The Cellar Security proposal

[lookout123]

that is one seriuosly messed up situation.

[Griff]

Originally Posted by glatt

Why, in your opinion, is Bush proposing this change? Who is he trying to help here? What's his motivation?

If its done properly, the Republican Party stands to gain a lot of registered voters. The Democrats have been cynical and cavalier with SS. They taxed the working man disproportionately and pissed away the surplus. Letting people actually build a savings moves voters out of the Dem ranks. This GOP Congress is pretty sucky as well but over the long haul the Dems have been the bigger theives.

[tw]

Originally Posted by glatt

Why, in you opinion, is Bush proposing this change? Who is he trying to help here? What's his motivation? Do you really think his prime motivation is to support the stock broker lobby? I just don't understand why he is pushing for this, or how it's going to positively impact SS in any way.

This question has been asked repeatedly in business discussion groups. There is no single reason. But one often mentioned is a neo-cons adversity to support programs such as Social Security. Their belief is that government should not be a social service. Social Security since its inception has been opposed by right wing extremists. The Neo-cons were not happy when Reagan raised the taxes on (contributions to) Social Security.

Private accounts is a first step to undermining a Trust Fund that does so much for the neo-cons strongest opponents - the poorer and more needy. The Trust Fund is the one and only retirement program that is guaranteed - no risk. It is only intended as partial support. Americans are expected to have other private retirement investments because SS was never intended to be enough to live on and stay out of poverty.

The original lie about private investment was that it would save Social Security. No one bought that lie. So the lie was recently changed. George Jr recently acknowledged that private investment accounts would not help nor save Social Security. IOW the neo-cons really never had a good reason for their SS 'reform'. So that we don't call them liars, they are now spinning private investments for other reasons. But the real reason they were promoting SS changes - step one to dismantling a program that is adverse to a neo-con political agenda

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by glatt

Why, in you opinion, is Bush proposing this change? Who is he trying to help here? What's his motivation? Do you really think his prime motivation is to support the stock broker lobby? I just don't understand why he is pushing for this, or how it's going to positively impact SS in any way.

1- An influx of $$$ into the market would push the whole market up just like when mutual funds became the thing to do. Money managers have a flow of money they have to buy something with, they’re bidding against each other, market prices rise, Bush’s buddys get richer.

2- When people buy this stock some of it will be issued by the companies rather than from someone that holds previously issued shares. That money flowing into the Board of Directors and CEO’s hot little hands will make Bush their God. Probably worth 4 gimmes(sp) per 18 holes for W.
I doubt if any of the money will be labeled “Not to be used for evil”.

Aside~~ I worry about the people below the “middle class”.
Some are not well educated. Some are unlucky. Some never have two nickels to rub together their whole lives.
It’s hard to preach the virtue of saving on a regular basis to people who are living hand to mouth.
Granted, some of them are living that way because of there own actions......carrying on a family tradition?
Many don’t even know what an IRA is and couldn’t or wouldn’t handle it anyway. Giving them the opportunity to direct their retirement plan is a joke. Probably a third of them would buy Amway.

Is this your problem? No. Should you be penalized from making a fortune because of them. No.
But you have other options for making your killing.
Don’t kill these people in the process....please.

[tw]

Originally Posted by lookout123

wow - i see you once again typed a lot but didn't actually answer the question about what specific part of individual SS accounts scare you.

Again Lookout123 spins nonsense. SS monies are taken by the government to solve cash flow problems (such as a war in Iraq). Instead the Trust Fund should be *repaid with interest*. All SS Trust Fund problems solved – no problem. Lookout123 must avoid this solution *repaid with interest* to keep spinning his half truths. I have no problem with a solution to SS. I have a problem getting Lookout123 to even acknowledge simple solutions that are contrary to his neo-con agenda.

What scares me? The propaganda that Lookout123 promotes. For example, a discussion of brokers on (I believe it was Bloomberg News) noted that bond traders would be harmed by the privatizing of SS contributions. But stock brokers would reap substantial rewards. Lookout123 instead lies by saying

a well designed and run Individual account system would make many of our clients less likely to invest additional $$ with us ...

Right. More money in the stock market and yet stock brokers would see less business? Only a student of Pravda and Gerhing (professional liars) would say that. These neo-con lies - just like lies that promoted the 'Pearl Harboring' of Iraq - scare me. Lookout123 has again posted propaganda - half truths – that private accounts would cause reduced business for stock brokers. Who, pray tell, could ever believe that lie. But then notice who makes that ‘reduced business’ claim.

If Lookout123 were honest, he would demand that government *repay with interest* the monies confiscated from the FAA, Highway, and Social Security Trust Funds. He completely avoids that discussion - as any good political propagandist must. There is no neo-con agenda for correcting this accounting fraud.

An honest Lookout123 would have first demanded that all monies taken from the Trust Funds be *repaid with interest*. Notice every post from Lookout123 completely avoids the concept. Neo-cons don’t want this fraud highlighted. Lookout123, et al have other agendas. What’s good for a neo-con is good for America?

[lookout123]

bruce - you've brought up some good points. i think those are very valid objections to the private accounts.

tw - you continue to be a self impressed asshat. accuse away. you have yet to ever answer a question i've asked of you. as long as you have everything figured out, i'm sure we'll all be ok.

[tw]

Originally Posted by lookout123

tw - you continue to be a self impressed asshat. accuse away. you have yet to ever answer a question i've asked of you. as long as you have everything figured out, i'm sure we'll all be ok.

Ever since I reamed Lookout123 a new asshole with a simple question, he is now playing this game of "you don't answer my questions - boo hoo hoo".

Never forget the very first question someone was accused of avoiding. Lookout123 - when will we go after bin Laden. He still will neither answer nor even acknowledge that question.

Latest expression that the neo-con and religious extremist Lookout123 must avoid: *repaid with interest*. As a good propagandist of the neo-cons, he must avoid the concept. *Repaid with interest* is not in the neo-con agenda. Therefore Lookout123 maybe is not permitted to discuss it? Interesting. Who does he work for? Is Lookout123 a paid neo-con spokeperson? Maybe he is told what he can and cannot discuss? *Repaid with interest* is not permitted. "When do we go after bin Laden" - he's not permitted to discuss that either?

[Clodfobble]

Riddle me this, tw: If the government doesn't have the money to afford Baby Boomers surging into Social Security, how is it they're supposed to have the money to repay with interest the money they borrowed over the decades??

Yeah, if I pulled money out of my ass I could repay my mortgage tomorrow. But the fact is I don't have that money, that's why I had to borrow it in the first place. You're crying over spilt milk--the money they've stolen is gone, spent on other things. Harping on their financial irresponsibility doesn't help fix the problem.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

Riddle me this, tw: If the government doesn't have the money to afford Baby Boomers surging into Social Security, how is it they're supposed to have the money to repay with interest the money they borrowed over the decades?

OK, let's assume much of the old money is gone. SS therefore is only solvent for another 40 years. But if starting today, every new dollar put into SS gets paid interest, then plenty of money remains to fund the boomers. But if starting today, every new SS dollar bought Treasury bonds, then a major Federal Treasury cash flow problem gets exposed. Best to avoid the *repaid with interest* solution. You just asked the question they (and Lookout123) hope to avoid - because the answer is rather embarrassing and troubling.

BTW, its not just the Republicans that fear to address *repaid with interest*. This fraudulent accounting is endorsesd with winks from both sides of the aisle.

[lookout123]

Ever since I reamed Lookout123 a new asshole with a simple question, he is now playing this game of "you don't answer my questions - boo hoo hoo".

are you kidding me? when the hell do you think you reamed me? cite? or is this one of those things that if you say it enough, you can accept as truth. i've been asking you to answer questions since i got here last april... total questions tw has answered since then... 0.

and on Bin Laden - tw - i've answered that one enough times. i guess that is just further proof that you don't read any posts but your own.

but, damn, you got me on the neo-con bit... was it the horns sticking out of my head that tipped you off?

[tw]

Originally Posted by lookout123

and on Bin Laden - tw - i've answered that one enough times. i guess that is just further proof that you don't read any posts but your own.

Yes you did answer it all zero times. But you did not answer it through that newly reamed asshole.

So how many times will Lookout123 discuss "repaid with interest"? Let's see. He cannot do it minus one times......

[lookout123]

have you been drinking? if not, could you start?

[Griff]

Originally Posted by tw

But if starting today, every new dollar put into SS gets paid interest, then plenty of money remains to fund the boomers.

Finally a starting point. We know the FedGov can't pay interest on anything without robbing the taxpayer. Hmmm... who would borrow money and pay interest on it at no cost to the citizenry and a net gain to society?

[Happy Monkey]

Washington Post

A new paper by Yale University economist Robert J. Shiller found that under Bush's default "life-cycle accounts," which shift assets from stocks to bonds over a worker's lifetime, nearly a third of workers would bring in less in benefits than if they remained in the traditional system. That analysis is based on historical rates of return in the United States. Using global rates of return, which Shiller says more closely track future conditions, life-cycle portfolios could be expected to fall short of the traditional system's returns 71 percent of the time.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by Griff

Finally a starting point. We know the FedGov can't pay interest on anything without robbing the taxpayer. Hmmm... who would borrow money and pay interest on it at no cost to the citizenry and a net gain to society?

But all along people have been deceived into thinking they were paying a certain tax to the Feds and another tax for SS when in fact more of the total was actually going into the budget than they thought. Maybe that would wake people up to how much the feds are actually spending. The budget numbers are so huge nobody can relate to them, but the amount you pay becomes a real mumber to show changes in spending.