“Why are people told…”

Ahh, Chekote… precious Chekote… (*SMILE*)

Why do birds suddenly appear… every time… you are near…?

FURTHERMORE…

How much wood could a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?!

And on that note…

(*WINK*)

BILL

I deal with reality. Why are people told that SS and Medicare taxes are taken out their paychecks? Because they will get benefits when they get old. You must have never had to deal with 941 paperwork in your life.

I mean really, Bill Moyers Jorno?

Pathetic.

It’s the “some equivalent” that’s important here, and i wouldn’t say “equivalent” but better option. The way Medicare is set up, and the fact that it’s controlled by government, has led to a situation where it’s no longer sustainable. With the baby boomers retiring, it can’t last.

It needs to be phased out as young people start joining a different system set up in the market — a health savings and retirement plan which is started at 18-20, or even before, so that money is saved, invested, and the interest over the years will be enough to have safe and comfortable golden years.

This needs to be done separately from poverty issues. I have ideas on that, too, but for the majority of people who will be working all their lives, a private health savings and retirement plan would be much better than breaking the government — we will be forced to something at some point — why not start now.

People much smarter than I am would have to work out the details, but I have no doubt it can be done.

“…people were promised…”

(*HEADACHE*)

(Well… you know what they say… “You can lead a horse to water…”)

Chekote. Dear, sweet Chekote. Well-intentioned, well-meaning, sensitive Chekote. I deal in facts. I deal in reality. You should too.

(*SHRUG*)

Did you even bother to read the Supreme Court decision I provided the link regarding?

(*SIGH*)

Anyway…

(*ROLLING MY EYES*)

BILL

Personally, I believe that Medicare (or some equivalent) is as necessary as government provided insurance is necessary for the entire population of citizens and legal residents. There should be no distinction based on age because a citizen is a citizen. I don’t care how old they are. Consequently, I see no point in a program that is established especially for class of citizen vs another. If one can get coverage in a government program then everyone should be able to OR no one should be able to.

Again I will suggest that health care insurance must be considered in terms of the society’s obligation to it’s citizens. While health care insurance does have direct impact on the individual, it’s status as insurance requires an assessment of the risks by individuals and families and a determination whether they are willing to accept those risks. And society must determine if it can tolerate the individual risks or must require coverage for everyone except those who demonstrate the financial wherewithwal to not become a burden upon society in the event of accident, illness, etc.

While health care insurance is much more important than auto insurance, it is similar it must be based in part on individual risk acceptance (the likelihood of occurence and consequence if it does occur) balanced with society’s tolerance for individual risk acceptance. I don’t care is someone’s auto insurance has a collision provision as long as I (society) are covered if that person run’s into me. We have to balance individual rights with the societal needs and one governing factor in that analysis is the impact upon society of an individual exercising their rights. Of course thrown into the equation needs to be society’s obligations to all it’s citizens.

The discussion of whather a something is socialistic, socialism, or whatever, is useless. Thank God I haven’t been around to have to read such stuff. The tendency to devolve into debating labels continues to hold sway here with the scoring of points the only outcome.

I was using the word figuratively. Look people were promised certain benefits once they paid into the system. This is not socialism. Everybody pays a set rate.

Chekote. Because I like you… (*SMILE*)… basically because I think you have the right instincts and all that is missing is the knowledge… (*GRIN*)… let me explain to you the fallacy of the “lock box” theory.

OK. Take the highway fund. In theory it’s supposed to go to… er… funding highway construction and repairs, right?

If there’s an excess that excess goes to…

(*SHRUG*)

Chekote. I left the sentence hanging for a reason.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Highway_Trust_Fund_%28United_States%29

Anyway… let’s segway into Social Security and “pay as you go.”

Let’s say that the federal government LITERALLY “saved” excess Social Security contributions. I’m talking literally piling up $100 bills in Ft. Knox or somewhere.

Imagine a United States government which didn’t (and which hadn’t) ever run deficits.

Imagine a United States government with no debt. NO DEBT!

Well… I suppose then government COULD (have) stockpiled “excess revenues” – perhaps converted them to gold. (*SHRUG*)

OR… in this fantasy world of no deficits and no debt I suppose the government could (have) INVESTED the money… billions and billions and billions (trillions?) of dollars.

“Invested” where though?

Certainly not domestically! I mean… think about it for even a moment and you’ll immediately see the problem with that scenario. Namely, in short order the federal government would have bought up much of the private sector! (*GRIN*) Given enough time and enough “excess” Social Security “contributions” and they would have bought the whole (privately owned) country up!

(*CHUCKLE*)

We couldn’t have that – could we? I mean even if we slow down a bit and don’t go to the logical extreme of government “investing” ALL of the entire HISTORY’S worth of Social Security “excess contributions,” at the very least such governmental actions would by necessity act as a skew to free markets – you see that, right?

But, hey… here’s what we COULD have done and probably SHOULD have done:

Social Security “excess” contributions should have either been turned into gold and other precious metals, etc. (yeah… I’m serious… but again… we’re working off a “lock box” scenario here – the one Balc brought up) and “stored” across the nation… OR… we could have created a separate “U.S. Government Foreign Investments” Entity which would have for the past 74 years been buying up FOREIGN properties and assets…

* THINK PRESENT DAY CHINA’S FOREIGN “INVESTMENT” POLICIES! (*RUEFUL CHUCKLE*)

Anyway… seriously… bottom line… there is no lock box. There never was a lock box. When you think about it, the very concept of a lock box challenges credibility.

BILL