Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Given the deep/deepening recession, do you think it was wise
Topic Started: Nov 30 2013, 10:46 PM (3,482 Views)
Mountainrivers
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Banandangees
Dec 5 2013, 10:51 PM
Mountainrivers
Dec 5 2013, 10:23 PM


Quote:
 
Being the king of sarcasm, you are obviously unable to recognize your own talent in someone else.

Quote:
 
But why such criticism of Pat while totally ignoring how Campken's position on the elderly (above) differs so greatly from yours?


Since you understood neither Ken's post nor mine, I'll explain it to you real slow so you can "get" it.

Ken's post was sarcastic, Pat's was not.

Oh, I think it just the opposite MR. Kens post, while maybe being sarcastic was serious, he has posted quite a few very similar attitudes toward the elderly and SS in the past in terms of what they are deserving of regarding entitlements from the government and has expressed his opinion that they, because of age, should move way to the back of the line in consideration because of "their bleeding of funds" that should go to those yet to be worthy of.

Your and Ken's post aren't very difficult to understand at all MR. You just chose to ignore what Campken posted while criticizing Pat, who was more likely to be using a little sarcasm in his "for instance" example.
Every time Ken posts stuff like that, I'm aware that it is sarcasm, but I'll let him explain whether it was or not. I can't say what Pat's intent was, for sure, because I can't read his mind, but his overall attitude tells me that he would be happy to have not paid into SS and Medicare. That, of course, in hind sight.
I don't think Ken and I differ at all on the elderly. That's your perception, not mine.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mountainrivers
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Banandangees
Dec 5 2013, 10:54 PM
Why do such knowledgeable people stay on a forum where stupid people just don't see the light of their truth?
Because we feel compelled to set you straight. So far, it seems we've failed, but we persevere because we like you and want you to see the light.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
campingken
No Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
My post was mostly sarcastic. I cannot understand how so many people are glad to accept their socialized Medicare yet want to slam the door in the face of everyone else.

However if we, as a nation, don't believe in socialized medicine then we should be true to our beliefs and end Medicare. Why are the elderly more deserving than the young?

Edited by campingken, Dec 6 2013, 12:44 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Neutral
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
You have been explained why a dozen times or more Ken, you post it repeatedly just to be posting I guess.
You will accept Medicare when you reach the age too if it's still around.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pat
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Sea Dog
Dec 5 2013, 09:38 PM
Since I have been drawn into the discussion,
I am curios as to how much Pat would have paid into
Medicare and SS.

The reason being, I am wondering how much investment it takes
to gain a profit of 2.5 million.
The max Sea Dog and here is the problem with what I assume you are suggesting. You se Sea Dog, one would never know exactly what the return of the money would have been yet if I compared it to later returns on investments and projects I see no reason why I was exaggerating. Yet again, you never know. I did what the law said I must Sea Dog and expect the government now to own up to it's end of the bargain. With mega cities going bankrupt it wouldn't surprise me that if one day soon both medicare and social security are reframed into a program or two that is aimed at dismantling the programs and spreading the payroll tax benefits across the board to the poor. We are already witnessing with medicare a large chunk being diverted to Obamacare.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
campingken
No Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Pat,

Are you claiming that when you got your first job at 16, or whenever, you earned enough to contribute the SS max?

If everyone had self discipline and invested the money that SS deducts wisely then we wouldn't need SS. However I am willing to bet that 80+% of the population would have either immediately spent the money on disposable items or they would have invested in high flyers like Enron etc.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mountainrivers
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Pat
Dec 5 2013, 05:24 AM
Remember this quote?

In September, Harry Reid told reporters---

"Let's stop these really juvenile political games -- the one dealing with health care for senators and House members and our staff. We are going to be part of exchanges, that's what the law says and we'll be part of that."

Guess whose staff has been exempted from Obamacare despite other congressional leaders instructing their staffs to use Obamacare? :smile:
Just found this little tidbit regarding a post Pat made yesterday. Seems it's not just dems and Reid tried to change the law, but couldn't get reps to agree.

"Sen. Reid has proposed changing the law so all staff and members go on the exchange but unfortunately, Republicans have shown no interest in trying to fix the law but rather just want to kill it,” Orthman said.

Other lawmakers also are exempting staff, some entirely, according to news reports.

Sen. Tim Johnson, D-S.D., has said he was keeping his aides on their current Federal Employees Health Benefits coverage. Likewise for Rep. Steve Stockman, R-Texas, and Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, has placed his personal staff in the exchanges but exempted his aides on the Senate Finance Committee.

Sen. Tom Carper, D-Del., chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, also is keeping his committee staff on the federal plan. Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., the ranking Republican on the committee, is doing the same.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Sea Dog
No Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Pat
Dec 6 2013, 02:31 AM
Sea Dog
Dec 5 2013, 09:38 PM
Since I have been drawn into the discussion,
I am curios as to how much Pat would have paid into
Medicare and SS.

The reason being, I am wondering how much investment it takes
to gain a profit of 2.5 million.
The max Sea Dog and here is the problem with what I assume you are suggesting. You se Sea Dog, one would never know exactly what the return of the money would have been yet if I compared it to later returns on investments and projects I see no reason why I was exaggerating. Yet again, you never know. I did what the law said I must Sea Dog and expect the government now to own up to it's end of the bargain. With mega cities going bankrupt it wouldn't surprise me that if one day soon both medicare and social security are reframed into a program or two that is aimed at dismantling the programs and spreading the payroll tax benefits across the board to the poor. We are already witnessing with medicare a large chunk being diverted to Obamacare.
Well, Pat.
Assuming a ten fold return,
which is pretty darn good,
you would have had to have paid two hundred fifty thousand into
Medicare and SS.

I have no idea if this is a reasonable sum to have paid in.
Seems high to me.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pat
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
campingken
Dec 6 2013, 03:08 AM
Pat,

Are you claiming that when you got your first job at 16, or whenever, you earned enough to contribute the SS max?

If everyone had self discipline and invested the money that SS deducts wisely then we wouldn't need SS. However I am willing to bet that 80+% of the population would have either immediately spent the money on disposable items or they would have invested in high flyers like Enron etc.
Nom not claiming that. I believe I could have turned the money into a substantially larger nest egg than what I'm getting in benefits. And since you think I should forgo the benefits then pay me $2.5 mil. Pony up, I'll settle. It's not like I have twenty years to recover. lol.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Banandangees
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Sea Dog
Dec 6 2013, 04:12 AM
Pat
Dec 6 2013, 02:31 AM
Sea Dog
Dec 5 2013, 09:38 PM
Since I have been drawn into the discussion,
I am curios as to how much Pat would have paid into
Medicare and SS.

The reason being, I am wondering how much investment it takes
to gain a profit of 2.5 million.
The max Sea Dog and here is the problem with what I assume you are suggesting. You se Sea Dog, one would never know exactly what the return of the money would have been yet if I compared it to later returns on investments and projects I see no reason why I was exaggerating. Yet again, you never know. I did what the law said I must Sea Dog and expect the government now to own up to it's end of the bargain. With mega cities going bankrupt it wouldn't surprise me that if one day soon both medicare and social security are reframed into a program or two that is aimed at dismantling the programs and spreading the payroll tax benefits across the board to the poor. We are already witnessing with medicare a large chunk being diverted to Obamacare.
Well, Pat.
Assuming a ten fold return,
which is pretty darn good,
you would have had to have paid two hundred fifty thousand into
Medicare and SS.

I have no idea if this is a reasonable sum to have paid in.
Seems high to me.
Two decades ago I invested $200,000 in a triple A rated, triple tax free, insured, PA bond at 5% interest, just to get $10,000 interest, tax free each year.

Had Pat invested the same $200,000 that he could have earned in good conservative investments over the 40 year period he worked instead of paying forced SS/Medicare tax and then in August 2004 invested those earnings in Google when they went public with shares at $85.00 per share, the value of his stock today (at $1085 per share) would be worth $2,489,411.76. Just since 2004.... 9 years. So, it is possible that Pat could have used that forced tax to earn himself very close to $2.5 million.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Fire And Ice General Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Website Traffic Analysis