Hunt for weapons officially over.

This is the place where all heated debates shall reside. Non-tech topics allowed. Personal attacks will not be tolerated. "Enter at your own Risk".

Moderator: The Mod Squad

Postby video » Sun Jan 16, 2005 5:44 am

Ghen wrote:Clinton was impeached for lying. not getting a blow job, no matter where it happened.



lying about what? then,
video
Black Belt 1st Degree
Black Belt 1st Degree
 
Posts: 1492
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2003 7:23 pm

Postby trexntx » Sun Jan 16, 2005 6:39 am

video wrote:
Ghen wrote:Clinton was impeached for lying. not getting a blow job, no matter where it happened.



lying about what? then,


Lying about something anybody would have lied about and something that he should not have been asked in the first place.

But it's alright for Bush to "mislead" or "misinform" or whatever you want to call it to lead us into war in Iraq if I get the gist of what I hear and read.

And now he is doing it again in an attempt to leave some sort of a "domestic" legacy to his presidency by "fixing" social security.

Here is the lie straight from his lips.

"As a matter of fact, by the time today's workers who are in their mid-20's begin to retire, the system will be bankrupt. So if you're 20 years old, in your mid-20's, and you're beginning to work, I want you to think about a Social Security system that will be flat bust, bankrupt, unless the United States Congress has got the willingness to act now. And that's what we're here to talk about, a system that will be bankrupt."


Sorry to burst the bubble, but that is NOT a matter of fact.

Here is the reality.

According to the experts and those who know, the system will not be bankrupt or flat bust in 2042 or even 2052. So why is the president claiming that it will be bust by 2018 if we don't do something now? According to the Congressional Budget Office, we will be able to rely on the fund until 2052 and after that will still be able to pay 81% of scheduled benefits. That is with NO changes to the current system.

So here we go. Are the people that Bush claims "ratified" his approach to Iraq by reelecting him going to buy this load as well?

Wake up people.... try opening your eyes and stop ignoring what is uncomfortable to admit. Reality is reality, tilting at windmills is fiction.

I can only shake my head in dismay. Once again Chicken Little says the sky is falling.
Antec NeoHE 550
AMD 64 X2 4600+
ASUS A8N-SLI DELUXE
Corsair XMS (2X512)
Maxtor SATA (2x300GB) RAID 0
trexntx
Black Belt 5th Degree
Black Belt 5th Degree
 
Posts: 8012
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 7:22 am
Location: Fort Worth

Postby tedybear » Sun Jan 16, 2005 8:14 am

President Bush has made it clear that reforming Social Security is one of his top priorities for his second term. Battle lines are forming among supporters and opponents of his proposal to allow younger workers to invest privately a portion of their Social Security taxes through individual accounts. At times the debate can seem mind-numbingly complex, full of arcane actuarial terms and competing claims about insolvency and rates of return.

But underneath all the noise, there are only a few things that Americans need to know in order to understand the Social Security crisis.

First, the current Social Security system is what is known as a "pay-as-you-go" system. It is not a savings or investment system, but a simple transfer from workers to retirees. The payroll taxes from each generation of workers are not saved or invested for that generation's retirement, but are used to pay benefits for those already retired. The current generation of workers must then hope that when their retirement comes, the next generation of workers will pay the taxes to support their benefits, and so on.

Obviously, a pay-as-you-go system is very sensitive to the number of people paying in versus the number of people collecting benefits. In other words, the ratio of workers to retirees is crucial to the financing of the current system.

The current worker-to-retiree demographics in the United States spell trouble for Social Security and its ability to keep up with its promised benefits. People are having smaller families resulting in fewer new workers paying taxes into Social Security. And seniors are living longer and collecting benefits for many more years. Add to this the fact that the Baby Boom generation is about to retire and you end up with far, far fewer workers than retirees than when Social Security started.

In 1950, there were 16 workers paying taxes into the system for every retiree who was taking benefits out of it. Today, there are a little more than three. By the time the baby boomers retire, there will be just two workers who will have to pay all the taxes to support every one retiree.

Fewer workers for more retirees mean each worker bears an increasing financial burden to pay the benefits that Social Security has promised. The original Social Security tax was just 2 percent on the first $3,000 that a worker earned, a maximum tax of $60 per year. By 1960, payroll taxes had risen to 6 percent. Today's workers pay a payroll tax of 12.4 percent.

It is going to get much worse. In order to continuing funding retiree benefits, the payroll tax will have to be raised to more than 18 percent. That's nearly a 50 percent increase.

Let's look at that financial burden another way. The Social Security payroll tax is already 12.4 percent of wages, or one eighth of a worker's total annual wages. It is the biggest tax the average household must pay. Roughly 80 percent of American families pay more in Social Security taxes than they do in federal income taxes.

Despite that already huge tax burden, the payroll tax will have to be increased by nearly half in order to continue paying Social Security benefits. That's a terrible burden to impose on our children and grandchildren.

The only way out of this problem is to change Social Security from a pay-as-you-go model to a system based on savings and investment. That is why President Bush wants to allow younger workers to begin saving some of their Social Security taxes. Those who disagree have an obligation to tell the rest of us how they would deal with the grim demographic reality.



http://www.socialsecurity.org/pubs/arti ... 50114.html

http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/TR/TR03/II_project.html

The year-by-year relationship of the income and cost rates shown in figure II.D2 illustrates the expected pattern of cash flow for the OASDI program over the full 75-year period. Under the intermediate assumptions, the OASDI cost rate is projected to decline slightly and then remain flat for the next several years. It then begins to increase rapidly and first exceeds the income rate in 2018, producing cash-flow deficits thereafter. Despite these cash-flow deficits, trust fund interest earnings and assets will allow continuation of full benefit payments until 2042, when the trust funds will be exhausted. Pressures on the Federal Budget will thus emerge well before 2042. Even if a trust fund's assets are exhausted, however, tax income will continue to flow into the fund. Present tax rates would be sufficient to pay 73 percent of scheduled benefits after trust fund exhaustion in 2042 and 65 percent of scheduled benefits in 2077.

In case anyone wonders where the 2018 figure comes from. Not from Bush, but from our own social security office. In 2018 the problem starts kicking in...Would it be better to look for answers or solutions NOW before the fund starts running short?

http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/TR/TR03/II_project.html

Two choices...try and work together to come up with a fix...Or pretend that the problem does'ent exist..

S-
tedybear
Black Belt 5th Degree
Black Belt 5th Degree
 
Posts: 7251
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2004 12:55 am
Location: Fulton, New York, on Earth

Postby trexntx » Sun Jan 16, 2005 8:58 am

I'm not arguing that there isn't a problem with the program.

I'm saying there is not a crisis. There is a fable that comes to mind about a little boy that kept crying "wolf" until finally when there really was a wolf nobody believed him.

So who's right? The SSA or the agency that does the budgeting and says there won't be a problem for another 40 years?

What he ought to be reforming is the income tax system. :wink:
Antec NeoHE 550
AMD 64 X2 4600+
ASUS A8N-SLI DELUXE
Corsair XMS (2X512)
Maxtor SATA (2x300GB) RAID 0
trexntx
Black Belt 5th Degree
Black Belt 5th Degree
 
Posts: 8012
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 7:22 am
Location: Fort Worth

Postby video » Sun Jan 16, 2005 9:09 am

Two choices...try and work together to come up with a fix...Or pretend that the problem does'ent exist..




I got it, hold jim carry, micheal jackson, and the rest until they sign all there money over to use, Done. problem solved. The water is coming done as I write this already. :)
video
Black Belt 1st Degree
Black Belt 1st Degree
 
Posts: 1492
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2003 7:23 pm

Postby efs2 » Sun Jan 16, 2005 12:36 pm

Greetings:
Well, this has turned into the thread that just won't die.

Okay, time to do my part.

Regarding the Bill Clinton impeachment, or as it is more properly referred to, The Time When The Gods Of Hypocrisy And Blind Hatred Looked Down And Were Mightily Pleased:

As has been alluded to above, Bill "Horn Dog" Clinton lied under oath during a deposition in a civil lawsuit, and what he lied about was his tryst with Monica "Airhead" Lewinsky.

But, as always, the devil is in the details.

The lawsuit was brought by Paula Jones, whose lawyers were paid by Republican movers and shakers.
She claimed that while Clinton was governor of Arkansas and she was a state employee, he invited her up to his hotel room and once she was inside, he dropped pants and suggested she perform an indelicate act.

In a deposition in that lawsuit, Ms. Jones' lawyers asked whether Clinton had engaged in any extra-marital trysts.
He declined to answer, objecting on the grounds that the questions were not relevant to the lawsuit.
He was right.
Any extra-marital affairs are not evidence in such a lawsuit, as a settled matter of law.

But, curiously, the trial judge overruled Clinton's objections and ordered him to answer.
Or maybe it was not so curious.
Judge Susan Webber Wright is a Republican appointed to the bench by then-President George W. ("Bush I") Bush.
During Clinton's first political race in Arkansas, Ms. Wright worked in the campaign of the Republican candidate.
And, believe it or not, Ms. Wright was a student in a class taught by Clinton at the University of Arkansas in the early 1970s, and Ms. Wright disputed and appealed the grade she got in Clinton's course.

The crack Clinton legal team of Dewey, Cheatham and Howe appealed the trial court's decision, which was later reversed without much discussion because it was so clearly wrong.

But in the meantime, Clinton lied, and Kenneth "Satan's Handmaiden" Starr, fresh from all his Whitewater indictments and convictions, moved the focus of his investigation.

And the rest is history:
A country was reduced to chaos, tens of thousands died and the status and influence of the U.S. around the world was reduced to its lowest point since the U.S. became a world power.

No, wait, that's what is happening now.

Anyway, Ms. Jones' lawsuit was dismissed.
The Horn Dog surrendered his law license, moved his office to Harlem and wrote a book.
I hear it is really long.
Ed
Last edited by efs2 on Sun Jan 16, 2005 1:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
efs2
Black Belt 1st Degree
Black Belt 1st Degree
 
Posts: 1462
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2003 1:54 am
Location: Lexington, Ky (Outside the Green Zone)

Postby video » Sun Jan 16, 2005 12:47 pm

Lying about something anybody would have lied about and something that he should not have been asked in the first place.




My point exactly, non of anyones business. I didnt think he lied about anything. It was a big waste of money to begin with.

But, on the otherhand. I would have told everyone about it, Yeee.... haaaa....... even the (bark like a dog) would have come out. :lol:
video
Black Belt 1st Degree
Black Belt 1st Degree
 
Posts: 1492
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2003 7:23 pm

Postby tedybear » Sun Jan 16, 2005 2:19 pm

Spread the word from the top of the mount if ya want to LOL...Just do not offer to give out cigars..

Could'ent resist...
tedybear
Black Belt 5th Degree
Black Belt 5th Degree
 
Posts: 7251
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2004 12:55 am
Location: Fulton, New York, on Earth

Postby video » Sun Jan 16, 2005 2:32 pm

tedybear wrote:Spread the word from the top of the mount if ya want to LOL...Just do not offer to give out cigars..

Could'ent resist...



God, when you think about it it must have been GREAT!!!!!!!
being president in white house, AND getting ^%& in the oral office.

I bet he would sit back in that big chair, and say to himself. What a GREAT life. It doesnt get any better then this, :lol: :D :lol:
video
Black Belt 1st Degree
Black Belt 1st Degree
 
Posts: 1492
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2003 7:23 pm

PreviousNext

Return to The Hundred Year War

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest