• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The results are in on social security

Lol, don't get me started on politicians, that's all.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
I still say I sam glad you admit SS is broke and relies on borrowed money to pay seniors, thank you learn to take a compliment.
Click to expand...

You make it sound like being robbed is some kind of failing on the part of SS. Do you always blame the victim in a crime, or just with SS?
 
sawyerloggingon said:
I blame our gov, both parties.
Click to expand...

We have a representative government. The voters had a chance to elect a candidate in 2000 that proposed locking the SS funds. We chose the guy we would rather have a beer with, remember?

:sun
 
Catawba said:
We have a representative government. The voters had a chance to elect a candidate in 2000 that proposed locking the SS funds. We chose the guy we would rather have a beer with, remember?

:sun
Click to expand...

That was probably the one thing algore said that I agreed with, unfortunately he was a pathological liar so just because he said it didn't mean I believed he would do it. Where is crazy Al lately anyway? He's been kinda quiet since he got busted for beating up hookers and Tipper dumped his fat ass.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
That was probably the one thing algore said that I agreed with, unfortunately he was a pathological liar so just because he said it didn't mean I believed he would do it. Where is crazy Al lately anyway? He's been kinda quiet since he got busted for beating up hookers and Tipper dumped his fat ass.
Click to expand...

Feel better? I hope so, because you missed the point completely. :sun
 
Lovebug said:
Bring our Military back home, quit meddling in foreign affairs, quit foreign aide, all of it, tax imports, bring jobs back home, put able bodied welfare recipients to work, close the borders, rethink the war on drugs.
Yes we can.
Click to expand...

Even if we cut military spending in half (which we should), it won't make a dent in the deficit.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
Subject was Gore lock box. Point was he was a pathological liar so why believe he would do anything he said he would. Slamming him for beating up hookers just drives the point home. The guys INSANE!
Click to expand...

Oh you preferred the "sanity" of the guy who lied about the reasons for taking the country to war in Iraq, with the SS money we didn't lock.

Aren't you the clever one! :sun
 
mac said:
Even if we cut military spending in half (which we should), it won't make a dent in the deficit.
Click to expand...

It most certainly will make a dent, especially if we include ALL the military spending, which heretofore has been hidden through usage of the SS trust funds. Ending the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq alone will save $150 billion a year.
 
Catawba said:
It most certainly will make a dent, especially if we include ALL the military spending, which heretofore has been hidden through usage of the SS trust funds. Ending the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq alone will save $150 billion a year.
Click to expand...

$150 Billion isn't much of a dent in $1.3 trillion. If we eliminated 100% of our military spending it wouldn't even amount to half of our deficit. We spend to much on "defense", but we spend far more on other things.
 
justabubba said:
why cap it at $180,000
why should the rich not be subject to tax on their entire income just as the lower class wage earners
their high incomes do not prevent them from being able to draw social security - at the highest levels available
Click to expand...

Bad argument is bad. Almost every single change proposed to Social Security has been to means test it--and no one has complained and all seem to agree its a needed change.
 
mac said:
$150 Billion isn't much of a dent in $1.3 trillion. If we eliminated 100% of our military spending it wouldn't even amount to half of our deficit. We spend to much on "defense", but we spend far more on other things.
Click to expand...

That is just from ending our 2 middle east wars, than add on a 50% cut in military spending, and the $4 trillion in increased revenues over 10 years from eliminating the Bush tax cuts and you are looking at some real deficit reduction. If we also add in an upgrade of our health care system to that of the rest of the industrialized world, the deficit reduction looks even better.
 
Catawba said:
That is just from ending our 2 middle east wars, than add on a 50% cut in military spending, and the $4 trillion in increased revenues over 10 years from eliminating the Bush tax cuts and you are looking at some real deficit reduction. If we also add in an upgrade of our health care system to that of the rest of the industrialized world, the deficit reduction looks even better.
Click to expand...

No, no. Our entire yearly military budget is less than have the annual deficit. So, even if we spent $0 on the military next year, we'd still have over $700 Billion in deficit spending. Of course, spending $0 on defense would be ludicrous.
 
mac said:
No, no. Our entire yearly military budget is less than have the annual deficit. So, even if we spent $0 on the military next year, we'd still have over $700 Billion in deficit spending. Of course, spending $0 on defense would be ludicrous.
Click to expand...

You are only looking at part of the military spending ~

U.S Federal Budget Fiscal Year 2009

Total Outlays (Federal Funds): $2,650 billion
MILITARY: 54% and $1,449 billion
NON-MILITARY: 46% and $1,210 billion

"These figures are from an analysis of detailed tables in the “Analytical Perspectives” book of the Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2009. The figures are federal funds, which do not include trust funds — such as Social Security — that are raised and spent separately from income taxes. What you pay (or don’t pay) by April 15, 2008, goes to the federal funds portion of the budget. The government practice of combining trust and federal funds began during the Vietnam War, thus making the human needs portion of the budget seem larger and the military portion smaller."
The Federal Pie Chart
 
Catawba said:
You are only looking at part of the military spending ~

U.S Federal Budget Fiscal Year 2009

Total Outlays (Federal Funds): $2,650 billion
MILITARY: 54% and $1,449 billion
NON-MILITARY: 46% and $1,210 billion

"These figures are from an analysis of detailed tables in the “Analytical Perspectives” book of the Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2009. The figures are federal funds, which do not include trust funds — such as Social Security — that are raised and spent separately from income taxes. What you pay (or don’t pay) by April 15, 2008, goes to the federal funds portion of the budget. The government practice of combining trust and federal funds began during the Vietnam War, thus making the human needs portion of the budget seem larger and the military portion smaller."
The Federal Pie Chart
Click to expand...

Come on, Cat....warresitors.org?
 
mac said:
Come on, Cat....warresitors.org?
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that money to help pay for our wars has not been taken from the SS trust funds?
 
Last edited:
Catawba said:
Are you suggesting that money to help pay for our wars has not been taken from the SS trust funds?
Click to expand...

Not directly, or in the manner described by your extremely biased site. Social Security money is routinely used for a whole host of things.
 
mac said:
Not directly, or in the manner described by your extremely biased site. Social Security money is routinely used for a whole host of things.
Click to expand...

We borrow the money from china/wherever, the money that should have went back into SS is now being paid to china/wherever. Is that about right in your opinion?
 
donc said:
We borrow the money from china/wherever, the money that should have went back into SS is now being paid to china/wherever. Is that about right in your opinion?
Click to expand...

Not exactly. Excess money is given to the Treasury in return for securities.
 
mac said:
Not directly, or in the manner described by your extremely biased site. Social Security money is routinely used for a whole host of things.
Click to expand...

"Since the Greenspan Commission in the early 1980s, Social Security has cumulatively collected far more in payroll taxes dedicated to the program than it has paid out to recipients—nearly $2.4 trillion by 2008. This annual surplus is credited to Social Security trust funds that hold special non-marketable Treasury securities, and this surplus amount is commonly referred to as the "Social Security Trust Fund". The proceeds are paid into the U.S. Treasury where they may be used for other government purposes."

"According to the CBO, defense spending grew 9% annually on average from fiscal year 2000-2009.[42] Much of the costs for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have not been funded through regular appropriations bills, but through emergency supplemental appropriations bills. As such, most of these expenses were not included in the budget deficit calculation prior to FY2010. "

"First, there were the Bush tax cuts, which added roughly $2 trillion to the national debt over the last decade. Second, there were the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which added an additional $1.1 trillion or so. And third was the Great Recession, which led both to a collapse in revenue and to a sharp rise in spending on unemployment insurance and other safety-net programs."[59]

A Bloomberg analysis in May 2011 attributed $2.0 trillion of the $9.3 trillion of public debt (20%) to additional military and intelligence spending since September 2001, plus another $45 billion annually in interest."

United States federal budget - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Catawba said:
"Since the Greenspan Commission in the early 1980s, Social Security has cumulatively collected far more in payroll taxes dedicated to the program than it has paid out to recipients—nearly $2.4 trillion by 2008. This annual surplus is credited to Social Security trust funds that hold special non-marketable Treasury securities, and this surplus amount is commonly referred to as the "Social Security Trust Fund". The proceeds are paid into the U.S. Treasury where they may be used for other government purposes."

"According to the CBO, defense spending grew 9% annually on average from fiscal year 2000-2009.[42] Much of the costs for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have not been funded through regular appropriations bills, but through emergency supplemental appropriations bills. As such, most of these expenses were not included in the budget deficit calculation prior to FY2010. "

"First, there were the Bush tax cuts, which added roughly $2 trillion to the national debt over the last decade. Second, there were the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which added an additional $1.1 trillion or so. And third was the Great Recession, which led both to a collapse in revenue and to a sharp rise in spending on unemployment insurance and other safety-net programs."[59]

A Bloomberg analysis in May 2011 attributed $2.0 trillion of the $9.3 trillion of public debt (20%) to additional military and intelligence spending since September 2001, plus another $45 billion annually in interest."

United States federal budget - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

Cat, this doesn't corroborate your war resister's post....and also from your same link:

Military spending: The military budget of the United States during FY 2009 was approximately $683 billion in expenses for the Department of Defense (DoD) and $54 billion for Homeland Security, a total of $737 billion.[39] The U.S. defense budget (excluding spending for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Homeland Security, and Veteran's Affairs) is around 4% of GDP.[40] Adding these other costs places defense and homeland security spending between 5% and 6% of GDP. The DoD baseline budget, excluding supplemental funding for the wars, has grown from $297 billion in FY2001 to a budgeted $534 billion for FY2010, an 81% increase.[41] According to the CBO, defense spending grew 9% annually on average from fiscal year 2000-2009.[42] Much of the costs for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have not been funded through regular appropriations bills, but through emergency supplemental appropriations bills. As such, most of these expenses were not included in the budget deficit calculation prior to FY2010. Some budget experts argue that emergency supplemental appropriations bills do not receive the same level of legislative care as regular appropriations bills.[43]
Click to expand...

This is including Homeland Security as part of defense. As I'm sure you know, Homeland Security includes Fire and emergency services, Customs, Coast Gaurd and most major law enforcement agencies, FEMA....etc.
 
mac said:
Not exactly. Excess money is given to the Treasury in return for securities.
Click to expand...



When did we have any excess money in the last ten years?
 
mac said:
Cat, this doesn't corroborate your war resister's post....and also from your same link:



This is including Homeland Security as part of defense. As I'm sure you know, Homeland Security includes Fire and emergency services, Customs, Coast Gaurd and most major law enforcement agencies, FEMA....etc.
Click to expand...

It certainly does corroborate the 2009 military funding figures included on the site. You were intimating the budgeted amount for military was all we had to cut from. This has been disproved by the multiple sources I have cited.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom