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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (613847)	5/30/2011 6:44:07 PM
From: Alighieri	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577023

You don't know WTF you're talking about. Unfunded Liability is NOT a "looming" expense. It is a PAST expense that hasn't been properly accounted for, or at a minimum, hasn't been practically accounted for. >> BULLSHIT....Medicare can THEORETICALLY stop providing a benefit and the debt liability is gone.. So, are you offering that as a solution to the problem? And there is the contradiction one sentence apart. It's not a looming expense but it can be made to go away if benefits go away...make up your mind. That's the Tim Fowler theoretical argument, which has some THEORETICAL merit but absolutely ZERO practical merit. The reality is that the payments are required in order for our country to maintain any reasonable standard of living for the aged. The unfunded liability is the amount that must be paid now in order to make the payments required at a future date. I only made to point to illustrate your partisan obfuscation...I am certainly not in favor of cutting off benefits nor do I think that it is necessary...now I have gotten the impression that you are in favor of ryan's plan, which is one radical way to attack the problem, another solution might be to increase the collective contributions into the programs, move the eligibility age out a year or two, increase co-pays, and any number of measures that increase revenue/reduce costs....move to a single payer across the country....hey, there's an idea just about every other industrialized country has gone to, but they don't have american style block headed republicans in their political systems, so they can get things done... Al

To: i-node who wrote (613847)	5/31/2011 3:09:37 PM
From: combjelly	Respond to of 1577023

"It is a PAST expense that hasn't been properly accounted for, or at a minimum, hasn't been practically accounted for." In the case of SSI, the only reason it doesn't meet this standard is that they made rational projections. They never dreamed that so much wealth was going to be transferred to those who are way past the tax caps on income and that those aren't would stagnate to the point they have. If income had grown for the 90 some odd percent who pay SSI on all of their income like it had up to that point, SSI would be in surplus for the future.