ex senator Alan Simpson..

[ironglow]

 Obama's selected committee chair calls seniors the "greediest generation"..  Apparently because he wants to take away some SS benefits and extend eligible age.
   I haven't read the suggestions of the committee's report, but inless it stops all payments to "earmarks" and other pork barrel items such as National Endowment for the Arts, ACORN (in any of it's forms), ACLU. NPR , affirmative action quotas & set asides, the FED, and a host of other useless and outmoded programs..they may as well whistle into the wind.
  Here is one man's reply to Simpson...and although the language is sometimes salty and I "Xed" as much as I could, I must agree with his observations;

       Tell us how you really feel....('scuse the language/>
>
> This man points out in an eloquent manner a good example of why we need term limits for members of our congress.
>
> Senator lan (Alan) Simpson Calls Seniors 'Greediest Generation'...
>
> From a man in Montana....who - like the rest of us - has just about had enough
>
>  Hey Alan,
>
> Let’s get a few things straight…
>
> 1.      As a career politician, you have been on the public dole for FIFTY YEARS…
>
> 2.      I have been paying Social Security taxes for 48 YEARS (since I was 15 years old. I am now 63)…
>
> 3.      My Social Security payments, and those of millions of other Americans, were safely tucked away in an interest bearing account for decades until you political pukes decided to raid the account and give OUR money to a bunch of zero ambition losers in return for votes, thus bankrupting the system and turning Social Security into a Ponzi scheme that would have made Bernie Madoff proud…
>
> 4.      Recently, just like Lucy & Charlie Brown, you and your ilk pulled the proverbial football away from millions of American seniors nearing retirement and moved the goalposts for full retirement from age 65 to age 67. NOW, you and your shill commission is proposing to move the goalposts YET AGAIN…
>
> 5.      I, and millions of other Americans, have been paying into Medicare from Day One, and now you morons propose to change the rules of the game. Why? Because you idiots mismanaged other parts of the economy to such an extent that you need to steal money from Medicare to pay the bills…
>
> 6.      I, and millions of other Americans, have been paying income taxes our entire lives, and now you propose to increase our taxes yet again. Why? Because you incompetent bxxxxxxs spent our money so profligately that you just kept on spending even after you ran out of money. Now, you come to the American taxpayers and say you need more to pay of YOUR debt…
>
> To add insult to injury, you label us “greedy” for calling “bullshxt” on your incompetence. Well, Captain Bullshxt, I have a few questions for YOU…
>
> 1.      How much money have you earned from the American taxpayers during your pathetic 50-year political career?
>
> 2.      At what age did you retire from your pathetic political career, and how much are you receiving in annual retirement benefits from the American taxpayers?
>
> 3.      How much do you pay for YOUR government provided health insurance?
>
> 4.      What cuts in YOUR retirement and healthcare benefits are you proposing in your disgusting deficit reduction proposal, or, as usual, have you exempted yourself and your political cronies?
>
> It is you, Captain BS, and your political co-conspirators who are “greedy”. It is you and they who have bankrupted America and stolen the American dream from millions of loyal, patriotic taxpayers. And for what? Votes. That’s right, sir. You and yours have bankrupted America for the sole purpose of advancing your pathetic political careers. You know it, we know it, and you know that we know it.
>
> And you can take that to the bank, you miserable son of a bxxxh.
>



=   

[goofyoldfart]

Ironglow:  Don't you really hate it when anyone has such an ambivalent and inarticulate response to one of Dear Leader's most worthy lackeys.  I find the response most appropriate. just makes you wonder if anyone in the Government has ANY sense of morals. Loved the letter . God Bless to all.

                            Goofy 

[Dixie Dude]

From what I understand, earmarks are only 2% of the total Federal budget, thus the easiest to get rid of.  Welfare, Medicaid & Medicare, and Social Security take up about 60% of the budget, military about 30%.  All of the other government programs about 10%.  So, we have to tackle the bigest first.

Welfare: 
1) Make manditory drug testing to get benefits. 
2) Cut off benefits to able bodied people.
3) Benefits should not exceed what one would make at minimum wage. 
4) Go back to commodities instead of food stamps.
5) Stop paying farmers not to grow crops, use money to buy excess and put into commodities.
6) Begining at a certain date, don't give welfare money to single mothers after two children.  If they still want benefits after two, then get fixed.

Social Security:
1) Allow young people to begin putting away their money in independent investments to allow them to opt out of the system over time. 
2) Don't allow illegals or non-citizens to receive benefits.


Military:
1) Close European bases, as they are no longer needed. 
2) Go back to the full time soldiers doing cooking, garbage, etc. and eliminate contractors. 

[ironglow]

  Dixie Dude;
   I can't argue with a single one of your points ! Each one of them is "spot on"...

[magooch]

Although I think there is a bit of truth in what Simpson stated, it was not something that was ever going to help whatever argument he was trying to make.  Most people who are receiving Social Security are only expecting to get what they've paid for and what the government has promised.  The problem is that Social Security has morphed into much more than it was orginally ment to be.  That's fine, but financing it is the big problem and there is simply no easy fix, or for that matter, there probably is no possible permanent fix.

One fix that is and has been suggested is to raise the income level on which payroll taxes are collected.  So far, those increases have been more, or less prudent, but suggesting that the upper limit be removed is stupid and could lead to the eventual demise of the system.  First of all, why would high income earners even want, or need to be in the system?  If you raise the limit without jacking up the benefits proportionately, it is just another wealth transfer scheme.

Back in the Reagan era, the Social Security taxes were increased in an effort to prepare the system for the Baby Boomers.  That was all well and good, but it created a new problem and that was, what to do with the surpluses.  You can't just shovel the money into a vault and you can't really put it into the stock market.  So the net result was that Congress got a bonus to spend.  Of course it has to be paid back and that's the problem.

[woodchukhntr]

From what I understand, earmarks are only 2% of the total Federal budget, thus the easiest to get rid of.  Welfare, Medicaid & Medicare, and Social Security take up about 60% of the budget, military about 30%.  All of the other government programs about 10%.  So, we have to tackle the bigest first.

Welfare: 
1) Make manditory drug testing to get benefits. 
2) Cut off benefits to able bodied people.
3) Benefits should not exceed what one would make at minimum wage. 
4) Go back to commodities instead of food stamps.
5) Stop paying farmers not to grow crops, use money to buy excess and put into commodities.
6) Begining at a certain date, don't give welfare money to single mothers after two children.  If they still want benefits after two, then get fixed.

Social Security:
1) Allow young people to begin putting away their money in independent investments to allow them to opt out of the system over time. 
2) Don't allow illegals or non-citizens to receive benefits.


Military:
1) Close European bases, as they are no longer needed. 
2) Go back to the full time soldiers doing cooking, garbage, etc. and eliminate contractors. 

I agree with most of these suggestions.  I would change Welfare #6 by limiting payments to 2 children max.  Mandatory drug teesting is a no-brainer, if they can affortd drugs, they obviously have too much money and don't need welfare.  lso, go back to giving them commodities, let them learn how to cook, not heat frozen food which costs a lot more.  If we are to have a war on poverty, we need to have wartime sacrifices for everybody.  Taxpayers are already sacrificing.

As far as Simpspn,it's amazing hopw fast they change when there is no political benefit to them for continuing the mess they started!.