounding of interest the fund would be probably be able to pay the national debt off at this time.
However Congress managed to convince the public that if they authorized COPA increases to Social Security they should be allowed to spend that building fund on the promise if the money was ever needed they would put it back.
They bartered with the Public's greed to get more money at the cost of losing the stability Social Security had realized.
Now they try to make it look like people on Social Security are entitlement seekers (parasites feeding off working Americans) instead of people that were forced to buy an insurance on the promise of monthly payment upon retirement.
That one act should be enough to cause the American Public standup and demand reform to Congress and the Federal Government.
The first thing that should be done is the immediate and permanent abolishment of the Federal Reserve a non governmental entity that dictates US financial matters and controls public funds while brokering "deals" with privately owned banks and financial institutions.
If you haven't noticed while everything else seems to be in recession the Banking industry is making money hands over fist and to keep profits reports low on paper are paying extremely expensive commerical property and building buildings to hide this huge profit.
In my area on one of the main commerical roads Banks have bought land actually tearing down buildings on that land to build new banks. On one section of what I would imagine to be the most costly piece of commerical land in the area they have build 4 banks within 200 feet of each other while there are at least 10 other banks within a mile radius. And I'm not talking 14 different banking companies no these are the same 4 or 5 banks that have all these buildings. Why would any bank need 2, 3, 4 branches within a mile radius of each other? Other than you were hidding profits by buying land with government subsidies and one say will capitalize on by selling them off.
The rich get richer and poor is what is making them rich and Congress is making it legal for them to do it.
Okay I will get off and hopefully stay off the soap box. Sorry! I just hope the American public wakes out and votes these bums out and aren't stupid enough to vote in bigger criminals.
Ed in Tampa
Stay out of trouble!
Stay out of trouble!
OK Guys I will vent a bit more. Luck you!! In the late 1930's when FDR instituted Social Security believe that no one was ever supposed to collect. Well, not in very large numbers anyway.
I think that the average working American male died at about 61 or 62 years of age. FDR said if you are lucky enough to make it to 65 we will pay you this nice little stipend to tide you over. So people would pay and die young and never collect so the people would never collect and the Gummint would get the windfall. (my opinion only) My dad died at age 60, never collected, my mom at age 66, collected one year, my sister at age 63, never collected.
Other problem is that the retirement age never went up with the life expectancy. I should not have been able to retire at 63. I should have been required to work longer because of the increased lif expectancy. But they said go and retire when I got laid off at 63 and 1/2.
In addition, a law can not be changed once it is passed unless another law is passed to recind the first one and replace it with another. (think prohibition)
There is no legal carve out or exemption under the health law. The carve outs for unions and friends of Barry are unconstitutional by violating the equal protection clause in the Constitution. Kind of like making Republicans stop for red lights and giving Dems a pass to go through.
The law passed with, I believe, only 7 votes. Most members of Congress admit that they never read the law before they voted to pass it. This again is probably unconstitutional. We live in a Republic which is also a Representative Democracy. If a congressperson who never read the bill passed it when their constituency directed them not to, then those people were not represented as they should have been. No represention, no constitutionality, no Representative Democracy.
I have said my piece.
But I will probably have some more.
Bill V
I think that the average working American male died at about 61 or 62 years of age. FDR said if you are lucky enough to make it to 65 we will pay you this nice little stipend to tide you over. So people would pay and die young and never collect so the people would never collect and the Gummint would get the windfall. (my opinion only) My dad died at age 60, never collected, my mom at age 66, collected one year, my sister at age 63, never collected.
Other problem is that the retirement age never went up with the life expectancy. I should not have been able to retire at 63. I should have been required to work longer because of the increased lif expectancy. But they said go and retire when I got laid off at 63 and 1/2.
In addition, a law can not be changed once it is passed unless another law is passed to recind the first one and replace it with another. (think prohibition)
There is no legal carve out or exemption under the health law. The carve outs for unions and friends of Barry are unconstitutional by violating the equal protection clause in the Constitution. Kind of like making Republicans stop for red lights and giving Dems a pass to go through.
The law passed with, I believe, only 7 votes. Most members of Congress admit that they never read the law before they voted to pass it. This again is probably unconstitutional. We live in a Republic which is also a Representative Democracy. If a congressperson who never read the bill passed it when their constituency directed them not to, then those people were not represented as they should have been. No represention, no constitutionality, no Representative Democracy.
I have said my piece.
Bill V
oops. sorry bout that. I had mentioned earlier that we had gone to PV power. Fact, it may have been saying "PV" without splaning what the initials meant. My goof. We've gotten so used to it I'm afeared I forget that it aint "general knowledge".Ed in Tampa wrote:Okay I'll be the one to bit why is it that you no longer have a power bill?
(did it again) PV equals Photo Voltaic. As in sun-power panels on the roof. Et cetera. Watt we generate goes to cancel what we use off the grid, with excess coming as a credit aginst future usage. Onliest thing on the bill is administrative fees. So running the A/C all day costs nothing.
Mark V 520, Power-Pro!; Speed Reducer; B/S; Jointer; ShopMate DCS; SS Tenon Master; Rip-Strate; Incra; BCTW; DW734; var. SS sanding systems; Wood River;