Guess who's planning to screw you out of EARNED entitlements? Surprised?

While leaving the U. S. Tax Code, with all its loopholes, shelters, exclusions, and exemptions undisturbed, to make sure that their own "Limousine Liberals" never actually pay their fair share of taxes, Obama and his "friends of the poor and downtrodden" -- DEMOCRATS, have decided that what they really need to do is start screwing people out of EARNED entitlements they've been forced by law to pay into all their lives:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/05/obama-social-security-cuts_n_3019123.html

http://www.dispatch.com/content/sto...a-budget-offer-cuts-into-social-security.html

http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2013/apr/06/obama-seeks-deal-proposes-cuts-social-security/

Up until now, we've only seen lunatic-fringe Republican losers like "Crusader Rick" Santorum coming out with such a grossly unfair, politically stupid suggestion: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/06/rick-santorum-social-security-cuts_n_1190527.html

So, are all you Obama-lovers simply going to try to ignore this? 80,000,000 Baby Boomers won't be ignoring it, I assure you, and Baby Boomers VOTE!

 

Obama love for G.E., Goldman Sachs, and the 1%, but none for the peons.

 

I suspect this is likely just another cynical, "as much pain as possible" strawman related to the sequester.....trotted out to blame the right-wing for not laying down for the progressive left's big "benevolent" government, and their tax, spend and redistribute collectivist dogma.

 

If you had told me a year a go that there would be a thread on this board criticizing Obama for cutting entitlements, I would laughed in your face. Truly, we are through the looking glass and its time for a puff with caterpillar.

 

Somebody has got to pay for the welfare, foodstamps, medical care, etc. for the 25 million low-skilled, low IQ invaders that we are getting ready to grant amnesty.........how did I ever guess it would be me.......after paying into the system for 30+ years.......

 

Read my previous post......Progressive leftists (collectivists) will never cut entitlements or welfare....they'll just float balloons and rattle sabres in order to blame "your pain" on the right-wing.

 

Change the laws to prohibit the hiring of these so-called "invaders" by businessmen and you'll see a huge drop off in the invasion. Of course you'll have to go up against the US Chamber of Commerce, a huge daunting task to say the least, but you have to start somewhere.

 

Ah, we posted at the same time. I dunno, I think Obama really wants to cut a grand bargain of sorts. If he does this then he really puts the ball square in the Rights court. If he offers this and they dismiss it then he has perfect ammo for 2014. If they accept it and start seriously negotiating, then a lot of repubs who's seats are up for grabs might have to deal with tea party candidate primaries.

 

This is the language of megafool Ed Schultz. You don't EARN entitlements. You're not even entitled. Every bene is at the whim of this or the next Congress. There is no chain of accumulation to which you have any right no matter how long you contribute or how much you've paid in.

It's a giant scam. You've bought into the lying rhetoric.

 

When they can have children and go opn welfare, n they won't leave. You have to cut off all benefits for noncitizens who can't pay. And abolish that dreadful anchor baby law that has lead to most of our illegal problems. Lets be like Sweden and other countries that are so highly regarded and only let people in who can actually pay their own way...oh what a concept right. Theyre NOT bad, but we are for taking care of millions. What a joke.

 

In my opinion, Entitlements are not really earned, but bought and paid for by the tax payer. Also democrats were never really the good guy or the "lesser of two evils," they just had a more appealing message to Liberals; in the end all they really care about is lining their own pockets with their "Special Interest" Bribe Money!!

 

So we basically agree....this is more about "party over country" political brinkmanship than any real attempt to address the nation's [irreconcilable] fiscal ills. Bread and circuses.

 

I'd say we are at about 90% agreement. I think that if the Repubs come back with a reasonable return offer, he would Actually work with them on it.

 

And therein lies the problem. "Reasonable" compromise with the progressive left most often results in their wiggling free of their end of the bargain. Reagan reluctantly agreed to their "amnesty" proposals in return for spending reductions....none materialized. Bush Sr.... after promising "no new taxes"... reluctantly capitulated to the left's interminable demands for more taxes....only to be rewarded by their smearing his "read my lips" comment all over the national alphabet news. To find a "reasonable" solution to the contentious debt ceiling debates, ObamaCo suggested the sequester deal....only to try reneging on his own deal by blaming all the "awful pain and suffering" on "obstructionist" right-wingers.

Progressives (socioeconomic collectivists) are "means to an end" frauds.....laughably so.....you'd be wise not to trust anything they say or do.

 

If it's a "giant scam" then it's been legal and in force since the 1930's! I didn't "buy" into anything -- I was FORCED BY LAW to pay into the Social Security System all my working life, and I continue to pay into it to this day. You're damned right -- I AM entitled to my Social Security benefit, and it will be political suicide for Comrade Obama, "Crusader Rick" Santorum, or any other son of a (*)(*)(*)(*)(*) to try to cheat working, taxpaying citizens out of it now.

Especially not after we've rushed for over five years to rescue all these scum-sucking investment bankers with TRILLIONS of dollars because their hired stooges in government ran around with their hair on fire screaming that they were "too big to fail". Too big to fail? 80,000,000 Baby Boomers are going to make it very clear to Obama, Santorum, and all the rest of this pack of scheming, deceitful bastards that taxpaying American citizens are "too big to fail", too!

 

This is a very good illustration of the loss of trust between political ideologies. Republicans demand reductions in Social Security and Medicare (which is entirely reasonable, since those are the obligations that produce the huge deficits). Obama produces a budget that cuts those programs to the point where many of his supporters are screaming betrayal at him.

And Boehner says, nope, not good enough, we DEMAND that reductions are not tied to tax increases. His idea of compromise is, he gets the whole loaf or it's no deal.

And now, we have the conviction that EVEN IF Republicans should agree to what they themselves required, they'll turn around and reject it because they don't trust the Democrats to keep the agreement. And they're probably right about that - the Democrats have a history of raising taxes now and cutting expenditures "later" - which never seems to come.

Nonetheless, I don't see any possible resolution here. No matter what the Democrats agree to, Republicans can reasonably distrust it. So maybe Obama is trying to propose a reasonable-looking initial bargaining position and is willing to bend. But maybe everyone is posturing and pointing fingers in the hopes that they'll get control in the next elections. Blaming the opposition doesn't help the country with its fiscal and economic problems, but politicians aren't interested in that help stuff. They're interested in power and re-election.

 

I don't think of SS and Medicare for those who have paid into it, as "entitlements" in the same way that welfare, medicaid and food stamp programs are. I think the programs that people have been paying into their whole life should be protected BEFORE the safety net programs, after all what incentive is there to get off of welfare and become a productive member of society, and pay into SS/medicare when it wont even be there for you when you retire?

 

Repubs can't give in on the tax increase since they took so much flak for caving and agreeing to the increases to avoid the cliff..Obama knows this. There could possibly be common ground on loop hole closure, but adding the tax increases ensures there will be no agreement and he knows it. He wants to be able to blame the other side for keeping the sequester in place. This is gonna drag on for a loooong time. They are like stubborn fighting children.

 

At the end of the day, it's all bread and circuses and exploitation of the Hegelian Dialectic....crisis after interesting crisis designed to entertain, provide fodder for the water cooler, create division... and ultimately, keep we sheep complacently grazing.... thinking they're "doing something" with our "best interests" at heart....when, in reality, we're heading over a deadly cliff of their making....that can only be "avoided" by giving them more and more authority, and more and more money.

I'd plan a vacation around watching DC burned to the ground.

 

You've gotta get your mind right. You AREN'T ENTITLED. There is NO TRUST FUND. There is no account where your Social Security funds are kept. You can't will them to your kids and .... Congress can sweep every bit of it away tomorrow.

Once you accept the sad reality of 80 years of Big Fed lies you'll have a shot at a rational response to a poop sandwich.

 

Is this where we pretend the GOP budget doesn't include any changes to earned benis?

 

Right wingers have been advocating entitlement reforms for decades....for Obama to suddenly trot out something like this reeks of some sort of a trap....which go-along-to-get-along, establishment GOPers...out of cowardly...(yet, perhaps justifiable) fear they'll be maligned by the progressive Fourth Estate.... will dutifully walk right into

Negotiating in good faith is dead....all cynicism, all the time.

 

You are incorrect (incorrect).... OK, here we go --

http://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/fundFAQ.html

http://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/assets.html

http://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/investheld.html

Should I stop now? I could continue like this for another half-hour, but that would be cruel... besides, I suspect you know this already and are just trying to pour gasoline on a grass fire. You don't need to. President Two-Faced has already done that. Besides, how complicated does it have to be?

1. In the 1930's, the great Socialist "god", Frankie Roosevelt, sets up the Social Security System. It demands participation with prison sentences for those who do not comply.

2. In 2012, the first of the Baby Boomers come to full retirement age and want their money.

PAY THEM WHAT THEY ARE OWED... The fund is solvent until the year 2032! But, if more money is needed, the ****ing government can go get it from the same place they got the trillions needed to rescue the banking cartels and all the other criminal bastards who were "too big to fail"!

 

In fairness, Obama already passed major Medicare reforms three years ago (per beneficiary spending growth in the program slowed to almost zero last year, historically low) and he's pushed for more in his subsequent budget proposals.

Seems a bit odd to suggest he's new to the party when his administration is actually implementing Medicare reforms as we speak--not just blustering about reform--and the Dems arguably lost the House in 2010 over their Medicare reforms (given the 20+ point swing in the senior vote away from the Dems compared to the prior midterms).

 

We haven't forgotten that President Transparent has already stolen $716 Billion dollars from Medicare for his socialized medicine scheme called "Obamacare". This newest travesty will involve theft of EARNED Social Security benefits....