Social Security costs 47 billion more than it takes in

.

You've confused earned benefits with entitlements - among other things. Originally Posted by gnadfly

Maybe you can get a job as a auto union labor boss. That is the exactly wtf they tell management when they try and cut their benefits. You do realize that the tea pots want to cut ss and medicare entitlements....what you now call earned benefits!

Maybe you can get a job as a auto union labor boss. That is the exactly wtf they tell management when they try and cut their benefits. Originally Posted by WTF

More deflection and deception by WBC!! The people who worked 40 years for those SS and Medicare benefits EARNED them. Of course, its somewhat negotiable.

You do realize that the tea pots want to cut ss and medicare entitlements....what you now call earned benefits! Originally Posted by WTF

No person who earned and is receiving those benefits is getting them cut. Other than the money President Obama and the Democrats are taking out of the system! If you have information to the contrary please provide a link! I love how you misstate what the Republicans and Teapartiers represent.

You Teawipe Parrotriots are the ones who lump any benefit as an entitlement so cool it with your bait'n'switch tactics. Originally Posted by Randy4Candy

I am not a TEA Partier dumbshit. You are just easily confused. I do believe its the spending, stupid and we are taxed enough already.

I am not a TEA Partier dumbshit. You are just easily confused. I do believe its the spending, stupid and we are taxed enough already. Originally Posted by gnadfly

That's just peachy, gnad, but no one asked you about your religion.

I love how you misstate what the Republicans and Teapartiers represent. Originally Posted by gnadfly

What they represent is delusion. They want to cut government programs but can not name just what it is they want to cut.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/04/...uts/index.html

Medicaid is something we talk about like it's a God-given right, when it's only been around since the 1960s. It's a program that we phased in. We can easily start to phase it out," he said.
FreedomWorks, another prominent Tea Party group, echoed similar sentiments.
Adam Brandon, a spokesman, told CNN, "The first thing you have to do is roll back entitlements you can't afford. Second is moving them towards solvency. One of the best ways to do that -- especially for younger workers -- is through some kind of voluntary personal accounts."
And yet, Brandon acknowledged that his and other Tea Party support organizations would have a tough time selling such ideas to everyday Americans.
"It's part of our job to get out there and to educate and make sure that voters have a choice and understand what we're talking about," Brandon said. "We're not talking about throwing Grandma out on the street. What we are talking about doing is making hard, difficult decisions that are going to get the country, the fiscal house in order."

http://www.thedemocraticstrategist.o...r_medicare.php
One of the most interesting spectator sports of this election cycle is to watch Tea Party-oriented candidates rant and rave about government spending being a threat to liberty, and then change their tune entirely when asked about a specific, popular program like Social Security and Medicare. Here (via Dave Weigel) is Forbes' Shikha Dalmia, who wants to cut entitlement spending bad, complaining about Tea Party gutlessness:

Any geniuses here want to tell me the last time that a government entity had a medical breakthrough? If it wasn't for private research Randy, WTF, and CJ would still be walking around with drippy dick.

Any geniuses here want to tell me the last time that a government entity had a medical breakthrough? If it wasn't for private research Randy, WTF, and CJ would still be walking around with drippy dick. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Really...
http://www.nasa.gov/50th/50th_magazine/benefits.html

It was heartening, therefore, when USA Today recently offered a list of the “Top 25 Scientific Breakthroughs” that have occurred in its 25 years, and nine of them came from space, eight directly from NASA. In a speech kicking off NASA’s 50th anniversary year, NASA Administrator Michael Griffin said:

http://voices.yahoo.com/private-indu...29.html?cat=58
When Hubbert showed that American oil production had peaked and the world's oil demand would outstrip world oil production between 2005 and 2010 countries took two different approaches.
Japan started a government lead consortium that did major research and development into making fuel-efficient cars. They shared this knowledge with the Japanese car companies who then competed to market cars that used this fuel-efficient technology.
In the US, the home to the largest three auto manufactures in the world, Jimmy Carter proposed a similar plan but the big three argued that private industry could handle a crisis better than the Government could and all three companies handled their own R & D.
As history shows, private industry handled the crisis. That's why the big three American Car manufactures still dominate the world car market and hardly anyone has ever heard of Japanese cars like Toyota, Nissan, and Mazda.
Oh I got that wrong, Toyota and Nissan are the largest and third largest auto manufactures and two out of the big three American auto manufactures are bankrupt.
Private Industry alone cannot handle large technological challenges for a simple reason private industry has to focus on the short term


http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/...-the-internet/

In truth, no private company would have been capable of developing a project like the Internet, which required years of R&D efforts spread out over scores of far-flung agencies, and which began to take off only after decades of investment. Visionary infrastructure projects such as this are part of what has allowed our economy to grow so much in the past century

http://www.publicagenda.org/articles/medical-research
Public money, private partnerships

Prior to World War II, support for medical research was a largely private undertaking. During the war, however, the federal government for the first time mobilized scientists not only to develop weapons but also to fight diseases threatening troops in a global war. The success of the collaboration persuaded the federal government to fund science in peacetime, resulting in the creation of the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation.
In 1980, the federal government began encouraging academic-industry relationships by creating a uniform federal patent policy, allowing federal grantees to collaborate with commercial interests to promote inventions, and permitting universities to retain the title on inventions developed through government funding.
As a result, as many as 90 percent of life-science companies now have a financial relationship with academia. Corporate licensing of academic inventions account for more than $20 billion of the universities' annual revenue. In most cases, the researchers making the discoveries get some portion of the money.
The financial ties between academia and the corporate world have led some scientists to question whether researchers have -- intentionally or not -- compromised their work, either by overlooking data that may show a drug doesn't work, for example, or rushing research to get a drug patented before a competitor. Others question whether the partnerships that encourage commercial development also discourage the free sharing of information considered vital to science.Another recent byproduct of the increased privatization of research has been the right of companies under patent law to refuse to allow foreign competitors to create generic -- and often significantly cheaper -- treatments for life-threatening diseases. Poorer countries in Africa, particularly, say they need the less-expensive generic drugs to fight AIDS, leaving the federal government in the awkward position of equivocating between protection of U.S. corporate interests and global humanitarian interests.

http://www.faseb.org/portals/0/pdfs/...h_benefits.pdf

Boy do you like to grasp for straws. The last has a lot of terms like "for the first time mobilized scientists", "began encouraging academic-industry relationships", and "creating a uniform federal patent policy". CIVILIAN scientists and universities working under GUIDELINES set by the federal government. I want to see some evidence that government scientists started the research and made the discovery. Haven't seen that yet.
Also NASA is run by the government but they started out as a CIVILIAN agency with civilian scientists. All that early research came from people borrowed from universities. It became more than a quasi government organization in the 1970s which is about the time that we retreated from the moon? Coincidence?

Want to tell me who invented Tang, Velcro, and Teflon which have been credited to NASA?

It became more than a quasi government organization in the 1970s which is about the time that we retreated from the moon? Coincidence?

Want to tell me who invented Tang, Velcro, and Teflon which have been credited to NASA? Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

per my previous link...notice the years, all after the seventies.


The following examples, shown by the year they were published in Spinoff, are merely indicative of NASA’s positive societal impact over the years.
1978: Teflon-coated fiberglass developed in the 1970s as a new fabric for astronaut spacesuits has been used as a permanent roofing material for buildings and stadiums worldwide. (By the way, contrary to urban myth, NASA did not invent Teflon.)
1982: Astronauts working on the lunar surface wore liquid-cooled garments under their space suits to protect them from temperatures approaching 250 degrees Fahrenheit. These garments, further developed and refined by NASA’s Johnson Space Center, are among the agency’s most widely used spinoffs, with adaptations for portable cooling systems for treatment of medical ailments such as burning limb syndrome, multiple sclerosis, spinal injuries and sports injuries.
1986: A joint National Bureau of Standards/NASA project directed at the Johnson Space Center resulted in a lightweight breathing system for firefighters. Now widely used in breathing apparatuses, the NASA technology is credited with significant reductions in inhalation injuries to the people who protect us.
1991: Tapping three separate NASA-developed technologies in the design and testing of its school bus chassis, a Chicago-based company was able to create a safer, more reliable, advanced chassis, which now has a large market share for this form of transportation.

1994: Relying on technologies created for servicing spacecraft, a Santa Barbara-based company developed a mechanical arm that allows surgeons to operate three instruments simultaneously, while performing laparoscopic surgery. In 2001, the first complete robotic surgical operation proved successful, when a team of doctors in New York removed the gallbladder of a woman in France using the Computer Motion equipment. 1995: Dr. Michael DeBakey of the Baylor College of Medicine teamed up with Johnson Space Center engineer David Saucier to develop an artificial heart pump – based on the design of NASA’s space shuttle main engine fuel pumps – that supplements the heart’s pumping capacity in the left ventricle. Later, a team at Ames Research Center modeled the blood flow, and improved the design to avoid harm to blood cells. The DeBakey Left Ventricular Assist Device (LVAD) can maintain the heart in a stable condition in patients requiring a transplant until a donor is found, which can range from one month to a year. Sometimes, permanent implantation of the LVAD can negate the need for a transplant. Bernard Rosenbaum, a Johnson Space Center propulsion engineer who worked with the DeBakey-Saucier group said, “I came to NASA in the early 1960s as we worked to land men on the moon, and I never dreamed I would also become part of an effort that could help people’s lives. We were energized and excited to do whatever it took to make it work.”
2000: NASA’s “Software of the Year” award went to Internet-based Global Differential GPS (IGDG), a C-language package that provides an end-to-end system capability for GPS-based real-time positioning and orbit determination. Developed at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, the software is being used to operate and control real-time GPS data streaming from NASA’s Global GPS Network. The Federal Aviation Administration has adopted the software’s use into the Wide Area Augmentation System program that provides pilots in U.S. airspace with real-time, meter-level accurate knowledge of their positions.
2000: Three Small Business Innovation Research contracts with NASA’s Langley Research Center resulted in a new, low cost ballistic parachute system that lowers an entire aircraft to the ground in the event of an emergency. These parachutes, now in use for civilian and military aircraft, can provide a safe landing for pilots and passengers in the event of engine failure, midair collision, pilot disorientation or incapacitation, unrecovered spin, extreme icing and fuel exhaustion. To date, the parachute system is credited with saving more than 200 lives.
2005: Two NASA Kennedy Space Center scientists and three faculty members from the University of Central Florida teamed up to develop NASA’s Government and Commercial Invention of the Year for 2005, the Emulsified Zero-Valent Iron (EZVI) Technology. Designed to address the need to clean up the ground of the historic Launch Complex 34 at KSC that was polluted with chlorinated solvents used to clean Apollo rocket parts, the EZVI technology provides a cost-effective and efficient cleanup solution to underground pollution that poses a contamination threat to fresh water sources in the area. This technology has potential use for the cleanup of environmental contamination at thousands of Department of Energy, Department of Defense, NASA and private industry facilities throughout the country.

Want to tell me who invented Tang, Velcro, and Teflon which have been credited to NASA? Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

That info was in the link I provided.

You then pose it as some big question as if you and only you know the answer!

What they represent is delusion. They want to cut government programs but can not name just what it is they want to cut.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/04/...uts/index.html

Medicaid is something we talk about like it's a God-given right, when it's only been around since the 1960s. It's a program that we phased in. We can easily start to phase it out," he said.
... Originally Posted by WTF

I guess its easy to accuse people of being delusional when your reading comprehension is lousy. Right WBC? You talked about SS and Medicare - but this quote is for Medicaid - another animal. Yes, the TEA party and others want to reduced Medicaid - NOT SS and Medicare to those who already earned those benefits. Then you say they can't tell you what they want to cut then you accused them of wanting to cut MediCAID. Fuc'n Hilarious.

Its OBAMA who promised 4 dollars in expense cuts for every dollar in revenue increases. What's his planned cuts?

I didn't read your other link since its from Democratic talking point mill. Let me guess: its spreading more disinformation that the SS trust fund is totally solvent but doesn't address that many people, even some Democrats, understand its not sustainable. And no credible politician is proposing to eliminate SS and Medicare benefits to those who have already EARNED them. Nobody.

Its OBAMA who promised 4 dollars in expense cuts for every dollar in revenue increases. What's his planned cuts? Originally Posted by gnadfly

Hey, they're gonna get to those....later

Let me guess: its spreading more disinformation that the SS trust fund is totally solvent but doesn't address that many people, even some Democrats, understand its not sustainable. Originally Posted by gnadfly

You think present Defense Spending is sustainable? Without the SS and Medicare surplus for the last 25 years, we would have already addressed that problem.

Don't you think it funny when those programs start to go into their savings account...that is when you stupid math fucs start crying about those programs? Funny how that works. Those were great programs when Defense could balance the books on those programs surplus. Funny is a sick sort of way for people to God damn stupid to be able to follow the money trail.

And no credible politician is proposing to eliminate SS and Medicare benefits to those who have already EARNED them. Nobody. Originally Posted by gnadfly

No credible politician will tell you with a straight face that the present folks recieving SS and Medicare have paid in the correct amount. Those fuckers then want me to make up the difference. Fuck you and them, you fucking free loaders.

When i get my investment statements i can easily determine what my return on investment is for that period of time.
When I get my SS statement there is no acknowledgment of the return on that investment. All that is shown is what I have "deposited" along with what has been "deposited" on my behalf. No indication of what the return on the investment is, no indication of compounding interest, not a thing.

You claim that SS is solvent but if I were to get a statement like that from the people I have trusted my investments to, I would fire them and take my money elsewhere. To take 15 percent of my income right off the top, just after taxing me at my highest rate and then not allowing my account the interest earned on the investment is little more than a scam.

I think most of the people that you refer to as taking out more than they put in are what we know as Democrats.


Keep those printing presses running, the ink smells good.

I think most of the people that you refer to as taking out more than they put in are what we know as Democrats.


. Originally Posted by The2Dogs

Just how would you prove that? You can not. Kinda like your God. Folks can make fun of say the Mayans and their form of religion/beliefs but are rigid when it comes to their own unscientific form of beliefs/religion.

My belief is that had there been no cancer research from government funds many folks across this country (and on this board) would now be dead. The life expediency would be lower and SS and Medicare would actually have a much rose'r future. So IMHO Medicare has extended the life of so many folks that its own success is in fact what is breaking it. How about we quit funding cancer treatments to our elderly? Our elderly have not paid in near enough for wtf they are getting back in return. Not the other way around.

I would like to see Paul Ryan's overhaul of Medicare started right now if it is such a great plan...I never understoop why we had to wait? Well I understood, he could get no votes for that plan. A Tea Pot dilemma. All he was basically saying was that we are not paying enough into the system but that we are going to give the freeloaders (those 55 and over) a free ride. This was done to buy their votes.

Old people whether they be Dem's or Repuke's are all selfish like that. your statement holds no water with me. When folks are sick in this country, they look for the government to either blame or help them or both. I find that strange.

When Warren Buffet says we need to pay more in taxes, you folks on the right always say "Let Warren Buffet pay more in taxes!" Well you folks are bitching about SS and Medicare...do not take any benifits from those programs...show your commitment just like you want Warren to.

You think present Defense Spending is sustainable? Without the SS and Medicare surplus for the last 25 years, we would have already addressed that problem.

Don't you think it funny when those programs start to go into their savings account...that is when you stupid math fucs start crying about those programs? Funny how that works. Those were great programs when Defense could balance the books on those programs surplus. Funny is a sick sort of way for people to God damn stupid to be able to follow the money trail. Originally Posted by WTF

More distraction and deception by WBC. The impending implosion of SS and MCr have been known for decades. The increase in Defense Spending has just hastened it. Probably not as much as the recent double dip recession though brought on by the housing and other bubbles.

No credible politician will tell you with a straight face that the present folks recieving SS and Medicare have paid in the correct amount. Those fuckers then want me to make up the difference. Fuck you and them, you fucking free loaders. Originally Posted by WTF

WBC: "Fuc Grandma." They paid the correct amount and you won't find a credible politician who won't say otherwise. Are they looking for you and me to make up the diff? Yep, you probably voted for the guy that wants us to head off to work every morning to keep up the Ponzi scheme. Like I said, you were going on a War spending rant then start with the homo slurs. Game, set, match.

Here's a less tired target for your misplaced rage: The impending implosion of the Student Loan program. Heck, people are getting a huge tax deduction sending kids to college for a degree that's meaningless to most of them when they graduate to a bad economy. You are paying for this WBC!

You claim that SS is solvent but if I were to get a statement like that from the people I have trusted my investments to, I would fire them and take my money elsewhere. To take 15 percent of my income right off the top, just after taxing me at my highest rate and then not allowing my account the interest earned on the investment is little more than a scam.

I think most of the people that you refer to as taking out more than they put in are what we know as Democrats.


Keep those printing presses running, the ink smells good. Originally Posted by The2Dogs

WBC is hilarious. He insists Social Security is solvent then complains that Defense spending took the money.