Clinton pledges caution on Social Security changes

mikelew007 · 11-24-2007, 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nightrider

Bill lied under oath and committed perjury as well as obstruction of justice (among other things) - all impeachable offenses. I really don't think that the attacks coming from the right were at all "outlandish and brutal" (as you say). He deserved all the criticism that he took!

I said "some", not "all". Some criticisms were fair and just. Lying under oath was wrong, I don't think anyone could disagree. And he was impeached for his crimes, and was acquitted in the end. Anyway what I think is most ridiculous is the conspiracy theory that the Clintons had Vince Foster killed, amongst other people. In a sense, those who believe it are essentially calling the former President a murderer. If that isn't outlandish I don't know what is lol. That's quite a serious charge.

In other words: I really don't think that electing "Billary" as president would serve our best interests (to put it mildly).

I guess you won't be voting for her then. Just a guess lol. I'm not really jumping for joy myself over her likely nomination.

ps: You can also count me as a "card carrying member" of a vast right-wing conspiracy (and proud of it)!

Here you go, sorry it's not wallet-size lol:

You know you're not helping, I'm trying to keep myself convinced that there isn't a vast right-wing conspiracy LMAO!

sgtdmski · 11-24-2007, 11:09 PM

I will be the first to admit that some of the claims are outlandish, but, all we have to do is look at some of the conspiracy theories right here in this forum regarding the "Bush regime". Both sides have their crazies......

But you cannot ignore the factual claims that have been made regarding the Clinton time in the White House, including the health care debascle, the IRS audits, the FBI files, Whitewater, and how many more????

Bush was attacked for being a son of a President, nepotism and all that. So is it not only fair that the same attacks be made upon a former President's wife in her run???

dmk

RidinHighSpeeds · 11-25-2007, 01:03 AM

What bugs me about Obama and Clinton is the fact that they turn to taxes to solve the problem. Does this solve the problem though?? The answer is, No. Only temporarily.

Social Security needs to be invested in bonds, CD's, and other safe options where it can GROW. Also, Social Security should be used just for Social Security, nothing else.

It really is common sense when you look at it.

Obama wants to raise the Social Security tax cap = Dumb, short-term solution (no common sense)
Clinton wants to remove the tax cap on Social Security = Dumb and unfair. (punish those who work harder, or even small-business owners)

Why not INVEST!

sgtdmski · 11-25-2007, 05:30 AM

Raising the cap on Social Security does exactly what FDR did not want it to do, take from one segment of the population (those who make money) and redistribute it to another.

The funny thing about the whole social security debate is the fear about private accounts. Democrats are afraid of losing control of our wallets, for they know that once they do, and we the people see that we can do better without the help of government, we might all start to think that some other programs might work better if done privately. (GOD FORBID).

All one has to do is look at those who were allowed to opt out of social security. I believe there were people in San Diego and somewhere in Texas (will try to research when I have more time). There is a lot of data available, and all of it is bad for the government program.

dmk

indago · 11-25-2007, 06:25 PM

In his State of the Union Message, 28 January 2003, President Bush said: "We will not deny, we will not ignore, we will not pass along our problems to other Congresses, to other presidents and other generations." So, who does he think is going to pay for all this? We all know that our posterity will be bearing the brunt of the costs. It will bear upon our children, and our children's children, and our children's children's children, and...

The W. R. Grace Company had aired a rather bleak outlook advertisement depicting the outcome. The scene was an abandoned factory with some bleachers set up inside. Some small children were huddled together; raggedy clothes, old worn out blankets, dirty, bleak faces. Up front was a table set up with a teen-age judge. The prosecutor was a teen-ager also. He was asking the defendant, who was an old man, the question: "And when you saw what was happening, what did you do?" The old man looked out at the children, then hung his head and said: "Nothing".

On the television program Adam Smith, aired 8 October 1992, Adam Smith proposed a scenario for the year 1995: "It's 1995 in America and something terrible has happened. You've lost your job. Your company has closed. They've canceled your credit cards and your bank has failed. And the money in your pocket is practically worthless. Why? Because we, the American people, allowed the national debt to go on rising and now it's out of control. ...The coming debt crisis is the one issue that politicians would rather not talk about. Collectively, they produced this terrible mess."

Interviewing two young people who have formed a coalition to prevent further damage to the economic future of the young people, one of the individuals, Rob Nelson, noted: "We're at the beginning of what could become a generational war. Our generation, those that follow us are being denied the opportunity to dream big. We're being denied the resources to invest in our future. We're being left a legacy of debt, and that is a scandal."

John Cowan, another member of the coalition, noted, concerning the present generation: "What they have done is mortgage their children's future and that's nothing less than fiscal child abuse. Four trillion dollars of debt could be $8 trillion of debt in the next 10 years. They've mortgaged our future and it's going to have to stop."

Has anything changed??? NO! Life goes on…

Only now, the "fiscal child abuse" is worse. The young people have their elders to thank for the mess that has been created, a shameful legacy to pass on to our posterity. In retaliation, they could work to eliminate the Social Security System. PAYBACK IS HELL!

mikelew007 · 11-25-2007, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sgtdmski

I will be the first to admit that some of the claims are outlandish, but, all we have to do is look at some of the conspiracy theories right here in this forum regarding the "Bush regime". Both sides have their crazies......

Thank you!!!! Someone gets it! There are nutcases on both extremes! Can you tell I've been hanging around the Politics section of Yahoo Answers for a little long lol?

But you cannot ignore the factual claims that have been made regarding the Clinton time in the White House, including the health care debascle, the IRS audits, the FBI files, Whitewater, and how many more????

Well one can easily ignore Filegate, as there was nothing but accusations and allegations thrown around. No one got charged, arrested or convicted for anything in that "controversy". Earlier you mentioned FBI records being found in Hillary Clinton's office, could you show me some news story confirming that? Because according to this, the Whitewater Independent Council found no evidence of her or Bill engaging in any misconduct relating to the matter.

Independent Counsel: No 'substantial and credible' evidence of Clinton involvement in 'Filegate' - March 16, 2000

The Whitewater controversy to say the least, was far more murky and shady and nowhere near as clear-cut as Filegate IMO, at least from what I've read. Bill Clinton pardoning some of those who were convicted and sentenced wasn't a smart move to me.

I really don't know anything about the IRS audits you speak of, maybe you could give me a refresher course?

Just to let you know though, if Bill Clinton was ever found guilty of raping any of the women who claimed that he did, I'd lose all respect for him on the spot.

Bush was attacked for being a son of a President, nepotism and all that.
He's attacked for a lot more than that, again like Bill Clinton some of it fair and some not.

So is it not only fair that the same attacks be made upon a former President's wife in her run???

dmk

Fair? Maybe. Right? Nah, responding to mudslinging by more mudslinging to me is just more dirty politics. Though IMO, some attacks are pretty damn creative, like when Insight Mag and the Wash. Times tried to manufacture an attack on Obama supposedly coming from Mrs. Clinton's campaign.

Insight
CNN debunks false report about Obama - CNN.com

BTW, does anyone else want a membership card for the "Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy" lol?

RidinHighSpeeds · 11-27-2007, 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by indago

Only now, the "fiscal child abuse" is worse. The young people have their elders to thank for the mess that has been created, a shameful legacy to pass on to our posterity. In retaliation, they could work to eliminate the Social Security System. PAYBACK IS HELL!

Good response.

I think we can all see the pattern here... Whenever the Government tries to RUN anything, they fail!

garysher · 11-27-2007, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RidinHighSpeeds

What bugs me about Obama and Clinton is the fact that they turn to taxes to solve the problem. Does this solve the problem though?? The answer is, No. Only temporarily.

As much as I hate paying tax, ultimately there is no other way to solve the Social Security shortfall other than raising taxes.

The trickle-down effect is fully optimised when there is minimal unemployment (which is the current situation) and yet the budget deficit is still huge.

Everyone agrees we should cut spending - unless it impacts my town or my family!

Quote:

Originally Posted by RidinHighSpeeds

Good response.

I think we can all see the pattern here... Whenever the Government tries to RUN anything, they fail!

I think it would be more true to say that whenever Govt tries to run anything - without sufficient money or motivation - they fail.

Examples of successfully run Government organisations include the US military (one of the largest enterprises on the planet) and NASA.

Putting men on the moon 40 years ago was quite an achievement for a govt-run organisation!

fxashun · 11-27-2007, 03:48 PM

Is the social security system in true shortfall, or is the truth that the government can't pay back all the money that it has "borrowed" from the system?

RidinHighSpeeds · 11-27-2007, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by garysher

As much as I hate paying tax, ultimately there is no other way to solve the Social Security shortfall other than raising taxes.

The trickle-down effect is fully optimised when there is minimal unemployment (which is the current situation) and yet the budget deficit is still huge.

Everyone agrees we should cut spending - unless it impacts my town or my family!

So lets say we raise taxes to solve this problem now...what about the future?? Keep raising taxes?? It's definitely a short-term fix, but we need a long-term solution (private accounts)