Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Obama - Clinton Disaster -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill who wrote (43849)	1/25/2011 4:03:21 PM
From: John	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 103300

I strongly agree, Bill. That proposal seems like something a Marxist or socialist would come out with to redistribute wealth. The idea of a crooked politician saying, "You're wealthy, so can do without the money you were forced to contributed to Social Security and Medicare for your entire working life," is outrageous. What's wrong with Pawlenty to suggest something so asinine?!?!? There is no way that I would vote for him or even consider him now. I'm looking for conservatives candicates who will say: - Social Security and Medicare are terminally broken because the concepts of both are based on a ponzi scheme - We will gradually phase out Social Security/Medicare over time, but everyone who was promised Social Security/Medicare will receive their full benefits and entitlements, as promised - New workers entering the workforce today will have the option to either completely opt out of Social Security/Medicare, or, to pay in less and less over time and receive proportionally fewer benefits in retirement (but the system will stop collecting contributions in 20 years as it prepares to sunset) - For new workers entering the workforce today, the retirement age will increase to 70 - Only fully legal, United States citizens are eligible to receive Social Security/Medicare benefits - Social Security and Medicare benefits are only avilable for working Americans who contributed to the system, as well as the infirmed, physically disabled, and mentally disabled who are incapable of working

To: Bill who wrote (43849)	1/25/2011 4:44:54 PM
From: HPilot	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 103300

Although I am not a fan of redistribution of wealth. When the Social Security system is bankrupt, I think the rich should be last in line. This would be doing the same but before it is broke.

To: Bill who wrote (43849)	1/30/2011 3:11:49 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 103300

Gingrich off your 'list' too?

To: Bill who wrote (43849)	1/30/2011 3:12:03 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Respond to of 103300

Americans for a Balanced Budget Amendment: Dear ABBA Member, Our national debt now tops 14 Trillion dollars. More disturbingly, the Congressional Budget Office estimates that the publicly held portion of the debt (the portion that we pay interest on, rather than just a paper IOU) will be 73.9% of GDP by 2012, up from 39.7% in 2008. This is close to a doubling of our debt as a percentage of GDP in four years! The other half was accumulated over 234 years. Fortunately, more and more of our Senators and Reps. in Congress are identifying a balanced budget amendment (BBA) to the U.S. constitution as the only way out of the debt morass into which our fearless leaders have sunk us. Rep. Goodlatte's version of the BBA in the House now has well over 100 co-sponsors. Unless the Republican leadership in the House is very disingenuous, this amendment should come up for a vote in the House soon. If it should pass the House, it likely will come up in the Senate as well. This brings up what I feel is a very important point. Since we are likely only going to have one shot at this, we want to be sure we get it right. Although Rep. Goodlatte's (HJR 1) is a very good amendment, I believe it contains a very serious loophole. It allows for unlimited deficit spending for an unlimited amount of time as long as there is a "declared war" on the books. A simple majority of both Houses of Congress could vote one time to "declare war" (perhaps under the duress of a 9-11 type event) and as long as the "declared war" is in effect, Congress will have effectively nullified the balanced budget amendment. My concern is this: what if we declare war in some low-level conflict and stayed engaged in that war for years or even decades. The net effect would be to render the balanced budget amendment useless. As an example, suppose Congress in 1950 had declared war in Korea (a very easy scenario to envision) in order to evade some very tough budget decisions. We still have troops in Korea. Would we have ever "undeclared" the war? If we had had a "declared war" on the books, Congress would have been free to deficit spend for the next 60 years. Take Afghanistan, we have been engaged there for close to 10 years. Do we trust Congress not to utilize this loophole? I personally do not. The problem is very easy to fix. The amendment could allow deficit spending for any reason--including war--with a super-majority of 67% of both Houses for any fiscal year. This would allow us to prosecute any major military conflict if necessary. The other way to fix this would be to force Congress to vote every fiscal year that the war is in effect if they want to allow deficit spending for the war. That way, they would at least have to sign off on it every year and have some culpability. Senator Mike Lee of Utah has proposed dropping the war loophole and I believe this gives us a much more solid amendment which eliminates this gaping war loophole, yet it would still allows us to spend for a war or any other national emergency. For those of you who are concerned about this war loophole, please contact your Senator and Representative and let them know that you prefer eliminating this loophole. If they are not supportive of a balanced budget amendment at all, please let them know of your disapproval. We remain primarily an internet driven organization and we are totally non-partisan. There is currently no cost to join our organization, so almost every fair-minded and concerned American should be a likely candidate to join our organization. If you are so inclined, please forward this letter to your acquaintances so they can have the opportunity to join. You can direct them to our website at: balanceourbudget.com to join. Our facebook page has pithy news items and can be joined by going to: facebook.com. Thanks to all those who have been spreading the word about our organization to friends and family. One of our members recently offered to make available non-stick bumperstickers for a minimal fee. He is also working on possibly having T-shirts available soon. Hope all is well with you and yours! Alan Parks, MD President, Americans for a Balanced Budget Amendment alanparksabba@gmail.com (512)557-2790