"
Each day, 10,000 baby boomers retire and begin receiving Medicare and Social Security benefits. And while five workers supported the benefits of each retiree in 1960, there will be only two workers funding each retiree by 2030."
Those who dismiss long-term budget projections should re-read the last paragraph. The retirement of 77 million baby boomers into Social Security and Medicare is not a theoretical projection. Demography is destiny.
ObamaCare is also driving spending upward. According to the CBO, over the next decade, ObamaCare will be the single largest driver of rising health-care spending. (read the whole thing by entering on Google --> "Heading Off the Entitlement Meltdown")
 |
| "Some day, all this will be yours" |
14 comments:
On the bright side we will probably be murdered by some group before the finances go kaput.
Heading it off?
Far too late for that, and that was the intent.
It's the Cloward-Piven Strategy nearing fruition.
The democrat party's war on work.
Note the part where the Clinton/Republican congress era welfare to work rules have been gutted by this administration.
Why work when you can take from others and watch pro-democrat party TV all day?
The figure of speech "heading off"... i take it, is from the westerns. "Head'm off at the pass."
If so, is it a dying metaphor?
Not to worry. The best minds, Harvard educated no less, tell us they can print and print and print with ZERO consequences. So who are we, mere peasants, to object?
Abortion is a bitch.
As the Demos are beginning to realize.
Pogo: I never said I was a diplomat said...
Heading it off?
Far too late for that, and that was the intent.
It's the Cloward-Piven Strategy nearing fruition.
The whole point of Cloward-Piven was a guaranteed annual income for everybody.
A sinking economy, too much debt service, and no workers means Cloward-Piven isn't gonna happen.
Lem said...
The figure of speech "heading off"... i take it, is from the westerns. "Head'm off at the pass."
If so, is it a dying metaphor?
Westerns seem to be more popular than ever on cable.
Everybody's running them.
ricpic said...
Not to worry. The best minds, Harvard educated no less, tell us they can print and print and print with ZERO consequences. So who are we, mere peasants, to object?
I believe the phase is "Top men. Top. Men."
We're all good conservatives here who only want the government to keep its paws off our social security and our medicare; and away from our other private parts, like our mortgage interest and charitable contribution deductions. And college education deductions. Because it's only an entitlement when someone else gets it.
And please do not shortchange our heroes in the military. And be sure to continue to support the billions needed to employ more federal employees to protect our southern border (and keep on shooting crossers, because, well they're just Messicans after all); and the billions more needed to finish that 2,000 mile long border wall. That'll keep on the right side, for sure.
On the other hand, for a very thoughtful opinion on entitlement reform, from a conservative AND a federal employee no less,
please read this great letter from "Dave at Garfield Ridge". He posted at Ace of Spades HQ last October. His take on military reform was eye opening for me.
(I sent Lem the link last October and asked that he repost it here, but he didn’t. That's OK Lem.)
Hey, if they let me invest all the Social Security I paid, they could leave me alone.
As for Medicare, maybe if they opened that up, there's a better deal there to be had.
The tell is right at the beginning, "We're all good conservatives."
This copy/paste response does look familiar. There is a broad coalition of conservatives who did very well for themselves and do not mind Social Security and Medicare payments being means tested, while recognizing the government took that money their entire working lives. Many with the full understanding they'd never see it. Likewise conservatives acknowledge interest deductions for mortgages needed apply to second and third and fourth and fifth homes, along with charitable deductions. They just give away their extra stuff.
Yes, this is a cartoon version of conservatives that does sound familiar. Very familiar.
The assumption that support for billions more needed to employ federal employees to protect borders is most cartoonish of all. Conservatives recognize federal government already has the resources to do that and no more is needed. From a conservative point of view our resources are already misallocated. The statement of demanding more comes from a liberal way of thinking, not a conservative argument. And the statement of shooting just because they are Mexicans is projection at its worse.
But why am I even responding? Because this fruitless responding feels familiar too. I'm responding to someone who just likes to argue, is impervious to new information. I'm arguing with a resolute inflexible partisan who projects like a mother fucker in order to have an arguable point, and then argues with that, while holding this thing they saw that someone else wrote on their hard drive and drop it in any and all posts like this.
Focus!
The post is about the debt being unsustainable.
The post is about shifting the consequences of our political decisions today onto our children.
I notice the gay people I speak with have no concern about that. It is a fundamental point that is regularly dismissed. As if they do acknowledge the present only. As if there is no future generation to hold their concern. It's all about getting their man or their woman elected, and that is it.
I reject you little essay. I reject your projection. I reject you point of view. I reject your partisanship. I reject your duplicity.
And my answer to you is conservatives are not your enemy. Wake the fuck up. Your country is in deep trouble and it young people who it will fall to resolve. Because you sure as hell aren't going be any help.
And save your "we're all good conservatives…" for people who haven't heard it before, like 100 fucking times.
The only plan is to let the younger folks designate a good portion of their soc sec "conributions" to a private bucket and , in return, they agree to allow the majority of their "contributions" go to paying off the accumulated deficit caused by disreputable thieving pols from both parties. [this will take the next 75-100 years but it does fix the problem forever unlike most of the current proposed fixes].
And to sweeten the offer, I suggest we offer to execute in public a dozen or so longstanding members of both parties who have been in the Imperial City for too long. It would serve as a message to future elected officials.
Sound like a good plan to you guys?
Chip,
Wow, you really jump into people's shit at the drop of a (turd). I'll cede half your argument based on me being a broken record and I probably should have left it with the linked article. But the rest of your rant was pretty much unintelligible.
I notice the gay people I speak with have no concern about that.
That all started with John Maynard Keynes. You can look it up.
AJ
"And to sweeten the offer, I suggest we offer to execute in public a dozen or so longstanding members of both parties who have been in the Imperial City for too long. It would serve as a message to future elected officials.
Sound like a good plan to you guys?"
No, but I think exchanging their entitlements for govt. property out west would be nice.
Post a Comment