tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8193628934721963907.post5360540927862784920..comments2024-03-28T02:32:09.047-05:00Comments on Give2Attain: What to Do About Government Spending?Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14991027705809503541noreply@blogger.comBlogger59125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8193628934721963907.post-68304594404916671762018-01-03T10:53:47.678-06:002018-01-03T10:53:47.678-06:00You asked "what to do," did you not? Th...You asked "what to do," did you not? The first step in solving a problem is to admit that there IS a problem, and so far our elders and betters in DC have done everything BUT admit the problem. The next step after that is to identify the problem clearly (usually framed as "runaway entitlements," but any naming is better than the false feelgoods we are being peddled). Again, from Prof. Hill, "Either you are closing your eyes to a situation you do not wish to acknowledge, or you are not aware of the caliber of disaster indicated by..." simple math.jerrye92002https://www.blogger.com/profile/01858692298982859775noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8193628934721963907.post-36833409138752648582018-01-02T23:09:44.985-06:002018-01-02T23:09:44.985-06:00Well we are not going to solve the issue here. Ne...Well we are not going to solve the issue here. Next topic. :-)Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14991027705809503541noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8193628934721963907.post-59029816242257028572018-01-02T21:51:52.778-06:002018-01-02T21:51:52.778-06:00Not a solution. That is what will happen anyway, ...Not a solution. That is what will happen anyway, unless the system is reformed-- we will raise taxes and cut benefits, and put off the day of reckoning, just as we did the last time SS was "fixed for all time." When the "trust fund" runs out of money, benefits will get cut for everybody, and it will continue to get worse. And none of that does ANYTHING for the other, and larger, "promissory notes" Congress has written against our bank account. jerrye92002https://www.blogger.com/profile/01858692298982859775noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8193628934721963907.post-83042173840174014522018-01-02T14:27:21.195-06:002018-01-02T14:27:21.195-06:00You know my view...
Raise Payroll tax rates
Lower...You know my view...<br /><br />Raise Payroll tax rates<br />Lower benefits until they are aligned<br /><br />Probably deny benefits to people with net worths greater than $10 million. It just seems sill that they are receiving government welfare.Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14991027705809503541noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8193628934721963907.post-69545587298075138782018-01-02T14:14:46.252-06:002018-01-02T14:14:46.252-06:00And recognizing these awful truths solves the prob...And recognizing these awful truths solves the problem how?jerrye92002https://www.blogger.com/profile/01858692298982859775noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8193628934721963907.post-3225468633997620982018-01-01T21:29:23.468-06:002018-01-01T21:29:23.468-06:00As for "relative to federal budget"... ...As for "relative to federal budget"... That seems to be no problem...<br /><br />We pay the SS Trust fund bonds off and borrow from someone else.<br /><br />The GOP and DEMs both seem to have no problem with deficits.<br /><br />And the Chinese seem to enjoy buying US bonds.Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14991027705809503541noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8193628934721963907.post-33574364945816752742018-01-01T21:26:12.396-06:002018-01-01T21:26:12.396-06:00What do you have against my simple solution...
Ri...What do you have against my simple solution...<br /><br />Rich people do not get benefits until they are middle class?<br /><br />It smacks of socialism, but it is really simple fix. Besides you keep saying Medicare is terrible...Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14991027705809503541noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8193628934721963907.post-6690474593031921912018-01-01T19:06:40.286-06:002018-01-01T19:06:40.286-06:00These programs are simply unsustainable in anythin...These programs are simply unsustainable in anything like their current form, and time for an easy transition to a more sensible system is quickly running out. Don't look at these entitlements as a fraction of GDP, look at it as a fraction of federal revenues. By that measure, 2025 is the drop-dead date for all of these programs.jerrye92002https://www.blogger.com/profile/01858692298982859775noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8193628934721963907.post-6630137983530554232018-01-01T10:36:56.575-06:002018-01-01T10:36:56.575-06:00By the way if $10 million does not solve the probl...By the way if $10 million does not solve the problem... Then they will say...<br /><br />"If your net worth is ~$3+ million, no checks or Medicare for you."<br /><br />Please remember that Congress and the President can change the rules at any time. And if the GOP alienates most voters who have little net worth, and the DEMS stop being extremists who want to save everyone and everything... The DEMs will be in control.Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14991027705809503541noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8193628934721963907.post-34276109999134877702018-01-01T10:33:49.682-06:002018-01-01T10:33:49.682-06:00I am not denying them freedom or opportunity. I a...I am not denying them freedom or opportunity. I am ensuring that we continue to set aside a portion of today's income to care for the irresponsible who have little foresight or self control... People are free to learn, work, earn, save and invest on top of this.<br /><br /><a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/economy-budget/340553-beware-of-the-big-3-entitlement-costs-are-simply-untenable" rel="nofollow">Entitlements Link 1</a><br /><br />"Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are three of the largest and fastest growing parts of the budget. As recently as the year 2000, those three programs cost only $700 billion, or about 7 percent of the economy. Today they cost nearly $2 trillion, about 10 percent of the economy. By 2050, as a result of an aging population, rising health costs and growing benefit levels, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid will spend 15 percent of the economy. <br /><br />This trajectory is unsustainable. No program can indefinitely grow faster than the economy, just like no household or business expenses can indefinitely grow faster than household income or business revenue."<br /><br /><a href="http://www.heritage.org/budget-and-spending/report/causes-the-federal-governments-unsustainable-spending" rel="nofollow">Here is a very long and detailed link I may need later</a> <br />Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14991027705809503541noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8193628934721963907.post-30176891342125770362018-01-01T08:43:25.058-06:002018-01-01T08:43:25.058-06:00I think the solution is simpler still. Get rid of...I think the solution is simpler still. Get rid of SS and MC forever, and let people be responsible for themselves. Otherwise, you push out the date of bankruptcy a few years, at best. You are missing the magnitude of the problem. It is estimated that entitlements will consume 100% of federal revenues as early as 2025. <br /><br />History may be on your side, but history is an amoral beast. I sense you are denying to others the freedom you claim for yourself, based on ? You have stated previously that you "accidentally" had opportunities others did not have, and profited by them. Why would you deny others that freedom and opportunity? jerrye92002https://www.blogger.com/profile/01858692298982859775noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8193628934721963907.post-82274374949027528142017-12-31T20:14:26.509-06:002017-12-31T20:14:26.509-06:00I think the solution will be simpler... At some t...I think the solution will be simpler... At some time they will just means test who gets social security and medicare. If your net worth is ~$10+ million, no checks or Medicare for you.<br /><br />Of course, I can claim that many Americans do not "have the drive, self discipline, knowledge, etc to actually" be trusted to prepare adequately for their own retirement... History is on my side in this. Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14991027705809503541noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8193628934721963907.post-6367079221687409922017-12-31T18:29:54.716-06:002017-12-31T18:29:54.716-06:00Their golden years are liable to be pretty bleak, ...Their golden years are liable to be pretty bleak, regardless. Once the federal tax rate exceeds 100%, as it will have to do to keep all of these sky-high promises going, living is going to get very tough. <br /><br />And I don't think you can stand there and deny that others have enough "drive, self discipline, knowledge, etc to actually make a decision," and then deny that nobody else deserves that freedom. For example, If SS went away in favor of private accounts AND we continued to mandate that SS taxes went into those private accounts, you solve both problems-- having enough at retirement and (partially) ending the massive government spending spree.jerrye92002https://www.blogger.com/profile/01858692298982859775noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8193628934721963907.post-2579828368500454752017-12-30T18:12:58.400-06:002017-12-30T18:12:58.400-06:00"those who relied solely"
This would im..."those who relied solely"<br /><br />This would imply that these people had enough drive, self discipline, knowledge, etc to actually make a decision.<br /><br />My opinion is that without forced savings (payroll taxes) they would have nothing coming in later in life.<br /><br />I have a couple of good friends who have pretty much no self control and/or ambition, if it wasn't for SS, SSD and Medicare their golden years would be really bleak.Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14991027705809503541noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8193628934721963907.post-78682245949823112732017-12-30T18:07:08.191-06:002017-12-30T18:07:08.191-06:00Or maybe the cheap skates would actually stop tryi...Or maybe the cheap skates would actually stop trying to lower their personal taxes, and actually pay today's bills today.<br /><br />I have been having a similar discussion at <a href="https://www.minnpost.com/politics-policy/2017/12/republicans-celebrate-their-win-tax-bill-democrats-wonder-gop-s-obamacare-mo" rel="nofollow">MP Have GOP met their ACA Moment</a>?Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14991027705809503541noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8193628934721963907.post-80912150236970834522017-12-30T17:29:54.109-06:002017-12-30T17:29:54.109-06:00And that's why 401Ks and IRAs get funded. So ...And that's why 401Ks and IRAs get funded. So who are we blaming when people don't save enough, those who tried to fund their own but also paid into the Ponzi scheme, or those who relied solely on the /mandatory/ Ponzi scheme?<br /><br />Here's an idea about "what to do about government spending." I created a poster a while back, showing a then-6-month-old girl, with the caption, "She is currently in debt to the federal government for $400,000 and can't find a job."<br /><br />If people knew that our government had so wildly over-promised and was headed for ruin, perhaps there would be a greater desire to curb spending. jerrye92002https://www.blogger.com/profile/01858692298982859775noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8193628934721963907.post-50107527853068635372017-12-30T09:29:16.909-06:002017-12-30T09:29:16.909-06:00They were also told they need more, if they wanted...They were also told they need more, if they wanted a comfortable retirement. That is why 401s and iras were promoted Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14991027705809503541noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8193628934721963907.post-69002716564978169882017-12-30T07:32:54.353-06:002017-12-30T07:32:54.353-06:00So, people "DO NOT KNOW WHAT THEY NEED"?...So, people "DO NOT KNOW WHAT THEY NEED"? Might that be because, all of their lives, they have been told that they are "investing" in Social Security and that it will "be there for them"? And that they will be taxed if they invest outside of SS?jerrye92002https://www.blogger.com/profile/01858692298982859775noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8193628934721963907.post-8044772091114493122017-12-29T10:49:22.401-06:002017-12-29T10:49:22.401-06:00As noted above, the lack of net worth for a majori...As noted above, the lack of net worth for a majority of Americans pretty much proves that American know what they want... And that they truly do NOT KNOW WHAT THEY NEED.<br /><br />"You know what you need and want and can afford, and can choose among competing alternatives."<br /><br />Thinking long term and being willing to sacrifice today for a better tomorrow is really hard for most people apparently.Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14991027705809503541noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8193628934721963907.post-5647319760386910962017-12-29T10:05:07.560-06:002017-12-29T10:05:07.560-06:00Fine. Somebody offers to sell you a new Chevy at ...Fine. Somebody offers to sell you a new Chevy at 80% off, then withdraws the offer before you get it. Are you without transportation options? <br /><br />Again, the whole point here is economic freedom. What government spends cannot be spent by the individuals most affected by how their money is spent. That basic hierarchy of spending efficacy still applies. <br /> -- The most efficacious spending is when you spend your money on yourself. You know what you need and want and can afford, and can choose among competing alternatives.<br /> -- the second is when you spend somebody else's money on yourself. You won't be inclined to "blow it," and you will seek good value and prioritize, but it may not be something you would not or could not buy for yourself under normal circumstances. And that's OK. It's like charity. <br /> -- third is when you spend your money on somebody else. You are going to try to get something that you can afford and that you THINK they need or want but would not necessarily buy for themselves. You may even come pretty close, especially if you ask them first.<br /> -- The least efficacious way to spend money is when you spend somebody else's money on a third party. This is government spending. You don't care how much you spend or what you get. If it is several somebodies you are likely to get the same thing for all, regardless of what they individually may need or want. <br /><br />The only way to do what you want to do-- protect people from themselves-- is to offer them incentives to do the right things, and a true "safety net" -- not a hammock-- for those who are /unable/ to do it. Suppose, for example, there were no tax on savings and investments, until that money was withdrawn? EVERY savings and investment account would be an IRA. And suppose everybody below a certain income threshold got a check from the government to start an HSA policy that they chose? Government should not, in general, be deciding for YOU how to spend your money. And they could save trillions by not doing so.jerrye92002https://www.blogger.com/profile/01858692298982859775noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8193628934721963907.post-72814310549529145562017-12-29T09:30:59.474-06:002017-12-29T09:30:59.474-06:00By the way, the ACA insurance requirements are pre...By the way, the ACA insurance requirements are pretty Chevy like... No Mercedes or Cadillacs there.Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14991027705809503541noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8193628934721963907.post-72306109848634273012017-12-29T09:29:44.134-06:002017-12-29T09:29:44.134-06:00Jerry,
People often rationalize that "it won&...Jerry,<br />People often rationalize that "it won't happen to me", especially young people. Especially when to manage the risk is expensive and they have things they want to buy / do.<br /><br />I mean look at how many people did not save / invest when they are young and now have less that $40,000 in the bank at retirement.<br /><br />The reality is that many people simply can not or will not buy good quality health insurance without a mandate of some sort. Then bad things will happen, they won't have the money to pay the bills and society will absorb the cost in one way or another. Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14991027705809503541noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8193628934721963907.post-58930884704722479532017-12-29T09:16:27.481-06:002017-12-29T09:16:27.481-06:00It seems the CBO did pretty well considering all t...It seems the CBO did pretty well considering all the States who choose to not expend Medicaid.<br /><br /><a href="https://www.factcheck.org/2017/03/cbos-obamacare-predictions-how-accurate/" rel="nofollow">Factcheck CBO Accuracy</a>Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14991027705809503541noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8193628934721963907.post-39989723048774853892017-12-28T23:01:56.387-06:002017-12-28T23:01:56.387-06:00"Meaning that they will passing their risk on..."Meaning that they will passing their risk on to us." There you go making that assumption again. Suppose somebody offered you a new Mercedes for 20% of list price. Setting suspicions aside, now suppose they withdrew the offer. Would you still buy a Mercedes? No, nor would you be out of transportation options. Just because government provides doesn't mean it provides the just what you want, need and can afford, and they do it with somebody else's money-- the LEAST efficacious spending.<br /><br />Considering Obamacare was supposed to insure 48 million people, I don't know if I trust that 16/13 million of the 12 million now covered will "lose insurance."jerrye92002https://www.blogger.com/profile/01858692298982859775noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8193628934721963907.post-79668542681670927732017-12-28T22:44:49.152-06:002017-12-28T22:44:49.152-06:00Looking at Avik's summary of this CBO document...Looking at Avik's summary of this CBO document. I would say he is somewhat intentionally misleading the readers.<br /><br />"CBO believed that approximately 16 million people would voluntarily drop out of the insurance markets without a mandate, and that the majority of those dropouts would occur in Medicaid and the employer-based health insurance market, not the Obamacare exchanges."<br /><br />Table 2 refutes this. And it clarifies that the drop would occur over 10 years.<br /><br />Though he does note the new numbers later.<br /><br />"On November 8, CBO published an updated estimate of the impact that repealing Obamacare’s individual mandate would have on the deficit and on health insurance coverage.<br /><br />Under the new estimates, coverage would decline by 13 million in 2026, not 16 million, and the ten-year deficit reduction would be $338 billion ($307 billion in spending reductions and $31 billion in increased tax revenues) instead of $416 billion."<br /><br />Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14991027705809503541noreply@blogger.com