TexasCHLforum.com

mojo84 wrote:

G26ster wrote:

mojo84 wrote:

G26ster wrote:

Lambda Force wrote:Republicans should repeal them all or admit they're socialists and push single payer for everybody.

It's crazy to have "free" or subsidized healthcare for everybody except the people who work and pay taxes. Or should I say, the suckers who work and pay taxes.

Say, brother, where do I get me one of those Obamaphones?

Oh, so it's OK to plan for your retirement knowing that you paid into Medicare all your working life, and then after you retire banking on those benefits, you get them taken away and have squat to live on. Yeah, that's real fair. All you have to do is push the "reverse button" go back in time, and tell yourself you need to have a higher yield on your savings/investments because Medicare won't be there. Where did I put my time machine. Can't find it. And BTW, people on Medicare pay income taxes too. At least we do.

I don't believe anyone in their right mind would really want to take away the benefit for which you or anyone has paid for over the years. There is an option to stop the program for the future before those that have not yet started paying into the system start.

Whether some of the programs are intentionally and systematically phased out, they will implode on their own and people will lose what they've paid for and the economy will take a devastating hit.

This isn't a young against old deal. The system is unsustainable.

Mojo: I agree that SS & Medicare need to be reformed for future recipients, AND the current system is unsustainable. But when you spice an opinion with phrases like, "It's crazy to have "free" or subsidized healthcare for everybody except the people who work and pay taxes. Or should I say, the suckers who work and pay taxes," after you've said get rid of Medicare, it implies that recipients of SS & Medicare are freeloaders who pay no taxes. That simply is untrue, and it can make the reader feel like it IS a young vs. old situation, and folks on Medicare are deadbeats.

I sure hope none of my post came across that way. In my opinion Medicare in the VA are completely separate from the primary Health Care issue that Obamacare affected.8

Mojo: My last post was mainly in response to another member who said in one post to get rid of Medicare and Medicaid, then in a subsequent post made the statement I quoted. Sorry for the confusion.

G26ster wrote:

mojo84 wrote:

G26ster wrote:

mojo84 wrote:

G26ster wrote:

Lambda Force wrote:Republicans should repeal them all or admit they're socialists and push single payer for everybody.

It's crazy to have "free" or subsidized healthcare for everybody except the people who work and pay taxes. Or should I say, the suckers who work and pay taxes.

Say, brother, where do I get me one of those Obamaphones?

Oh, so it's OK to plan for your retirement knowing that you paid into Medicare all your working life, and then after you retire banking on those benefits, you get them taken away and have squat to live on. Yeah, that's real fair. All you have to do is push the "reverse button" go back in time, and tell yourself you need to have a higher yield on your savings/investments because Medicare won't be there. Where did I put my time machine. Can't find it. And BTW, people on Medicare pay income taxes too. At least we do.

I don't believe anyone in their right mind would really want to take away the benefit for which you or anyone has paid for over the years. There is an option to stop the program for the future before those that have not yet started paying into the system start.

Whether some of the programs are intentionally and systematically phased out, they will implode on their own and people will lose what they've paid for and the economy will take a devastating hit.

This isn't a young against old deal. The system is unsustainable.

Mojo: I agree that SS & Medicare need to be reformed for future recipients, AND the current system is unsustainable. But when you spice an opinion with phrases like, "It's crazy to have "free" or subsidized healthcare for everybody except the people who work and pay taxes. Or should I say, the suckers who work and pay taxes," after you've said get rid of Medicare, it implies that recipients of SS & Medicare are freeloaders who pay no taxes. That simply is untrue, and it can make the reader feel like it IS a young vs. old situation, and folks on Medicare are deadbeats.

I sure hope none of my post came across that way. In my opinion Medicare in the VA are completely separate from the primary Health Care issue that Obamacare affected.8

Mojo: My last post was mainly in response to another member who said in one post to get rid of Medicare and Medicaid, then in a subsequent post made the statement I quoted. Sorry for the confusion.

No worries. Guess I overlooked that post. Some posters just don't get a lot of my attention. I want to make sure as I do not want anyone think we should stick it to anyone. Just want people to be responsible for themselves. Medicare and Social Security systems are set up to force people to do that. I have used the term "entitlements" when referring to those services. However, the term as I used it means that it is something people truly are entitled to. Not a freebie that some think of when people use entitlement.

The thing is, the money you and I paid into Social Security and Medicare last year was paid out last year. The same thing happened with the money we paid in ten years ago, etc. There is no pile of money sitting in our FICA "accounts" invested for our retirements. If anybody but the government ran it, it would be called a Ponzi scheme.

When the population and the economy were growing, it was easy for them to dismiss those with concerns as fringers. Since the Great Recession, it's painfully obvious to anybody paying attention. FICA is a house of cards. Love em or hate em, Millennials are the first generation of Americans who are (as a group) unlikely to do better financially than their parents. They're also smaller in number than the Boomers. The math is simple.

Alf wrote:The thing is, the money you and I paid into Social Security and Medicare last year was paid out last year. The same thing happened with the money we paid in ten years ago, etc. There is no pile of money sitting in our FICA "accounts" invested for our retirements. If anybody but the government ran it, it would be called a Ponzi scheme.

When the population and the economy were growing, it was easy for them to dismiss those with concerns as fringers. Since the Great Recession, it's painfully obvious to anybody paying attention. FICA is a house of cards. Love em or hate em, Millennials are the first generation of Americans who are (as a group) unlikely to do better financially than their parents. They're also smaller in number than the Boomers. The math is simple.

You mean there is no "Lock Box?" I believe the money we paid into SS and Medicare was spent for every other program and misadventure the meat heads in D.C. could think of. It has never been "set aside" for the purpose for which it was collected. Yes, it's a Ponzi scheme.

My understanding ( anyone can correct me if I'm wrong ) Excess Social Security Taxes are used to buy treasury bonds. The Social Security Administration hold most of the federal debt.

The crisis everyone talks about is when social security out flow exceeds social security inflow. Then the SSA will no longer buy US debt, but will begin cashing in the bonds it holds to make up the difference.

The government will then have to borrow money to pay off the bonds and will have to find even more money to make up for the part the SSA used to buy. Most likely the government will have to pay higher interest rates to attract all this new money. Most likely the US will need to raise taxes, just to remain even.

When the government says it balenced the budget, it does not count the money it borrows from the SSA "lockbox".

In the last 8 years the government doubled the federal debt in addition to spending all the excess social security taxes. I have no idea what the excess money was spent on. Not infrastructure, not space, not protecting the border, not defense, and not on war.

philip964 wrote:My understanding ( anyone can correct me if I'm wrong ) Excess Social Security Taxes are used to buy treasury bonds. The Social Security Administration hold most of the federal debt.

It looks like intragovernmental holdings are less than 30% of the national debt.
https://treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports ... 022017.pdf

apostate wrote:

philip964 wrote:My understanding ( anyone can correct me if I'm wrong ) Excess Social Security Taxes are used to buy treasury bonds. The Social Security Administration hold most of the federal debt.

It looks like intragovernmental holdings are less than 30% of the national debt.
https://treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports ... 022017.pdf

That would be 60% 8 years ago. Sorry hard to keep up.

apostate wrote:

philip964 wrote:My understanding ( anyone can correct me if I'm wrong ) Excess Social Security Taxes are used to buy treasury bonds. The Social Security Administration hold most of the federal debt.

It looks like intragovernmental holdings are less than 30% of the national debt.
https://treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports ... 022017.pdf

Regardless whether it's 27.5% or 60%, the real numbers are in TRILLIONS and the total debt is almost $20 trillion. It's unsustainable and unmanageable. Robbing Petsr to pay Paul seldom works for long.

mojo84 wrote:Regardless whether it's 27.5% or 60%, the real numbers are in TRILLIONS and the total debt is almost $20 trillion. It's unsustainable and unmanageable. Robbing Petsr to pay Paul seldom works for long.

Absolutely. As the Iron Lady famously said, eventually "they always run out of other people’s money."

http://www.vox.com/2017/3/30/15121624/t ... ucus-tweet

Caution, Vox is a liberal "news" source. However, Trump apparently tweeted that unless the freedom caucus gets in line, his agenda is at risk, so he would then encourage primary assaults against the freedom caucus in 2018.

Trump is learning all Republicans are not the same and that if the Obamacare replacement bill is too liberal, conservative members won't vote for it. So he is looking to woo more conservative democrats (if there is such a thing anymore) to his side, rather than leaning more conservative and risk loosing the more liberal Republicans.

Like the previous Obamacare, no one really knew what the Obamacare replacement bill had in it. So it is difficult to praise or complain about it. Near as I can tell it was Obamacare light. Probably did nothing to reign in healthcare costs, like Obamacare and was most likely to cause health insurance premiums to go up. Which of course is what they do on their own, with or without new laws.

Not sure if Trump's tweet was more "art of the deal".

Rush Limbaugh predicted this new direction by Trump will win praise from the mainstream media and will cause them to play down the Russia investigation. Earlier this week on MSNBC some in the know former Obama staffer confirmed that Trump was being spied on by the Obama administration.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/ ... it-support

EU Union Boss in a speech to the EU commission threatened to break up the US over Trump's support of Brexit.

Article says Texas and Ohio would be ones he would encourage to leave.

Some Euopeans continue to remain clueless.

Ivanka is joining the White House staff as an advisor.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/ ... 9-17-56-41

This appears to be a good drain the swamp bill.

EPA science must be made public not kept confidential.

philip964 wrote:http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/ ... it-support

EU Union Boss in a speech to the EU commission threatened to break up the US over Trump's support of Brexit.

Article says Texas and Ohio would be ones he would encourage to leave.

Some Euopeans continue to remain clueless.

They can have the California politicians, and all of the Hollywood celebs who said they were leaving anyway. I'm sure they will enjoy the "no go" zones in Europe, as well as their open borders policies.

philip964 wrote:Trump apparently tweeted that unless the freedom caucus gets in line, his agenda is at risk, so he would then encourage primary assaults against the freedom caucus in 2018.

President Trump should be aware that very many of those who supported him believe in the Freedom Caucus goals. Alienating his base support is not a recommended path to reelection.

Freedom Caucus Fires Back at Trump
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavl ... k-n2306494

bblhd672 wrote:

philip964 wrote:Trump apparently tweeted that unless the freedom caucus gets in line, his agenda is at risk, so he would then encourage primary assaults against the freedom caucus in 2018.

Trump is learning all Republicans are not the same and that if the Obamacare replacement bill is too liberal, conservative members won't vote for it. So he is looking to woo more conservative democrats (if there is such a thing anymore) to his side, rather than leaning more conservative and risk loosing the more liberal Republicans.

President Trump should be aware that very many of those who supported him believe in the Freedom Caucus goals. Alienating his base support is not a recommended path to reelection.

The President needs better advisors. He was led to believe that the AHCA was good - it didn't have a chance, zero, nada, none.