home

Monday Open Thread

By Jeralyn, Section Blog Related
Posted on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 05:32:09 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

I have court in the mountains today - it's a beautiful day for a 2 hour drive. Here's a space for you to comment on what's making news. I'll be back late this afternoon.

Update: A big thanks to TChris who posted some great stuff today.

< Looks Like Wesley Clark Is In For 2008 | Religion v. Drug Laws >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Monday Open Thread | 67 comments (67 topical)
    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 05:06:40 AM EST
    Could this be the death knell for Social Security Privatization? Wall Street Slide Expected to Continue

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 05:10:17 AM EST
    Let's try that again... Wall Street Slide Expected to Continue

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 05:11:22 AM EST
    crap. The URL isn't linking and I have to run. You'll have to trust me ; ) The Wall Street Slide is Expected to Continue.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 06:10:25 AM EST
    mfox, No, I don't think this is the "death knell" for privitization. Anyone interested in private investment accounts understands that the market goes up and down. Anyone not interested in them doesn't need to be concerned at all, as no one has yet suggested that people would be forced to take part in such accounts. On the plus side, a down market is the perfect time to buy stocks, as long as one has a basic grasp of why the specific stocks are down (i.e., you don't want to invest in companies that are obviously doomed by the fact that their products are no longer needed - think rotary phone manufacturers circa 1990). If the problem is a general decline in investment driving the market down, that's the time to get in as bargains will exist. In that sense, no, this is good news for privitization, as it showcases the potential. If you want to test this theory out, do a little bit of research and pick 5 stocks that you think will do well over the next five years. Record their values as of today. Wait until 2010 and then check those stocks. Would a $5000 investment ($1000 in each stock) have done better or worse than having the government take it in and then promise to pay you some percentage of the previously promised benefit at a future date? Also consider that with a private account you own the gain, whereas with Social Security if you die at 67 you have nothing to leave to your descendants (assuming you have any).

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 06:25:11 AM EST
    Privatization? Think Enron, Worldcom, etc. You want to enrich the next round of corporate criminals? I don't see how I can develop another opinion on this as long as the CEO's and CFO's continue to make obscene amounts of money. Where is that coming from other than workers' wages and stockholders'profits. Let me think? How many Social Security execs have taken their stock options and left the company in disgrace?

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#6)
    by pigwiggle on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 06:47:04 AM EST
    If the market slides so does employment and with it federal revenue. Get over the endless pot of federal money fantasy. If the market is soft when the general fund starts paying back the borrowed SS trust fund you are going to see a huge backlash. You can expect folks to pay only so much of their income in taxes. “Privatization? Think Enron, Worldcom, etc.” There are thousands of successful law abiding publicly traded corporations making money for investors yet you chose to characterize them all alike, and worse, as styled after the biggest crooks.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 07:00:38 AM EST
    "Stocks Rally" The headlines of my local newspaper dated October 31, 1929, two days after 'Black Tuesday'. Nobody back then really suspected anything was going to turn out all bad. In fact, GE was 272 dollars per share on October 29, 1929. On October 30, it closed at 279 dollars. It was a gradual slide into the economic abyss. By May of 1932, there were 20,000 WWI veterans living in tents on the Mall in Washington, DC and more on 5 acres of land that the Postmaster General had in Anacostia. It was the original Hooverville . It all ended when MacArthur, along with Patton and Eisenhower, drove them out and burned their makeshift shelters. A large contingent left for Johnstown, Pennslyvania where they were welcomed. It was called the 'Bonus March'. Do a google search on 'Bonus Marchers' to learn more about it all. Today, in Denver Co, there is a homeless population of over 9,000 people. It is the beginning of the end. It can happen again. "The nation can't afford two Bushes." -- Alan Greenspan

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 07:12:50 AM EST
    CA - It is disingenuous of you to keep talking about Enron, etc. You are too intelligent to not know that the private accounts would be invested into a 401k with specific objectives based on the age of the investor to make sure the investor isn't in a growth fund at age 60 when what they need is stability and dividends. As for social security executives... Since SS is a government run enterprise, let me see. Now how many crooked politicans can we name... mfox - Can you lose money in the markets? Yes. But over the past 40 years the market has returned an average of nearly 12% per year. Source justpaul advised you to run some tests. Don't. Find yourself a finance person, check with your bank or someone in Harvard, and start putting $20 dollars a week in an IRA that is dedicated to growth. et al - Am I the only one here that knows that all of your major pension funds, is invested in the market? Ask a retired teacher how they are being paid.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 07:29:28 AM EST
    JustPaul, I agree with everything you said. The market is a great way to invest. I have decided as a result of all this talk to match my Social Security with equal deductions into a Roth IRA as if nothing else I've realized how little SS will pay. My point was that Bush's privatization plan is suddenly going to become an even harder sell and simply raising the question, will it be too hard now?

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 07:33:01 AM EST
    mfox, As noted above, I don't believe a downturn in the market makes it any harder a sell. Those who were already opposed will remain opposed. Those not opposed will ask themselves why they are missing out on this opportunity to buy when prices are down. In that regard, it may well be those opposed to private accounts, such as the AARP and most Democrats, who will now find their position harder to sell.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 07:39:41 AM EST
    My question is - how do you plan for retirement when part of the money you are counting on as planned income for your retirement fluctuates so rapidly. We could be both investing in our Private Soc.Security accounts (lets assume that the ultimate compromise is 25 or 50% of Soc Sec. deduction rather than the 3% model proposed or the 100% advocated by fiscal conservatives/libertarians). You planned last year to retire this June and I plan to retire in December. Without any catastrophic events the market could fluctuate 10% in those six months. What do I do about my retirement date?

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#12)
    by Patrick on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 07:45:11 AM EST
    Let me think? How many Social Security execs have taken their stock options and left the company in disgrace? I can name quite a few senators and congressmen, but let's not argue and bicker over who killed who. Mfox, Your Roth contribution should max out at 6 grand a year, IIRC you cannot contribute more than that per person. Of course SS takes more than that every year, and I bet your return with SS is less than a Roth.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#13)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 07:51:56 AM EST
    From my experience, the Republicans that I know are after their SS benefits with much enthusiasm and make every attempt to get as much as they possibly can from their Social Security. Social Security is an insurance plan, not an investment. What would happen if you became permanently disabled and were unable to benefit from Social Security because it wasn't there? No more steady income to invest into stocks. Nothing. What are you going to do? What? You had better hope than Social Security is still there. Don't be a dupe or a shill for the Republicans. They can't be trusted. I have voted Republican in the past, but never again will I vote Republican.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 07:53:31 AM EST
    Mfox, If you are planning to retire in less than 5 years and have not moved your assets to a more secure standing, you fail to understand the entire premise behind investing for retirement in the future. But in a way, your example if very instructive, as it showcases what is wrong with the preferred approach of those who say there is no need to do anything now as the real fiscal crisis is years away. If, at the age of 25, you begin investing a small percentage of your income in high-growth stocks, you have the ability to ride out the inevitable ups and downs, and even to swallow the likely losses on some bad choices. Give that account 25 years to grow, and unless you have chosen very badly indeed, you will havea sizeable nest egg at the age of 50 which you can then begin moving into less volatile stocks with a lower rate of return but an equally lower rate of fluctuation (think losses). Then, beginning in your early 60s (assuming you wish to reture at 67), you can begin the final transition, moving the majority of your amassed wealth into dividend paying stocks or transferring it out and into some sort of interest bearing accounts that will ensure your income (I say the majority because, if you can afford it, it's a good idea to leave some of your money in the market so that it can continue to grow). This is, in effect, what the President is suggesting we do now, before the crash. The opposing camp seems to be arguing that it is better to wait until the crash is imminent to do anything at all, by which time they have ruled out investment as an option because the time frame will by then be insufficient to allow investment to solve the problem at all (leaving their always preferred choice of hire taxation as the only option, unless you believe that they will cut benefits drastically when the time comes and live with the likely re-election consequences).

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#15)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 07:59:19 AM EST
    Notdumbenoughyet, If Social Security is a form of "insurance", why is it not required to carry the same sort of capital-to-liability ratio as real insurance companies?

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#16)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 08:03:31 AM EST
    lets see, your unbridled trust in government is matched only by your unbridled trust of corporate america (wall street).
    "..all of your major pension funds, is invested in the market..."
    so keeping in step with financial advice your portfolio should be diversified, least you have all your savings tied into wall street and its volatile performance. ?how do we fund the $trillion transition? if the us economy slips so low as to negatively impact ss distributions, we'd have problems far more serious than retirement payouts. $2b a month (increasing), spreading democracy jumps to mind. do we need to add the word "absolute" to "safety net". "absolute safety net", no ones looking to get rich off ssn, just a peace-of-mind that no matter how bad things get they'll be some type of income(support). hopefully that would make P's job somewhat easier. i'm thinking a "geriatric crime wave". seniors stealing pet food (for themselves), pharmacies being robbed at gun point, soup kitchens burglarized and i'm just being trite.
    ..and unless you have chosen very badly indeed...
    what percentage of the population will this happen to. many, as the desire for higher returns drives individuals to higher risk. this is a republican con game, based on the desire to dismantle ss totally. mehtinks america has been fooled enough, we won't be fooled again!

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#17)
    by Che's Lounge on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 08:20:33 AM EST
    Justpaul, On the plus side, a down market is the perfect time to buy stocks, Would you shift more withholding to your blue chip funds right now? I didn't think so. But you seem to be recommending it to others. Are you a trader? Maybe you should add a qualifier.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 08:27:14 AM EST
    It would have plenty of money in the coffers if politicians would rob the trust fund all of the time. It is politicians who are to blame for the mess we have. Nobody else can be blamed. This is a mess and nothing else. The incoherent babble about investing in IRAs and Social Security as being underfunded and broke is pure youknowwhat. The Republicans CANNOT be trusted. Rumsfeld shaking Saddam's hand comes to mind. Rush Limbaugh feeding his habit comes to mind. HUGE job loss to China comes to mind. The Chinese have 250 million people willing to work for a couple of dollars per day and the line doesn't stop. YOUR job is in jeopardy. I had a pretty good job once... way back when when I was 23 years old. You find out the hard way that an older worker is shunned. Past experience and education means nothing. Just keep rolling along on the hellbound train. Eventually, it is going to derail or wreck... it's not your choice. BTW, being a contrarian, my investments are up in a down market. I expect them to continue to rise... a lot. Not that I have ever lost money. I've lost plenty of it. Fortunately, the gains are greater than the setbacks.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 08:28:52 AM EST
    It would have plenty of money in the coffers if politicians would rob the trust fund all of the time. corrected: It would have plenty of money in the coffers if politicians wouldn't rob the trust fund all of the time.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#20)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 08:36:33 AM EST
    Che, If by "trader" you mean someone with money in the market, then yes, I am a trader. If you mean someone involved in any way other than as an investor, then no, I am not. I work for a non-profit and have no ties to anyone in the financial industries. As for the blue chips: That would depend on which blue chips we were talking about and how long the investments would stand. Not all companies, or investors, are created equal. As for your not having thought: That I can't help. But please note, again, that I am not suggesting that anyone should be forced to invest any money in the market. And, so far, no one else is either. The only people with the will to force their preferred system on anyone are those who insist that Social Security is a great thing and we all must take part in it, regardless of whether or not it is a losing proposition for most of us. Think about it this way: If an insurance company were to offer to sell you a retirement annuity and said "We will take 12.5% of your income for the next 35 years, after which we hope to be able to pay you a percentage of the monthly income the contract specifies " would you sign up for it? The truth about Social Security is obvious when you do the math and realize that you would do better putting your money into a bank savings account earning a paltry 1% interest over that same 35 years, and that's assuming you are in fact paid what you are owed, in its entirety and without higher taxes levied on you to provide it. If we assume the near inevitability of higher taxes and/or benefit cuts, you can do better than Social Security by burying your money in coffee cans in the back yard, as long as you remember where they are.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#21)
    by Sailor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 08:38:01 AM EST
    The first misconception is that bush has offered a plan.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#22)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 09:22:32 AM EST
    With an administration as corrupt as this one, I am worried some Ken Lay type will walk with all my investment and I will get nothing.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#23)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 09:37:06 AM EST
    Justpaul: If the market was gaining 11% a year (like it did under Uncle Bill) there would not be a question in most Americans' minds about privatization. Market downturns badly hurt privatization efforts and those 11% a year returns are not going to be back for some time as we continue to sell off America's future by running large deficits in both trade and budgets. Ultimately we can not continue the "cash and carrry" approach to the economy that is currently being put forward. We can not continue to make a tiny sliver of the American public richer by mortgage everyone's future in the largest wealth redistribution seen since the hordes of the Red Army went westward -- however -- unlike in Europe the money is not being redistributed downwards to the masses but upwards to the croney class. The privatization of SS (and yes there is talk abound about FORCING people into private accounts) is just another instnace of that reverse robin hood syndrome. Indeed, virtually every study confirms two groups benefit most by the system, the financial services industry (from the charges on the money) & the upper classes (which under most plans now in effect do markedly better). Put another way, get your hands off my wallet and crawl back to wall street, main street don't want what your selling. - k

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#24)
    by pigwiggle on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 09:53:04 AM EST
    “The truth about Social Security is obvious when you do the math and realize that you would do better putting your money into a bank savings account earning a paltry 1% interest over that same 35 years” One shouldn’t expect to receive anything from SS like investment or interest returns unless you make very little money. SS is essentially a wealth transfer scheme (excluding disability) benefiting only those who have consistently earned far below the national average. The top ~60% of wage earners in the SS pyramid receive less than they pay in while the bottom ~20% receive twice their payments. If you are in the national average, I guess the middle class, expect to receive a deficit of benefit to taxation of around –20%. SS could really pass as an ‘insurance’ like program if only those retiring with funds which sustain a below poverty living standard could draw funds. “Put another way, get your hands off my wallet and crawl back to wall street, main street don't want what your selling.” A ridiculous sentiment from someone supporting a system that has both hands deep in my pocket. But why should hypocrisy trouble a pickpocket?

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#25)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 09:56:17 AM EST
    JustPaul, In the interest of finding common ground (or at least language)I'm treading lightly here. Again, your argument is not inaccurate, nor unreasonable. First, you answered my question with a good point:
    If you are planning to retire in less than 5 years and have not moved your assets to a more secure standing, you fail to understand the entire premise behind investing for retirement in the future.
    Now if the feds were coming out with a proposal to privatize social security based on the idea of better returns and were willing to federally guarantee at least the return they would have gotten thru SS, then the debate might be a bit different. Here's where I run into problems:
    This is, in effect, what the President is suggesting we do now, before the crash.
    "The Crash". Just to clarify: Is this the crash that will happen if the government doesn't repay the money that the baby boomers have been paying in tyhat it borrowed? The perception to progressives is that the government a.just doesn't want to pay this $$ back, and b. the conservative platform advocates the repeal of all entitlement programs so we assume that this is a first step. The misrepresentation of Soc. Security, i.e. that it's going broke doesn't make sense, since the baby boomers paid in, there should be enough for them to get paid out. Isn't this how it was created to work? So, my suspicion is based on the confusion between choosing a better option for Social Security and "saving" it from sinking. I don't think that an argument for the second necessarily translates into an argument for the first.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#26)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 10:01:55 AM EST
    Karl, Please provide one link to anything showing that anyone has put forward a program that would include requiring people to invest part of the Social Security taxes in the market. And you might note, Karl, that my hand is not in your wallet, but your hand, via Social Security sure is in mine. I am willing to allow you to walk away from that program entirely, meaning I support your freedom to keep everyone's hands out of your wallet; do you offer me the same courtesy, or do you prefer continuing to steal from me for your own security? It's time you woke up Karl. Main Street has been investing for decades.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#27)
    by pigwiggle on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 10:07:19 AM EST
    “since the baby boomers paid in, there should be enough for them to get paid out. Isn't this how it was created to work?” Since there were so many boomers relative to those drawing benefits the program ran a surplus that was eventually placed in a trust fund. The trust fund money was spent all kinds of places, with a guarantee of repayment from the treasury. The treasury by law must pay back this money. They can find the funds a number of places; income tax, budget cuts, simply printing the money, etc. So, no there isn’t any of this boomer money. For a concise accounting of the program insolvency see the newest CBO analysis.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#28)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 10:10:58 AM EST
    Everyone here is busy discussing the trees and missing the forest. Bushbag and Co. are in the first stage of their plan to "Solve the SS Problem" and make no doubt it they intend to EXTERMINATE the Social Security trust fund! End of story. These people are using Private accounts like a pedifile uses a puppy to lure you to a certain death.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#30)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 10:23:37 AM EST
    mfox, There is no "trust fund". The money the Baby Boomers paid in was spent the same year it was collected by a largely Democratic congress looking to buy more votes via pork barrel spending of all kinds. The "trust fund" as it exists, is in fact a collection of IOUs Congress wrote the federal government when it "borrowed" this money. In order for this money, which has already been spent, to be spent providing benefits to the Baby Boomers, the government will have to collect more money through general taxation, meaning higher taxes for everyone to pay back the money already spent, so that it can be spent again. This is on top of the existing Social Security taxes and on top of the existing income taxes. (There are other options, such as signficant benefit cuts or significant cuts to other federal programs, but if you believe that Congress will ever vote to cut education funding, or highway funding, or even BS pork barrel spending in order to fund paying back those IOUs, you have not been paying attention to how things work in Washington). Minus those new taxes or cuts in spending and benefits, there will be no money to pay the Boomers their benefits. The "crash" is when the system stops collecting enough money to pay the bills, which at last report was 2018, a mere 13 years away. And, as someone who seems to approve of all forms of government largesse, you might want to consider that we are still spending the excess Social Security taxation income on projects you probably think quite highly of. When the day comes that the income stream will not pay the benefits, it also will not pay to fund those programs. This makes it a double-whammy, as Congress will have to raise taxes to pay for the Boomer's benefits and then raise them again to fund those programs now funded through excess SS taxes. Approximately 23 years later, in 2041, the second "crash" comes, when the so-called "trust fund" is depleted, and taxes must be raised yet again to continue making up the difference. There is no deception in the claim that the system is going broke. The deception is on the part of those who refuse to admit this is true. What W. has suggested is that those young enough to take advantage of the normal growth in the market be allowed to do so, so that when it comes time for them to retire, they will have real assets rather than promises from Congress based on IOUs that they themselves will have to repay in order to fund their own benefits. And that's the part that so many "progressives" don't seem to understand. If a 25 year old invests his social security taxes in the market for 35 years, he owns the assets he earns, not the government. If he dies at 60, he can leave those assets to his children, or donate them to a worthy cause. If he leaves them in Social Security, he has no assets, the money has already been spent, and if he dies, he leaves his family nothing. And that is reason number 1 to go with this approach. It stops Congress from spending the money. If Social Security had truly included Al Gore's famous lock box and was now sitting on a massive amount of actual money instead of IOUs that can only be paid back through higher taxation, few people would favor making any changes to the system at all. But because Congress decided, almost from day one, to treat Social Security as an unlimited piggybank, this is not the case, and we are now faced with paying taxes to payback the taxes we already paid.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#31)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 10:28:11 AM EST
    kdog, I'm with you there, but I'll even go one better. I'm 37 years old. I have paid into Social Security now for 22 years (yes, I got my first real job at 15). I will gladly walk away from the whole thing and let the government keep all that it has taken from me, so long as it agrees to take not one more dime for this grand socialist rip off. I didn't ask the government to hold my hand in retirement. What right does it have to make me hold Karl's?

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#32)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 10:45:49 AM EST
    JustPaul, To be clear, the crash assumes that the government won't pay back the Treasury Notes? Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush - They've all been on watch while the baby boomers have been working. Looks like a joint effort to spend, spend, spend. It also looks like, to me, that the government should be saying "Look, we've been living off credit by borrowing your retirement money - now it's time for you to sacrifice more so we can repay it" If the dems spent it, why would it be so hard for the Repubs to take this position? And, I wouldn't be true to my troll image if I didn't make one snarky comment :) if you'll forgive me. If Social Security had truly included Al Gore's famous lock box and was now sitting on a massive amount of actual money instead of IOUs that can only be paid back through higher taxation, few people would favor making any changes to the system at all. This implies, JustPaul that this admin. wants to Privatize SS because they don't like IOU's. What are they going to do when the rest of the IOU's come due - like, for the tax cuts we're borrowing to finance? Or the war? Perhaps "privatize" medicaid? Or invalidate government pensions?

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#33)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 11:09:24 AM EST
    The Reagan Administration raised the Social Security taxes to 13.5 percent from what was before at 9.6 percent. That is about a 50 percent increase. Republicans tax and make it look like the Democrats spend. Why do you think they raised taxes on Social Security? A: Because they knew it would get spent in the general fund so fat cats could get richer. Stop being fooled by the fools.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#34)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 11:17:10 AM EST
    just to re-iterate what someone else said: Bush has offered no plan, nor have the GOP. You are discussing nothing.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#35)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 11:25:01 AM EST
    justpaul writes - "If Social Security had truly included Al Gore's famous lock box and was now sitting on a massive amount of actual money instead of IOUs" For that we can thank LBJ. He's the one who moved it to the General Fund. Ed B writes - "and make no doubt it they intend to EXTERMINATE the Social Security trust fund!" Ed, try to understand something. There is no social security trust fund to eliminate. Now, say it out loud. I know it is a shock, what with Algore telling fibs in 2000, but it really doesn't exist. " property (as money or securities) settled or held in trust" karl writes - "If the market was gaining 11% a year (like it did under Uncle Bill)" Karl, we'll forgive you the snarky remark because you probably don't understand that the run up was based on the Internet bubble, but you should know that over the past 40 years the return has been nearly 12% a year. That includes the bubble, and the bubble pop. out - We`can agree on not trusting politicans, but it was a Democrat, LBJ, who broke into the trust fund. et al - Instead of complain and speculating, why don't you folks find a finanical advisor and get the facts. Note the "advisor" qualification. You don't want a stock broker. And take a class on interest, especially compound interest. You will be astounded. Try this. There is a rule that works like this. Take the interest rate you are being paid, and divide it into 72. The result will tell you when your money will "double." If, for example, you invest $20.00 and get an 8% return, in 9 years you will have $40.00. In 18 years you will have $80. In 27 years you will have $160. In 36 years you 1ill have $320.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#36)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 12:04:27 PM EST
    Kmart has done real well. It went from 46 dollars a share down to absolutely nothing. The same goes for Singer Corporation. Don't forget F.W. Woolworth, too. I invested in a small-cap company that handled sophisticated tracking software. It also ended up on the securities junk pile. There are no guarantees when you buy stocks. 'The small investor is a chicken about to become a broiler'

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#37)
    by Che's Lounge on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 12:23:03 PM EST
    Cuba held munincipal elections. 8 million people voted. Anyone can run (even non commies!) It's all locally held. Done every 2.5 years. And Haiti is a f***ed up mess. Of course all we care about is john Bolton's lies. Look! Over here. No, over HERE.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#38)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 12:57:33 PM EST
    A fun tidbit (imagining Jeralyn cavorting in the Rockies while the rest of us are still "stuck in the muck" to quote my 5 year old's book) Bush Supporter Sues RNC Over 'W' Logo 1 hour, 19 minutes ago U.S. National - AP
    By DAVID KOENIG, Associated Press Writer DALLAS - A supporter of President Bush is suing the Republican National Committee and one of its suppliers, claiming they stole his design for the ubiquitous "W" bumper sticker logo in the 2004 campaign.
    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#39)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 12:58:08 PM EST
    LOL - Where's tort reform when you need it???

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#41)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 01:35:52 PM EST
    Reagan on Rushmore - as suet for the birds. Coulter/Condi 69

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#42)
    by pigwiggle on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 01:39:10 PM EST
    Mark- Sounds like court packing; I guess this time it’s a conservative agenda?

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#43)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 02:29:12 PM EST
    Personally, I plan on working till I drop dead. I don't plan on seeing a dime of my SS back, I see it as just another tax.
    that's the real reality dOg. "plan, what plan, we don't need no stinking plan!"! reminds me of the old saying; "...and the con-game rolls on!"

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#44)
    by roy on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 03:10:50 PM EST
    I doubt TL will post anything more about the Minuteman Project unless somebody gets shot. Still, it's nice to debunk some myths about the protest. According to the local Border Patrol Union... A: The Minutemen aren't setting off sensors much, but the ACLU vigilantes [my word choice] are. B: The Minutement aren't disrespecting the Border Patrol guys.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#45)
    by Sailor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 06:44:19 PM EST
    Now is the time to : A. End the filibustering of judicial nominations & B. Update the Supreme Court by adding at least 6 more justices. That would solve a whole lot of problems.
    Yes, it would be a 'final solution.'

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#46)
    by jimcee on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 07:13:50 PM EST
    Ah, the Cuban elections....wow, now that is an oxymoron if ever there was one. By the bye, Fidel was given honorable mention on the Forbes list of most wealthy people in the world at $500 million or so. That's some worker's paradise ain't it? Meanwhile the average Cuban gets a pound of chicken a month. Yup, Communism, what a worker's paradise. Sheesh, does anyone really believe that nonsense anymore?

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#47)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 07:16:04 PM EST
    Che - And the government backed slate got 100% of the vote. Go figure. notdumb - Try the 401k approach, the IRA approach. The Keogh approach. Your getting professional management with these. DA - Do you believe everything your boss says, or just what you agree with? Can you say Chile? They are having success.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#48)
    by Che's Lounge on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 07:28:10 PM EST
    Re: The Cuban embargo, Meanwhile the average Cuban gets a pound of chicken a month. Thanks Jimcee.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#49)
    by jimcee on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 08:05:10 PM EST
    Che, The Castro embargo has nothing to do with an underfed populace. It would seem to me that with a tropical climate and some of the most fertile land in the world that Cuba could take care of its own food needs but for some reason they can't..hummm... I wonder why? Why it could be because it is a communist dictatorship, no never mind. Funny when I lived in Tanzania for a year that although people were very poor there was abundant, affordable and inexpensive food that was grown there and sold by those evil farmers/enterpenuers, the Tanzanian people. No, your right Cuba's problems are all the US's fault and Fidel is a great guy, loved by all. He must be his party did so well in that last "free" election. As I asked before, are there still people foolish enough to believe Marx's inanities? Apparently there are.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#50)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 08:45:08 PM EST
    KOS is trying to spin the following quote from Dean. "We're going to use Terri Schiavo later on" - Howard Dean What an evil, ugly, pathetic thing for him to do. Dean I mean. But KOS too. Dean will be lucky to survive the backlash.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#52)
    by chupetin on Mon Apr 18, 2005 at 11:55:25 PM EST
    I believe that the Trust Fund is held in US Treasury Notes. Are they not the ultimate IOU, backed by the full credit of the United States Of America? Or are they something the goverment can reneg on when tehy feel like it.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#53)
    by Jlvngstn on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 05:47:36 AM EST
    I find it very curious and frankly amusing that those casting votes, ordained by god, and claiming to be in communicado with god, have not come to a overwhelming unanimous vote as to the next pope. It would appear to me that god's spokesperson for one of the largest religions on the planet would be revealed in their "communicado" with god.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#54)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 06:29:04 AM EST
    Chupetin - Actually, the so called treasury notes are "special" notes paying only 2% interst, and they are for the "surplus." That is, the difference between what is paid in, and what is paid out. When the amount of FICA paid in falls below the dollars required to cover the pay out, then the "notes" are supposed to be redeemed to cover the difference. Only problem is this. Where does the money come from? It must come from FICA taxes or the Federal Income Tax. Now the FICA doesn't cover it, that is the shortfall problem. So the money must come from the general fund, which is covered by Federal Income Taxes. So what you have is a general tax increase or a FICA increase. Or else you cut benefits.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#57)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 08:51:53 AM EST
    Don't they now want US to pay back the money WE paid in that they used?

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#58)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 08:54:55 AM EST
    White Smoke; New Pope!

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#59)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 09:23:14 AM EST
    It's worse than that, mfox. The gov't doesn't have to guarantee you anything. Congress can simply legislate a pitance to you or benes to begin at age 100. It doesn't "owe" you the money and "we" didn't let them "borrow" it. What was left over after benes paid out to current retirees was simply spent (not even invested). You have no control over any money you pay into SS. You DO have control over your own investments. If you don't know a good investment when you see it, keep paying into SS. It's ironic (and entirely in keeping with socialism) that those of us who do know a good investment must be brought down to the level of the ones who don't. Many of the posts on this thread reveal the that mindset.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#60)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 09:24:55 AM EST
    Oops, I sand corrected. Some was invested.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#62)
    by chupetin on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 10:04:18 AM EST
    I guess my question is, if they are bought and paid for how can they become worthless. If they were paid for with cash, with the promise that they would be redeemed for cash when the time came,what happened? Are treasury notes like stocks?

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#63)
    by Che's Lounge on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 11:20:30 AM EST
    Ace, You were more correct the first time.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#64)
    by Che's Lounge on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 12:46:38 PM EST
    Pigwiggle, The CASTRO embargo? You are so disingenuous you even call it the CASTRO embargo. And I thought I was off by calling it a Cuban embargo! ROTFLMFAO! It would seem to me that with a tropical climate and some of the most fertile land in the world that Cuba could take care of its own food needs Of course, free trade isn't really necessary for us either, as we have plenty of farmland to feed ourselves, eh? Try that stupid arguement on the Hawaiians, or Haitians, or any other inhabitants of island nations. What are you doing? Keep those blinders ON!

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#65)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 05:27:50 PM EST
    Chupetin - No, Treasury Notes are not like stocks. Common stocks represent "part" of a company's preceived worth. If there are 50 million shares oustanding, and if each share is selling for $2.00, the worth is $100 million. As the profit of the comapny, future growth, etc., changes, the price goes up, or down. Tresuray notes are a promissory note to pay a certain amount of interest at certain times. They have no value beyond a promise to pay by the Federal Government. When the interest is paid, or when the note is paid off, it is done so with taxes paid by the tax payer, or, funds developed by the selling of new notes. Your confusion probably stems from thinking that the government has "money." It doesn't. What it has is taxes and fees it has collected from the taxpayer. Actually it is very simple. Let's say that current SS recipients are due $1 million on the first of May. Let's say that FICA taxes received are $1,500,000. That means that $500,000 is left over. The $500,000 is put in to the general fund and used for various things. In place of the $500,000 a special Treasury Note is issued paying 2% interest. Now, fast forward say, 10 years. On May 1 the recipients are due $1,500,000. The current FICA taxes coming in are $1,000,000. So there is a shortfall of $500,000. So, let's just cash a Treasury Note for $500,000. Now, how is the Treasury Note paid for? You got it! Taxes. But wait, my problem was that I didn't take in but $1 million in FICA taxes...So how do I.... Easy. Increase FICA taxes, Federal Income Taxes or decrease benefits. If we had some ham, we'd have some ham and eggs if we had some eggs. Chupetin, it is called a Ponzi scheme.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#66)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 05:34:53 PM EST
    mfox - Yes, the government owes us the money. The only thing is, the government has no money. All it has is taxes it has collected from all of us. And look, I am not picking on you. But concentrate on that concept, and read my comment to Chupetin above. As long as the population base was expanding, the ponzi scheme worked. As the number of people paying in decreases, the system fails. The fix is to either raise taxes or reduce benefits. Either one of these solutions is self limiting in that there is a limit to what people will pay, and there is a limit to how much they will let the benefits be cut.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#67)
    by glanton on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 05:50:26 PM EST
    Horse writes: "What an evil, ugly, pathetic thing for him to do. Dean I mean. But KOS too. Dean will be lucky to survive the backlash." Ya know, that's real interestin' you should say that, considering the extent to which the GOP used Shiavo for what they thought would be political gain, the ordeal they created will not be forgotten nor go away, any more thyan will all of Dubya's talk about WMD's after he changed official reasons for starting a war. The Shiavo story was more than an spectacle, it took on symbolic overtones, it reflected the true spirit of the people now running the show in Washington. You don't think they ought to have to answer for that in '06? What would be wrong with a caption of Delay or Santorum or Dubya with the words, "do you want this man making your most private decisions for you?"???????? You cannot say Dean is being tasteless, or at least not with a straight face, can you? Is it tasteless to point out tastelessness in others? "Where have the green fields gone?"

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#68)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 06:31:28 PM EST
    glanton The crux of the Shiavo matter was that some people (such as her immediate family) wanted to save the woman's life from the discretion of a morally dubious (to say the least) husband. Their motivation was Just. Now, contrast that with Dean saying "We're going to use Schiavo"... See the difference? If you don't yet, I guarantee you will in '06. "Go Ahead, Make My Day" ;-)

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#69)
    by glanton on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 08:21:30 PM EST
    No, Horse, the motivation was purely political, and if you followed the roadshow at all you know it. Certainly the public knows it. Hannity's little lemonade stand there, with Santorum and Delay visiting, that was really something to watch. Theater of the Grotesque.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#70)
    by glanton on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 08:23:16 PM EST
    And when I say 'they,' of course I'm talking about the politicians. Not Terry's family. But then, Dean hasn't said anything negative about her family, so hopefully you're not conflating them.... Only a rightie on the way down would conflate her parents with the brothers Bush and Oozy Santorum...

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#71)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 19, 2005 at 08:38:32 PM EST
    glanton I assure you Dean's quote "We are going to use Terri Schiavo" would be stamped on the Dems so brightly... It would be political suicide for Dean, at the very least.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#72)
    by glanton on Wed Apr 20, 2005 at 07:16:01 AM EST
    Horse, All you're doing is taking that one sentence and stripping it of what it MEANS. You're looking for a soundbite, that's all. You haven't responded one jot to my comments about why Dean's move is not only appropriate but necessary. Now, all of a sudden, you're qorried about Shiavo being USED for political reasons? Where were you during the roadshow, the lemonade stands, the special Congressional sessions? Where were you then but defending those rotten opportunistic politicians trying to turn a family tragedy into a political windfall? You were nowhere but up their asses. Keep spouting soundbites if that's all you're good for, though I admit, naiively, that I was hoping for an actual dialogue instead.

    Re: Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#73)
    by glanton on Wed Apr 20, 2005 at 07:31:07 AM EST
    (When the discussion turns to actual substance, all you get from these neocons is tape over the mouth and a bugged-out countenance. Maybe a few of them have purple thumbs too. On the tape should be written 'Your Body/My Decision').

    Monday Open Thread | 67 comments (67 topical)