Support NeoGAF

[Open Source]

The party that asbolutely dominates radio and owns the most popular cable channel.

the worldwide leader in sports?

 

[Clevinger]

Sorry. Cable news channel.

 

[empty vessel]

It's not a regressive tax - flat taxes are by definition neither regressive nor progressive - unless you take into consideration that income over a certain amount is not subject to the tax (true for social security, not for medicare).

I do mean the cap (which makes it regressive), but even an uncapped flat tax is regressive. A flat tax takes income from low income earners that would be used for sustenance whereas it does not take sustenance from higher income earners but only disposable income. That is inherently regressive, because it takes higher priorities from one group of people (lower income people) than from another group of people (higher income people).

But of course, Social Security is not paying for the operation of government. The government borrows it, sure, but in theory, the government owes that money - and often more than you paid in, the way the numbers work now - back to you at retirement. It's supposed to be a kind of mandatory, guaranteed retirement fund, rather than redistribution of wealth via taxation - at least, that was how it was sold.

I agree that Social Security is a defined program connected to a defined tax, and that it does operate in this way differently from other government spending, but I don't see how that takes it out of the realm of 'having a stake.' Payroll taxes also go towards Medicare too, and Medicare and Social Security tend to be the programs "called out" as unsustainable (although only one of those is true). So it looks an awful lot like eating one's cake and having it too. The bottom half of income earners get a lot less from the government once you remove the SSA and Medicare.

But with studies showing that people starting to pay into the system now getting back less than what they put in, it doesn't appear to be the best way to save for retirement for those disciplined enough to save.

It's not a way to save for retirement at all and was never meant to be. It's a retirement insurance program, not a retirement savings program. It is a pay-as-you-go program, in that workers today pay for a baseline of retirement income (insurance) for today's retirees. Tomorrow's workers will pay for tomorrow's retirees, etc. See http://www.ssa.gov/history/ponzi.htm.

As to studies showing that one gets less than one puts in (which isn't all that important in my opinion given the purpose of the program): http://moneywatch.bnet.com/retireme...he-return-on-your-social-security-taxes/1151/

I would be curious to see what studies you have seen.

 

[GhaleonEB]

The answer to your question is both. Medicaid and Defense. It's not just one or the other.

I think we need to be more clear about what 'cuts' mean.

Is granting Medicare Part D greater purchasing power a cut? It reduces spending. From what I've read, the proposals on the table for Medicare are more around providers, not cutting benefits. If they're just blunt force cuts to payments, I foresee issues. If they're tied to improvements in care and payment bundling, that's another thing.

It's not clear to me whether Obama is putting Medicare and Medicaid on the table conditionally, and if so, what those conditions and limitations are. As always his bottom line is murky, outside of a deal.

It's a cost reduction, but not a benefits cut. I only care about benefits cuts. Although it might better be called an increase in program efficiency.

Right, this is what I was saying. Obama will of course characterize such a change as a cut, given the current framing around reducing spending (which we both disagree with). My question is around the content, because not everything they could frame as a cut is a bad thing (nor is reductions in military spending, for that matter).

 

[empty vessel]

Is granting Medicare Part D greater purchasing power a cut? It reduces spending.

It's a cost reduction, but not a benefits cut. I only care about benefits cuts. Although it might better be called an increase in program efficiency.

 

[Open Source]

I do mean the cap (which makes it regressive), but even an uncapped flat tax is regressive. A flat tax takes income from low income earners that would be used for sustenance whereas it does not take sustenance from higher income earners but only disposable income. That is inherently regressive, because it takes higher priorities from one group of people (lower income people) than from another group of people (higher income people).

Oh, you are using a different sense of the word. "Progressive" and "regressive" have very specific definitions in statistics and economics.

The bottom half of income earners get a lot less from the government once you remove the SSA and Medicare.

That isn't what I've seen, but maybe you have some numbers to share?

It's not a way to save for retirement at all and was never meant to be. It's a retirement insurance program, not a retirement savings program. It is a pay-as-you-go program, in that workers today pay for a baseline of retirement income (insurance) for today's retirees. Tomorrow's workers will pay for tomorrow's retirees, etc. See http://www.ssa.gov/history/ponzi.htm.

True, it is technically not a retirement savings program, because it paid out to people who had never paid in, when the program was started. It is technically a social insurance program, but the event being insured against is so common (not dying before qualifying for benefits) that it is a de facto retirement savings program.

As to studies showing that one gets less than one puts in (which isn't all that important in my opinion given the purpose of the program): http://moneywatch.bnet.com/retireme...he-return-on-your-social-security-taxes/1151/

I would be curious to see what studies you have seen.

That's the same one. Look only at the social security portions. Medicare looks like a nice deal, of course, but there's no way the current system will survive (as you seem to agree - social security on the other hand is not doomed anytime soon).

 

[Measley]

Think I'll wait until the deal is done to either applaud or complain. It seems the media is ballooning this up to the point of absurdity.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Not going to happen, don't waste your time dreaming. Be happy with an end to some loophole few people take advantage of.

On a scale of Harry Reid winning to Russ Feingold winning, I'd say this is closer to Feingold.

Spoiler

fuck

 

[Kosmo]

Think I'll wait until the deal is done to either applaud or complain. It seems the media is ballooning this up to the point of absurdity.

Let me explain what is going on: http://blog.curry.com/stories/2011/07/05/youAreNowTheProduct.html

 

[Oblivion]

I'll say it once more, Obama's a shitty negotiator not cause he's incompetent, but because he wants to be.

 

[RustyNails]

Married Ohio State Representative Robert Mecklenborg Busted for DUI with a stripper. Tests showed he had Viagra in his blood.

As Modern pointed out earlier this evening, we discovered today that Republican State Representative Robert Mecklenborg was arrested half drunk, with Viagra in his system, back in April.

According to the arrest records, Mecklenborg was pulled over near the Burger King at the corner of Lorey Lane and US 50 in Lawrenceburg Indiana. Records indicate that a woman named Tiona Roberts was in the car when he was pulled over.

According to Google Maps, there are only two points of interest – besides the Burger King, of course – on Route 50 in this area. One is the Hollywood casino and the other is the Concepts Show Girls strip club, which is less than a two minute drive from where Mecklenborg was pulled over.

I haven’t been there, but Yelp’s trusted reviewers tell me that Concepts is THE place to stop if you “need a quick bit of action before or after” visiting the casino. “You won’t be disapppointed (sic).”

We did a little research and discovered that Ms. Roberts has personal connections with Concepts Show Girls. In our opinion, it’s likely works there too.

It’s certainly possible that Mecklenborg, 59, and Roberts, 26, are just old friends. Or maybe they met at the local Burger King after bonding over the new Viagra shake. Or maybe he was just giving her a ride to work after her car broke down on Route 50.

I fully admit, I don’t know WHY Ms. Roberts was riding around with a drunk and viagra-filled Mecklenborg. But I can make some guesses, and I’m sure you can too.

All I know for sure is this: a very attractive 26 year old woman who has connections to a strip club in Lawrenceburg, Indiana was in the car with 59 year old Republican State Representative Robert Mechlenborg at 12:08AM when he was pulled over by the Indiana State Police and subsequently tested positive for alcohol and Viagra.

I’m taking bets that Mechlenborg resigns before the end of the day on Friday. I’m going to go out on a limb as say… exactly 4:58PM on the dot.

Any takers?

Funny thing is that Mecklenborg was arrested in April, but I didn't hear a peep about it until today. Do local reps and politicians get arrested all the time? Sorry if this was posted earlier though, I saw it on reddit today. What's disappointing is that Mecklenborg was a family values crusader. Also from reddit comments,

From the comments....

Tom Myers on July 5, 2011 at 1:05 pm

Keith Olbermann pointed out on his show last night that this state representative wanted to make it harder for those without a driver’s license to vote. Since driving under the influence means one’s license gets suspended or revoked, then under his own proposal, he wouldn’t be allowed to vote. Irony can be sweet.

 

[TacticalFox88]

I'll say it once more, Obama's a shitty negotiator not cause he's incompetent, but because he wants to be.

And the million dollar question is: Why?

 

[RustyNails]

And the million dollar question is: Why?

He wants to hold hands with Republicans and sing Kumbaya my lord. The person who "reaches across the aisle"

 

[Cyan]

Tom Myers on July 5, 2011 at 1:05 pm

Keith Olbermann pointed out on his show last night that this state representative wanted to make it harder for those without a driver’s license to vote. Since driving under the influence means one’s license gets suspended or revoked, then under his own proposal, he wouldn’t be allowed to vote. Irony can be sweet.

Whoa! That's crazy.

Somebody actually watched Olbermann.

 

[slidewinder]

And the million dollar question is: Why?

He's Cool Barry Smooth, perpetually bridging the chasmic extremes of Harvard Law School ca. 1990, and that's all he has in him.

 

[Dram]

And the million dollar question is: Why?

I'm assuming it's to help get independents to vote democratic next year.

 

[PantherLotus]

Here's the deal: it might actually work.

 

[Open Source]

And the million dollar question is: Why?

Polls.

 

[GhaleonEB]

And the million dollar question is: Why?

Because his bottom line is getting a deal done, and so long as it conforms to the general principles he's spelled out, he won't draw hard lines on specifics. The lack of those hard lines means the other side can draw theirs way over there and Obama will move toward it.

 

[PhoenixDark]

I'm assuming it's to help get independents to vote democratic next year.

And why would they do that with unemployment still high, nearly four years after giving him a chance? I realize he often is forced to make tough choices in these negotiations, but we're talking about a trillion in cuts in exchange for congressmen doing something they're legally obligated to do. Something everyone knows will be done, and has to be done.

Here we are weeks into this process and republicans haven't agreed to a single democratic proposal or compromise, whereas the WH conceded group the minute this farce began. You'd think a trillion in cuts would be any republican's dream - hell, not even republican presidents pull that off. But they know they can keep threatening the hostage and Obama will offer more and more in exchange for nothing that will help him or the country in the long term.

Maybe we need another 4-8 years of republican bullshit. I'm rapidly reaching the point of not caring. Maybe businesses will be convinced to hire with a republican in office, knowing he'll let them do whatever they want; why wouldn't they want to make sure someone like that stays in office/successful.

 

[SomeDude]

secession is going to happen soon I think.


4 in 10 southerners side with the confederacy in a recent poll.

 

[Hitokage]

Finished reading The Big Short. Always geat when somebody can present an issue as not just an isolated incident.

Edit: In the real life version of a certain movie, the top is still spinning.

 

[Kosmo]

Whoa! That's crazy.

Somebody actually watched Olbermann.

Keith probably went with his "vas deferens" line, figuring nobody saw it the first time around on MSNBC.

And why would they do that with unemployment still high, nearly four years after giving him a chance? I realize he often is forced to make tough choices in these negotiations, but we're talking about a trillion in cuts in exchange for congressmen doing something they're legally obligated to do. Something everyone knows will be done, and has to be done.

Here we are weeks into this process and republicans haven't agreed to a single democratic proposal or compromise, whereas the WH conceded group the minute this farce began. You'd think a trillion in cuts would be any republican's dream - hell, not even republican presidents pull that off. But they know they can keep threatening the hostage and Obama will offer more and more in exchange for nothing that will help him or the country in the long term.

Maybe we need another 4-8 years of republican bullshit. I'm rapidly reaching the point of not caring. Maybe businesses will be convinced to hire with a republican in office, knowing he'll let them do whatever they want; why wouldn't they want to make sure someone like that stays in office/successful.

As much as we all know it will get raised, Obama wants to be the "got Osama" President, not the "defaulted on our debt" President. Even as minuscule as the chances are of the debt ceiling not getting raised, it is not out of the realm of possibility. If he thinks he's going to gain votes by kowtowing to Republican demands, though, that's just LOL funny.

 

[eznark]

Whoa! That's crazy.

Somebody actually watched Olbermann.

At least he is still peddling bullshit. Ohio was pushing voter ID (including various ID cards, in order to be constitutional). You get a DUI you can get a state issued ID card (with out without voter ID laws) the same day.

I think the delay in hearing about it was that it happened in Dearborn County (a rural county in Indiana) so the Dearborn County Register probably didn't put it together that the guy was an Ohio state rep.

 

[Jason's Ultimatum]

Keith probably went with his "vas deferens" line, figuring nobody saw it the first time around on MSNBC.

Well, Keith Olbermann does have vas deferences than most of his MSNBC collegues.

 

[Clevinger]

If he thinks he's going to gain votes by kowtowing to Republican demands, though, that's just LOL funny.

It's almost like you agree that Republicans are uncompromising, stonewalling shitheels.

 

[Kosmo]

It's almost like you agree that Republicans are uncompromising, stonewalling shitheels.

They are simply exerting what leverage they have (real or perceived - "illusory" as EV would say) to push their agenda, no different than when Obama said "We won, you lost, now sit down and shut the fuck up" (more or less) after the 2008 election.

 

[demon]

They are simply exerting what leverage they have (real or perceived - "illusory" as EV would say) to push their agenda, no different than when Obama said "We won, you lost, now sit down and shut the fuck up" (more or less) after the 2008 election.

So you're saying Obama's been as obstructive and uncomprimising as republicans are?

You're so full of shit I can smell it over my cable modem.

 

[Kosmo]

So you're saying Obama's been as obstructive and uncomprimising as republicans are?

You're so full of shit I can smell it over my cable modem.

Not at all, but he's playing a long game. He knows that liberalism simply needs to take continual steps forward, however small, no matter how much Republican's push back. He is willing to compromise the pace, but not the ends.

 

[Invisible_Insane]

So you're saying Obama's been as obstructive and uncomprimising as republicans are?

You're so full of shit I can smell it over my cable modem.

What, you don't feel that rawness in the back of your throat? That's Obamacare, son.

Not at all, but he's playing a long game. He knows that liberalism simply needs to take continual steps forward, however small, no matter how much Republican's push back. He is willing to compromise the pace, but not the ends.

This here is some full on Glenn Beck bullshit.

 

[mckmas8808]

I'm assuming it's to help get independents to vote democratic next year.

Or it could be because he wants to the country to not default or have the markets spin out of control. People here seem to be forgetting that he had already put $4 Trillion over 12 years worth of "cuts" in his long term budget goals.

He's already decided that budget cuts were going be had. The only thing I hope he maintains from the pass is his want to raise taxes on the top 2% and his cuts to the military.

 

[mckmas8808]

This here is some full on Glenn Beck bullshit.

Hold on! How is what he said some "Glenn Beck bullshit"?

 

[eznark]

This here is some full on Glenn Beck bullshit.

I for one am shocked that Glen Beck would say something that is so readily apparent to everyone. Weird that he'd say something pragmatic. I thought he was the fire n' brimstone guy?

 

[Invisible_Insane]

Hold on! How is what he said some "Glenn Beck bullshit"?

I don't think it's at all consistent with Obama's behavior to suggest that he's on some long march toward LIBRULISM. Most of the reforms he's tried to advance have been fairly conservative, even for America.

 

[gcubed]

I for one am shocked that Glen Beck would say something that is so readily apparent to everyone. Weird that he'd say something pragmatic. I thought he was the fire n' brimstone guy?

yeah, its not something i like to post publicly but i dont find anything wrong with what Kosmo said

 

[David Incorporated Esq.]

Not at all, but he's playing a long game. He knows that liberalism simply needs to take continual steps forward, however small, no matter how much Republican's push back. He is willing to compromise the pace, but not the ends.

The Left gets incremental changes towards Liberal policy.

The Right gets fucking Citizens United, Ohio's Heartbeat Bill and Indiana cutting funding to Planned Parenthood.

I'd say the Left is compromising pretty hard on the ends.

 

[eznark]

I think he might skip this one?

@AFLCIO Where are the jobs? #AskObama

 

[demon]

The Left gets incremental changes towards Liberal policy.

The Right gets fucking Citizens United, Ohio's Heartbeat Bill and Indiana cutting funding to Planned Parenthood.

I'd say the Left is compromising pretty hard on the ends.

Pretty much. I don't know what world people like Kosmo live in where Obama's policies make him some sort of socialist granola-shitting liberal, but it's not one I'd call reality.

 

[Invisible_Insane]

I think he might skip this one?

I just looked up that hashtag and it looks like 100% conservative trolling.

 

[eznark]

I just looked up that hashtag and it looks like 100% conservative trolling.

That makes it even funnier that the AFL-CIO is jumping in!

 

[reggieandTFE]

secession is going to happen soon I think.


4 in 10 southerners side with the confederacy in a recent poll.

They'll come running back quick when we pull out our military bases, NASA and the fucking Tennessee Valley Authority!

But seriously, almost all Southern states receive more in Federal money than they pay in taxes. There is zero chance that politicians (ie Perry) don't just use secession and states rights language as code words to rile up their base.

 

[gcubed]

They'll come running back quick when we pull out our military bases, NASA and the fucking Tennessee Valley Authority!

But seriously, almost all Southern states receive more in Federal money than they pay in taxes. There is zero chance that politicians (ie Perry) don't just use secession and states rights language as code words to rile up their base.

you're responding to somedude.

 

[Invisible_Insane]

Questions I tweeted that won't get answered:

Are you willing to allow EGTRRA to finally expire across all tax brackets at the end of 2012? #AskObama

How would you respond to the claim that while Republicans always defect, you always cooperate? #AskObama #PrisonersDilemma

Can we properly call our institutions democratic if $1bil need to be raised to run for the presidency? #AskObama

That last one really bothers me.

 

[Skiptastic]

you're responding to somedude.

Rookie mistake lol

 

[Enron]

If EGTRRA expires, that's going to fucking suck. It will assrape our ability to sock money away in our 401ks :/

 

[ChoklitReign]

I don't think it's at all consistent with Obama's behavior to suggest that he's on some long march toward LIBRULISM. Most of the reforms he's tried to advance have been fairly conservative, even for America.

Is this about the proposed spending cuts? Internet liberals sure are hard to please for spending cuts. What would YOU be comfortable with cutting besides defense?

 

[Enron]

Wait, what? Obama is a liberal?

 

[RustyNails]

secession is going to happen soon I think.


4 in 10 southerners side with the confederacy in a recent poll.

GOOD!

 

[polyh3dron]

I think he might skip this one?

I haven't seen one piece of legislation from Boehner's House of Representatives that is geared towards the creation of jobs.

 

[eznark]

I haven't seen one piece of legislation from Boehner's House of Representatives that is geared towards the creation of jobs.

So that means the AFL-CIO should give Obama a pass?