That IS the point Doc. US INDIVIDUALS PAID 6% MORE TAXES in this just ended fiscal year............. meanwhile the Nation's Corporations paid HUGELY LESS IN TAXES, and THUS, our National Fiscal deficit is exploding, up 17% in just the last year (SINCE THE TRUMP RICH GUY TAX CUT) according to weasel face Mitch McConnell.

It happens nearly EVERY TIME we let the Repugs. get a hold of the Gov't's finances.
The legacy grows.
Hoover, Bush, and now Trump.............
When will we ever learn!

As anyone who ever had to actually balance a checkbook, or manage the families finances knows, deficits happen when you SPEND more than you make.
It applies to each of us, and to a huge extent, on all of us as a Nation.
I ain't paying for my OWN %/share of the Nation's debt IF we default, much less yours, Doc!

Again, both Parties s*ck and share about equally in the problems of this Country. The deficit was a problem under BOB just as it is now. Repubs want to cut taxes on the wealthy and Dems want to keep giving everything away. (There's even one who posts here who says we should NOT cut any Government programs at all.) It's a lose-lose option that is created by the stranglehold these Parties have on our Government. While some elected officials MAY care about their constituents, they are powerless to do what is best for them because they truly need the support and financing their Party supplies to stay in office.

Posted by laramiebob on 10/17/2018 3:24:00 PM (view original):
As anyone who ever had to actually balance a checkbook, or manage the families finances knows, deficits happen when you SPEND more than you make.
It applies to each of us, and to a huge extent, on all of us as a Nation.
I ain't paying for my OWN %/share of the Nation's debt IF we default, much less yours, Doc!

How did Obama do?

Entitlement reform has to get done, or they face insolvency. Hard choices must be made. Kicking the can is not the answer.

Temporarily I don't mind if we get the economy moving forward at the expense of the deficit, and decent growth should be able to continue, but over the next few years some things must be addressed. Social Security must be reformed. If it means those of us working need to wait 6-18 months longer before we can draw benefits, so be it. It is not designed to be our sole source of retirement income. It needs fixing. Rubio has listed some attainable ways to go about it.

Low and behold, Trump rolls out the Nickel Plan. Tasks his Cabinet Secretaries to work with OMB to find 5% in budget cuts from each department. ..

Mulvaney was just on with Martha McCallum. He pointed out that there are significant areas where money going out can be reduced outside of Social security and Medicare.

From earlier today on Fox Business, discussing spending and the student debt problem

https://youtu.be/6elf0C9m0-I

BUSINESS NEWS
OCTOBER 16, 2018 / 3:59 PM / 2 DAYS AGO

Exclusive: U.S. Steel workers set to get biggest pay raise in years - sources

Rajesh Kumar Singh

• CHICAGO (Reuters) - United States Steel Corp (X.N) workers are set to get the biggest wage jump in at least six years under a new deal negotiated with the company, providing early signs that gains from U.S. President Donald Trump’s clampdown on foreign imports are finally trickling down.

Posted by all3 on 10/17/2018 5:23:00 PM (view original):
Again, both Parties s*ck and share about equally in the problems of this Country. The deficit was a problem under BOB just as it is now. Repubs want to cut taxes on the wealthy and Dems want to keep giving everything away. (There's even one who posts here who says we should NOT cut any Government programs at all.) It's a lose-lose option that is created by the stranglehold these Parties have on our Government. While some elected officials MAY care about their constituents, they are powerless to do what is best for them because they truly need the support and financing their Party supplies to stay in office.

I could NOT have stated this any better, Sir. Except that it goes way back before Obama.

And I certainly ain't no Republican lately. Not even close!
BUT, I do agree that entitlements need addressed.
And can be, easily.
TWO words. MEANS TESTING!

IMO.
A floor/ceiling should be established as to an individual's TOTAL ECONOMIC SITUATION at the time of retirement.
By that I mean one's age, health, living conditions/regional expense ratio, and YES, total bottom line amount of WEALTH.

IF (I SAY IF) you exceed the wealth ceiling, your SSA "retirement" benefits are limited to what you actually paid in over your "work-life" plus some small "fair" cost of living increase (1 - 2%).
Those specific individuals wouldn't get "screwed" as they'd still get back what they paid in + a little bit, BUT they wouldn't get this massive increase in benefits as compared to what they actually paid in, which is the situation for almost ALL retirees, today.

In other words, two separate "classes" of SSA beneficiaries.
The exceedingly "rich", and everyone else.

The SSA "deficit" would disappear immediately IMO.

In simpler terms, IMO no truly wealthy person (a millionaire or billionaire) NEEDS to collect their 2,000/Mo SSA "benefit" just because they lived to age whatever. The U.S. economic "system" worked very well for those few people......... they certainly don't NEED to tap the U.S. treasury (and us taxpayers) for that additional (in THEIR cases) ******* away money. To actual lower income folks 2,000/Mo. is a lot of money, to a Millionaire it's tip money!

Again we agree.

Scary, eh?

Posted by laramiebob on 10/18/2018 12:26:00 PM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 10/17/2018 5:23:00 PM (view original):
Again, both Parties s*ck and share about equally in the problems of this Country. The deficit was a problem under BOB just as it is now. Repubs want to cut taxes on the wealthy and Dems want to keep giving everything away. (There's even one who posts here who says we should NOT cut any Government programs at all.) It's a lose-lose option that is created by the stranglehold these Parties have on our Government. While some elected officials MAY care about their constituents, they are powerless to do what is best for them because they truly need the support and financing their Party supplies to stay in office.

I could NOT have stated this any better, Sir. Except that it goes way back before Obama.

And I certainly ain't no Republican lately. Not even close!
BUT, I do agree that entitlements need addressed.
And can be, easily.
TWO words. MEANS TESTING!

IMO.
A floor/ceiling should be established as to an individual's TOTAL ECONOMIC SITUATION at the time of retirement.
By that I mean one's age, health, living conditions/regional expense ratio, and YES, total bottom line amount of WEALTH.

IF (I SAY IF) you exceed the wealth ceiling, your SSA "retirement" benefits are limited to what you actually paid in over your "work-life" plus some small "fair" cost of living increase (1 - 2%).
Those specific individuals wouldn't get "screwed" as they'd still get back what they paid in + a little bit, BUT they wouldn't get this massive increase in benefits as compared to what they actually paid in, which is the situation for almost ALL retirees, today.

In other words, two separate "classes" of SSA beneficiaries.
The exceedingly "rich", and everyone else.

The SSA "deficit" would disappear immediately IMO.

This is radical, but how about we let people keep their money and gain much larger returns investing privately instead of letting our screwed up government do the investing for us. Just a thought, but as with all my thoughts it's a damn good one.

Well, it would be Coach........... IF you could count on folks to be marginally intelligent with their money. Unfortunately, in reality, the Gov't will do a much better job of gaining a legitimate positive return than the majority of "individuals" would do if free'd up to "invest their own money".

That's been my observations of "folks" out there anyway.

WOW! larryboob is a commie