Support NeoGAF

[CharlieDigital]

The 401(k) transition was good for the changing economy by adding portability and an ability to accrue benefits...

401K's biggest problem is that it requires us all to be capable investors to get any sort of reasonable return.

 

[Chichikov]

401K's biggest problem is that it requires us all to be capable investors to get any sort of reasonable return.

I think the biggest problem is that it requires you to save enough money for the worst case scenario.
It's an insurance system with one client, and it's syphoning money from the real economy to Wall Street.

Even if we could all somehow get great returns, that system would still be inefficient.

 

[Tamanon]

401K's biggest problem is that it requires us all to be capable investors to get any sort of reasonable return.

Eh, I'd disagree with that. With the abundance of target funds, it's easy to invest in 401(k)s. All it involves is picking your target, and avoiding selling out of fear. Half of my job in my previous life was just convincing people not to sell when they're decades out from retirement.

 

[Manmademan]

Eh, I'd disagree with that. With the abundance of target funds, it's easy to invest in 401(k)s. All it involves is picking your target, and avoiding selling out of fear. Half of my job in my previous life was just convincing people not to sell when they're decades out from retirement.

Yeah, I'd agree here. "buy and hold" is as a reliable a strategy as you can get, provided you're diversified. as you get older most of your investments should be in bonds and things that aren't volatile anyway.

it's when people panic and sell en masse when downturns happen, or decide to be wizards of wall street and go day trading that money gets lost.

 

[Chichikov]

Eh, I'd disagree with that. With the abundance of target funds, it's easy to invest in 401(k)s. All it involves is picking your target, and avoiding selling out of fear. Half of my job in my previous life was just convincing people not to sell when they're decades out from retirement.

Why do I need to learn about this crap?
We act like it's some sort of great life skill to know what's mid cap value retirement fund (or whatever) is.
And you know what, if people want to play that stupid game they can, but why the fuck am I coerced, and the threat of death by homelessness no less, to participate in it?

It's not a law of nature that we must teach all of our citizens about wall street in order to retire, it's a carefully designed system that works really really well for the banking industry.

p.s.
You can't really pick your target, and that's the fucking problem.

 

[Tamanon]

Why do I need to learn about this crap?
We act like it's some sort of great life skill to know what's mid cap value retirement fund (or whatever) is.
And you know what, if people want to play that stupid game they can, but why the fuck am I coerced, and the threat of death by homelessness no less, to participate in it?

It's not a law of nature that we must teach all of our citizens about wall street in order to retire, it's a carefully designed system that works really really well for the banking industry.

You don't have to learn much, and most administrators will be happy to give you the basic advice for free.

 

[Gotchaye]

My solution is that the government needs to actually guarantee opportunity in areas it is currently lacking (healthcare, education, etc.) which alone will greatly help most people's finances, but people also must show more personal responsibility.

But you're sloganizing again. Encouraging "personal responsibility" is obviously not a major goal of public policy. Pigeon points out that we try very hard to make sure that people don't have to take personal responsibility for not getting shot or enslaved, among other things. Providing health care is already starting to shade into equality of outcome territory, unless you're advocating an extensive system of tax incentives based on people's diets and activity levels.

I'd suggest that our default position should be that policies that achieve some end regardless of how responsible individuals are are better than policies that achieve some end only if people exercise sufficient personal responsibility (PR). PR-requiring policies have to be significantly better in their effects than non-PR-requiring policies to justify their requirement of PR. That a policy forces people to show PR is a reason to avoid it, and is not at all an argument for it.

Of course there's some value in encouraging people to develop PR, but retirement saving is perhaps the silliest possible thing to decide to teach PR through. Almost by definition people will have very little opportunity to learn from mistakes made in saving for retirement in such a way that they end up better off for it.

 

[Chichikov]

You don't have to learn much, and most administrators will be happy to give you the basic advice for free.

And yet most Americans seem to be failing in that basic task.
You really think the problem is that we all just too stupid?

I dunno, I mean, considered as part of the sort of personal finance oeuvre, it is an important life skill. Not necessarily specific knowledge like mid cap value funds or what have you, but some general knowledge about markets and the fundamentals of investing... yeah, I think it's important.

Which is not to say that your second point is necessarily wrong.

It's only part of personal finance oeuvre (is that a right use of that word? honestly asking) because we're forced to put our retirement money in Wall Street.
This is not a law of nature, this is a system that was designed, mostly by Wall Street.
I personally think it's a very bad system.

 

[pigeon]

Eh, I'd disagree with that. With the abundance of target funds, it's easy to invest in 401(k)s. All it involves is picking your target, and avoiding selling out of fear. Half of my job in my previous life was just convincing people not to sell when they're decades out from retirement.

This post pretty much illustrates the exact issue here. Charlie says "you have to be a good investor." You say "it's not that hard, all you have to do is follow a few simple rules that I had to spend most of my time explaining to people because they didn't understand they needed to follow them."

You're probably right! But you already know from experience that people make dumb investment mistakes constantly, and lots of people probably don't have an administrator as together as you. Without you all those people would've been screwed. So shouldn't we fix that system?

 

[Tamanon]

And yet most Americans seem to be failing in that basic task.
You really think the problem is that we all just too stupid?

? No. What do you think we are arguing about? My point has never been that investing choices is the issue.

 

[Manmademan]

And yet most Americans seem to be failing in that basic task.
You really think the problem is that we all just too stupid?

It's only part of personal finance oeuvre (is that a right use of that word? honestly asking) because we're forced to put our retirement money in Wall Street.
This is not a law of nature, this is a system that was designed, mostly by Wall Street.
I personally think it's a very bad system.

sort of, yes. Most americans are functionally illiterate in terms of math, reading, science, the political process, and we can toss personal finance on that pile as well. it should be obvious why signing up for multiple credit cards with 30% APR is a bad idea, but I guarantee most americans don't understand why, or the ramifications of what happens when things go bad.

a course in basic finance SHOULD be taught before leaving high school, since literally everyone will need to negotiate the loan process for buying a home, car, starting a business, going to college, etc. But this has never really been a concern of the school system.

 

[Chichikov]

This post pretty much illustrates the exact issue here. Charlie says "you have to be a good investor." You say "it's not that hard, all you have to do is follow a few simple rules that I had to spend most of my time explaining to people because they didn't understand they needed to follow them."

You're probably right! But you already know from experience that people make dumb investment mistakes constantly, and lots of people probably don't have an administrator as together as you. Without you all those people would've been screwed. So shouldn't we fix that system?

And really, there are worst thing in life than being bad investor, and yet we punish people immensely harshly for that crime.
Fuck, Mark Twain lost all of his money due to stupid investment, are we saying as a society we should reward people like Lloyd Blankfein more than him?
Because that's the effect of the system we currently have in place.

sort of, yes. Most americans are functionally illiterate in terms of math, reading, science, the political process, and we can toss personal finance on that pile as well. it should be obvious why signing up for multiple credit cards with 30% APR is a bad idea, but I guarantee most americans don't understand why, or the ramifications of what happens when things go bad.

Nothing in finance is really complicated, I helped enough economy major in uni to know that, it's mostly obfuscation, usually so you don't figure out that you're being fleeced.
But even if you're right, don't you think we should design a system fitting the capabilities of the population?

? No. What do you think we are arguing about? My point has never been that investing choices is the issue.

The point I was trying to make that regardless how difficult you (or me for that matter) find that problem, if most of the population failed to comprehend it then it's too complicated, by definition.

 

[Manmademan]

Nothing in finance is really complicated, I helped enough economy major in uni to know that, it's mostly obfuscation, usually so you don't figure out that you're being fleeced.

Absolutely true. The basics could be taught to literally anyone in a couple of days. I guarantee you though that the average american- even those that went to college- could not explain to you how the stock market works, what a stock even IS, or the basics of the banking system.

This stuff is not explained at any level of primary, secondary, or university education unless one takes the initiative to hunt it down and find out for themselves. It should be mandatory, like passing a test to drive a car. Want a home loan? College Loan? pass a one week course in personal finance first.

But even if you're right, don't you think we should design a system fitting the capabilities of the population?

Impossible, since the US alone can't design a global financial system. The best we can do is make sure as many people as possible are educated on how the system actually works. When JFK decided americans were all getting fat, Gym class became mandatory. You're telling me we can't do anything about the financial system?

The point I was trying to make that regardless how difficult you (or me for that matter) find that problem, if most of the population failed to comprehend it then it's too complicated, by definition.

Its not that the population failed to comprehend it, it's that the population is never exposed to it. The basics are simple enough for anyone to understand, but almost no one has the opportunity unless they have the initiative to hunt the information down and educate themselves- and that's a rare quality in any area.

 

[Gotchaye]

Impossible, since the US alone can't design a global financial system. The best we can do is make sure as many people as possible are educated on how the system actually works. When JFK decided americans were all getting fat, Gym class became mandatory. You're telling me we can't do anything about the financial system?

Thank God we nipped obesity in the bud. Can you imagine what it'd be like if we'd let that trend continue?

 

[Manmademan]

Thank God we nipped obesity in the bud. Can you imagine what it'd be like if we'd let that trend continue?

i didn't say gym class was a GOOD idea, I only said we made it mandatory when someone decided it was a problem. Actually I take that back- it IS a good idea, but the implementation is horrific.

 

[Gotchaye]

i didn't say gym class was a GOOD idea, I only said we made it mandatory when someone decided it was a problem. Actually I take that back- it IS a good idea, but the implementation is horrific.

Yes, mostly I was just having fun, but it does sort of get at the bigger problem here - education is of limited use when there's a whole lot of money in making people fat/indebted.

 

[Manmademan]

Yes, mostly I was just having fun, but it does sort of get at the bigger problem here - education is of limited use when there's a whole lot of money in making people fat/indebted.

True. there are a lot of people making money on the public being totally ignorant of personal finance (ESPECIALLY in regards to the stock market) so not only is there not a push to do anything, I'd wager there's parties involved actively keeping them that way- or at least making the system as obscure as possible, feeding hype, etc.

 

[Fenderputty]

Economically, the only thing that makes sense is a tax funded defined benefit universal system.
I think I made this point before here, but the problem with the 401k model is that you're asked to answer impossible question - how much money will you need for retirement, and you can't know it without a crystal ball (well, at least since the fat cats at Washington banned Miss Cleo).
You can figure out the average amount required to retire, but what good would that be?
You do that and you still probably running a 30-40% chance of running out of money and dying in the street (or burdening your children).
So the only smart move is to oversave, not everyone can do it, but even if you could, that still a whole lot money going to wall street that could've been used by more productive members of society.

The problem is that you bare 100% of the risk, wherein if you share the risk with the entire population, you only need to "save" (in this case, taxed) by the average amount required (which is very easy to figure out too). That's billions (if not trillions) of dollars that can stay in the real economy. okay, probably not trillions, but many billions most likely, like hundreds of them or something (I really couldn't a figure about how much do we contribute to 401k as a nation in a year).

p.s.
You do this and as a bonus we get to collectively stop stressing over that issue and we can once and for all stop pay attention to Wall Street.
That's the biggest con those fuckers pulled, we're all pretty much forced to play in their shitty little game and it needs to stop.
The great recession couldn't have happen (or at least couldn't have happened to that extent) if those fuckers didn't have all of our pension money to play with.


Edit: I've been in this country for over a decade now, I traveled it far and wide, I've seen many different people with many different opinions, I have never met a person who like the 401k model who didn't work in the financial industry.
Not a single one.

This sounds awesome. I hadn't considered the economical impacts of people not spending money into an economy but rather sticking it in a 401k either. My problem with 401k is that I have all the burden and now have to learn about investment as well. Like I have time for that. I don't think it's realistic to assume that even a mediocre portion of the population will ever become savvy as well.

This sounds like a massive expansion to SS though. Coupled with a progressive form of taxation instead of the capped bullshit we currently have too. All while liberal commander in chief possibly heads us in the opposite direction

 

[Manmademan]

This sounds awesome. I hadn't considered the economical impacts of people not spending money into an economy but rather sticking it in a 401k either. My problem with 401k is that I have all the burden and now have to learn about investment as well. Like I have time for that. I don't think it's realistic to assume that even a mediocre portion of the population will ever become savvy as well.

This sounds like a massive expansion to SS though. Coupled with a progressive form of taxation instead of the capped bullshit we currently have too. All while liberal commander in chief possibly heads us in the opposite direction

By what metric is obama liberal? serious question.

 

[KtSlime]

By what metric is obama liberal? serious question.

He's not, but his marketing can cause people to assume he might be.

 

[Giant Panda]

But you're sloganizing again. Encouraging "personal responsibility" is obviously not a major goal of public policy. Pigeon points out that we try very hard to make sure that people don't have to take personal responsibility for not getting shot or enslaved, among other things. Providing health care is already starting to shade into equality of outcome territory, unless you're advocating an extensive system of tax incentives based on people's diets and activity levels.

I'd suggest that our default position should be that policies that achieve some end regardless of how responsible individuals are are better than policies that achieve some end only if people exercise sufficient personal responsibility (PR). PR-requiring policies have to be significantly better in their effects than non-PR-requiring policies to justify their requirement of PR. That a policy forces people to show PR is a reason to avoid it, and is not at all an argument for it.

Of course there's some value in encouraging people to develop PR, but retirement saving is perhaps the silliest possible thing to decide to teach PR through. Almost by definition people will have very little opportunity to learn from mistakes made in saving for retirement in such a way that they end up better off for it.

I wasn't trying to sloganize, I was trying to give a broad explanation of what my opinion was. Being healthy is fundamentally required to have a good opportunity of living a successful life, which is why there should be healthcare for all. The people who are overweight, or otherwise intentionally make bad health decisions should be taxed if the government is going to foot the bill.

As for personal responsibility, I view the lack of a PR requirement to be a liability for a policy. The policy has to be good enough to overcome this lack to be worth it. I really believe that if you take away personal responsibility from too many areas of peoples life, their personal responsibility will decline in areas of life that are left to them.

 

[Manmademan]

He's not, but his marketing can cause people to assume he might be.

Obama's marketing? I don't think so. Everything that man has said or done has put him squarely at slightly right of center. He's about as liberal as Reagan or Nixon.

"liberal" is Bernie Sanders, Dennis K, or Elizabeth Warren. Obama isn't anywhere near there in words or actions.

Now, if you had said the GOP's marketing, you might have had something there.

 

[Fenderputty]

By what metric is obama liberal? serious question.

I thought the sarcasm was almost palpable there

 

[Jooney]

Oh shit, PD's prophecies are coming true!

 

[Manmademan]

I thought the sarcasm was almost palpable there

I don't pick up on sarcasm well over the internet. Not your fault, chief.

 

[Gotchaye]

As for personal responsibility, I view the lack of a PR requirement to be a liability for a policy. The policy has to be good enough to overcome this lack to be worth it. I really believe that if you take away personal responsibility from too many areas of peoples life, their personal responsibility will decline in areas of life that are left to them.

Yes, I realize that this is your position. I thought it was clear from my previous post that I got that, but I'll unpack my earlier post a bit more:

First, you've got a problem in that, obviously, people in general aren't exercising sufficient personal responsibility here. So maybe some people are doing better in other areas of life because they're also responsible for their own retirement, but clearly lots of people are doing much worse than they could be because they're not being responsible enough. Are these people also doing better elsewhere because of the opportunity they're given (which they miss) to be responsible for their own retirement? So much better elsewhere that this is worth it? Your way works fine if everyone is sufficiently responsible. But they're not, so now what? I gestured at this in the second paragraph of my previous post.

Second, what's the mechanism by which people not needing to exercise personal responsibility in one sphere will become less responsible in others? I already argued (third paragraph of previous post) that there's no learning process here - it's hard to learn from mistakes in saving for retirement because they don't really become apparent until you've already made pretty much all of your major life decisions. It seems to me that the only promising argument here is that exercising responsibility makes it easier to be responsible elsewhere - it's like a muscle, or something. This is intuitively appealing, but as psychology it's been pretty thoroughly discredited. And it doesn't really hold up when I look at my own life - I expect we've all experienced responsibility-fatigue at one time or another. It's actually easier to get stuff that I have to do done when I don't have to be worrying about other responsibilities. In a lot of ways, other responsibilities - the need to do my taxes, for example - makes it easier to put off writing a journal paper.

 

[jamesinclair]

Poligaf, I need your help.

I have a friend, a very sweet and kind girl. She is poor. She makes $9 an hour, and has to support herself, her deadbeat parents, and her younger brother.

A few months ago, outside a starbucks, she stepped on a large nail which went through her shoe and into her foot.

She now has high medical bills on top of things - and no insurance of course.


I recently found out shes not on food stamps or any kind of assistance, even though she is obviously well qualified for the programs. She refuses because she claims she doesnt need the help, and she wont take money she didnt earn.

Thats all very nice, but shes going to ruin her life with credit card interest bills and she has no college education - she wont be able to afford classes. Thats going to get her stuck in a lifetime of poverty.

How the fuck do I get her to accept government monies?

 

[Gotchaye]

Poligaf, I need your help.

I have a friend, a very sweet and kind girl. She is poor. She makes $9 an hour, and has to support herself, her deadbeat parents, and her younger brother.

A few months ago, outside a starbucks, she stepped on a large nail which went through her shoe and into her foot.

She now has high medical bills on top of things - and no insurance of course.


I recently found out shes not on food stamps or any kind of assistance, even though she is obviously well qualified for the programs. She refuses because she claims she doesnt need the help, and she wont take money she didnt earn.

Thats all very nice, but shes going to ruin her life with credit card interest bills and she has no college education - she wont be able to afford classes. Thats going to get her stuck in a lifetime of poverty.

How the fuck do I get her to accept government monies?

Ouch. "We have a safety net just in order to help people who are down on their luck; it's not your fault you stepped on the nail"? "You'll be taking money you didn't earn anyway when you declare bankruptcy with all this debt"? "I hear you can take the copper out of streetlights and sell it on the black market"?

 

[RDreamer]

Poligaf, I need your help.

I have a friend, a very sweet and kind girl. She is poor. She makes $9 an hour, and has to support herself, her deadbeat parents, and her younger brother.

A few months ago, outside a starbucks, she stepped on a large nail which went through her shoe and into her foot.

She now has high medical bills on top of things - and no insurance of course.


I recently found out shes not on food stamps or any kind of assistance, even though she is obviously well qualified for the programs. She refuses because she claims she doesnt need the help, and she wont take money she didnt earn.

Thats all very nice, but shes going to ruin her life with credit card interest bills and she has no college education - she wont be able to afford classes. Thats going to get her stuck in a lifetime of poverty.

How the fuck do I get her to accept government monies?

Tell her that it's already money she's paid into the system. She's just getting out what she's put in, like a rainy day fund. She had some legitimately bad luck, and shouldn't feel bad about it.

 

[GhaleonEB]

Holy shit. That's an appalling figure.

I'm glad this has been getting attention. I've seen a spate of such articles since Duncan Black's (Atrios) last month. Which is also worth reading.

Entire generations are going to retire into deep poverty, or not fully retire at all.

 

[jamesinclair]

Tell her that it's already money she's paid into the system. She's just getting out what she's put in, like a rainy day fund. She had some legitimately bad luck, and shouldn't feel bad about it.

Well shes 19, only been working for a year....

So I did say shell be paying taxes the rest of her life to support programs like it, so shes not taking anything she didnt work for.

Still said no.

Might try the bankruptcy angle...

 

[jamesinclair]

And to add salt to her poverty wound....

Apparently the highest paid public employee in the state of NJ is a women's basketball coach?

 

[Al-ibn Kermit]

Poligaf, I need your help.

I have a friend, a very sweet and kind girl. She is poor. She makes $9 an hour, and has to support herself, her deadbeat parents, and her younger brother.

A few months ago, outside a starbucks, she stepped on a large nail which went through her shoe and into her foot.

She now has high medical bills on top of things - and no insurance of course.


I recently found out shes not on food stamps or any kind of assistance, even though she is obviously well qualified for the programs. She refuses because she claims she doesnt need the help, and she wont take money she didnt earn.

Thats all very nice, but shes going to ruin her life with credit card interest bills and she has no college education - she wont be able to afford classes. Thats going to get her stuck in a lifetime of poverty.

How the fuck do I get her to accept government monies?

If she explains her financial situation to the hospital, she can probably get a large portion of the bill forgiven. Or at least get on a payment plan or something.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Watching Bill Maher. Who the hell is this apologist for the Rich speaking for the "millenials"?

As much as we're seeing progress in social issues in this country we're woefully behind on progress on fiscal issues.

It pains me to see so many of my friends talk about how social security and medicare and welfare won't be there for us. You know why it won't? Because we aren't demanding it will be.

We buy into this "the programs need to be reform" and we demand cuts. Its our own damn fault.

 

[pigeon]

By what metric is obama liberal? serious question.

The one where passing HEALTH CARE REFORM counts?

This shit is seriously embarrassing. What's the point of making huge progressive steps forward and fundamentally redefining the American welfare state if people don't even remember you did it?

 

[pigeon]

Either way it was gonna blow over fairly quickly, this way comes across as silly and emboldens the overly PC crowd.

Actually, so far it only seems to have emboldened the assholes who enjoy being slightly misogynistic crowd.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

The one where passing HEALTH CARE REFORM counts?

This shit is seriously embarrassing. What's the point of making huge progressive steps forward and fundamentally redefining the American welfare state if people don't even remember you did it?

He's done a amazing amount of liberal things. I understand criticism from the left on many of the things he's done but this wholesale disowning and abandonment is silly. Push him for liberal policy instead of throwing up your hands and saying we just need a real liberal in office, we have who we have.

This quote from Obama in Israel is important : "Speaking as a politician, I can promise you this: political leaders will not take risks if the people do not demand that they do. You must create the change that you want to see."

 

[Aaron]

Well shes 19, only been working for a year....

So I did say shell be paying taxes the rest of her life to support programs like it, so shes not taking anything she didnt work for.

Still said no.

Might try the bankruptcy angle...

Tell her by taking the assistance now she will be much more capable of paying it back down the line. Instead of burning herself out struggling in poverty, she takes a little hand up and gets back on her feet, so in the future she can contribute to society that helps more people in just the same rotten situation she was in.

 

[jamesinclair]

If she explains her financial situation to the hospital, she can probably get a large portion of the bill forgiven. Or at least get on a payment plan or something.

I dont think its costs directly related to the day of, but ongoing therapy. It happened six months ago, and it fucked up a nerve or something because it causes her pain to walk, so she was told to attend 6 therapy sessions. She said its over $1,000 so far in bills.

Tell her by taking the assistance now she will be much more capable of paying it back down the line. Instead of burning herself out struggling in poverty, she takes a little hand up and gets back on her feet, so in the future she can contribute to society that helps more people in just the same rotten situation she was in.

Ill try that

 

[Aaron Strife]

The one where passing HEALTH CARE REFORM counts?

This shit is seriously embarrassing. What's the point of making huge progressive steps forward and fundamentally redefining the American welfare state if people don't even remember you did it?

Obama has many fairweather supporters.

I'm not defending chained CPI or saying that it's a good idea, but I think everyone in this thread at the very least understands why he's proposing it. And I'm willing to bet he knows the GOP isn't going to accept it anyway, so there's no practical implications of saying "hey, why not do this." The GOP can attack him for the things he puts forth, but every one of them voted for the Ryan budget, so good luck with that.

Liberal apathy in 2010 (in combination with other factors, not blaming Democrats' poor electoral fortunes on that alone) didn't push Obama to the left, it helped sweep in Republicans at all levels of government, who we'll have to deal with for the next decade because they got to gerrymander every swing state. Do you think he'd be proposing this if Pelosi were still Speaker? No way.

 

[RustyNails]

Watching Bill Maher. Who the hell is this apologist for the Rich speaking for the "millenials"?

As much as we're seeing progress in social issues in this country we're woefully behind on progress on fiscal issues.

It pains me to see so many of my friends talk about how social security and medicare and welfare won't be there for us. You know why it won't? Because we aren't demanding it will be.

We buy into this "the programs need to be reform" and we demand cuts. Its our own damn fault.

Abby Huntsman. LOL throwing out repeated and tired arguments and trying to SPEAK FOR DA YOUNGZ. Fuck off lady, you don't know fucking shit. She was trying to come off as above the fray of political divide in washington, pointing and laughing at sanders and that book guy as "lol politics", and then in the very same breath asking "why is our economy so bad????"

Its like the teaparty never happened, credit downgrade never happened, sequester never happened and 100s of filibusters by GOP minority never happened. Atleast her nose was distracting.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Abby Huntsman. LOL throwing out repeated and tired arguments and trying to SPEAK FOR DA YOUNGZ. Fuck off lady, you don't know fucking shit. She was trying to come off as above the fray of political divide in washington, pointing and laughing at sanders and that book guy as "lol politics", and then in the very same breath asking "why is our economy so bad????"

Its like the teaparty never happened, credit downgrade never happened, sequester never happened and 100s of filibusters by GOP minority never happened. Atleast her nose was distracting.

The daughter of Huntsman, explains it. She's already got her check written.

 

[Oblivion]

Well this was interesting. Apparently, some woman who's living on food stamps, calls into Rush's program, pointing out that she'll be receiving a major cut due to the sequester. She's not the typical Limbaugh caller, so it's surprising that she got through (which even Rush himself mentions):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zMKDng9Oo0&list=UU-3jIAlnQmbbVMV6gR7K8aQ&index=7

Check it out.

 

[zero shift]

I just got back from the 7/11 where I was talking to the clerk. While we were talking she was saying stuff about how much she hates Obama and really seemed like a diehard Republican. She said she likes being up to date and informed. When I asked her what news programs she watches she said she only watches Fox News. She told me how much she hated Obamacare because it was going to force people on health insurance and if you don't have health insurance by October the government is going to charge you. She said that was horrible because what if you are too poor to buy health insurance? When I told her that under Obamacare if you are too poor the government will pay for you she was genuinely shocked. I then told her that this is the only 1st world nation that doesn't have free healthcare to which she responded, "Yeah I know! Canada has that! I mean why can't we have that here?"

Its insane that so many of these people support policies that are so far and away from what they vote for.

EDIT - I also told her to not watch Fox News and instead watch NPR and BBC to keep up with the world.

 

[Rocket Scientist]

No, I didn't see it. Can you link to it?

But generally a monetarily sovereign government's spending is never financially constrained by its revenue (or lack thereof). In other words, "getting tax revenue" is not something these governments are in need of doing in order to spend, because they are themselves the source of money. Spending precedes tax collection, and tax collection is just the collection of previous spending.

This money can't go to the shareholders of these companies because it would have to go through the US parent company [and be taxed]. (...) The only good news is that they've actually got to do something with this money and they're lending it to governments to pay for the deficits that most countries around the world are running. So mysteriously, tax havens are funding the deficits which governments are running, because they can't collect enough cash in the form of tax from companies, because they are hiding it in tax havens. So we go around in a giant circle here, where these companies are lending this money to governments instead of paying it in tax, to make sure that the whole world system keeps going.

It's from a Dutch documentary:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=531483

And lol, yes, I think everyone in this thread knows 'government isn't constrained by tax revenue' by now thanks to you I'm just interested in knowing what happens to all these billions and trillions in tax havens. In the documentary one guy claims it's loaned to governments which is kind of fucked up if true.

 

[The Librarian]

Fuck yeah we're awesome: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...STEROID?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

 

[Rocket Scientist]

Wow that would be incredible. Wonder what they would discover.

 

[Oblivion]

Haha, love this clip:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0H2AuK4Fdak

The part at the end was great too, so glad Bill called him out on his shifting position. Moore's such a clown.

 

[Jooney]

My own personal hell would be a never-ending panel segment of Real Time with Steve Moore, John Fund and Ron Silver as the guests.

 

[Kai Dracon]

I just got back from the 7/11 where I was talking to the clerk. While we were talking she was saying stuff about how much she hates Obama and really seemed like a diehard Republican. She said she likes being up to date and informed. When I asked her what news programs she watches she said she only watches Fox News. She told me how much she hated Obamacare because it was going to force people on health insurance and if you don't have health insurance by October the government is going to charge you. She said that was horrible because what if you are too poor to buy health insurance? When I told her that under Obamacare if you are too poor the government will pay for you she was genuinely shocked. I then told her that this is the only 1st world nation that doesn't have free healthcare to which she responded, "Yeah I know! Canada has that! I mean why can't we have that here?"

Its insane that so many of these people support policies that are so far and away from what they vote for.

EDIT - I also told her to not watch Fox News and instead watch NPR and BBC to keep up with the world.

In my experience this is also really goddamn common.

There are a lot of people who want things that, thanks to the Fox and neocon alternate reality spin machine, they don't realize they should have. And don't realize that "the evil enemy" is in some cases trying to give them.

Plus thanks to so many Americans being basically uninformed about how almost anything works, I have seen plenty of people who think say, health care is a racket in America and the way it is handled is morally wrong... but Obamacare is evil socialism, it will make the soviets rise out of the sea and invade America, etc etc.

Based on my own anecdotal encounters with the public, only about half or slightly less of the "die hard republicans" have actually bought fully into the neocon ideological package and act like Limbaugh ditto heads. The other half want stuff that the right agenda is blocking or wants to take away. And they either don't realize it at all, or are actual centrist republicans who just seem naive and hope that the GOP will "even out soon".